High Speed Two (HS2) discussion

[PR1Berske]

Sorry, I have been out most of the day. I have just heard a news item on Radio 4 saying that Labour will still support the HS2 project until the time of the next election, but if elected to power, will then seek a report to see if the budgeted costs could be better spent elsewhere on transport projects.

John Swinney said (did?) something similar in Scotland I believe.

My gut feeling is that Labour will scrap HS2, with limited spending at the southern end of the WCML. They know that they're tarnished with a bad reputation for spending so the moment this reaches a penny over £40 or so billion they would have to pull the plug.

 

[ainsworth74]

Unlike the industry-biased members of this thread, I do not have every technical term and Class type to hand to prove or disprove a point being made.

Not sure what that's got to do with anything? The discredation of your criticisims of the report didn't use technical terms or class types...

 

[jon0844]

I think Labour will realise that a big capital spending project is a good thing for the economy and the nation as a whole. Perhaps they want to associate the Tories/coalition with being unable to get it right (dawdling, mismanagement, over spending etc) so that if they regain power in 2015, they can 'reinvent' it and press ahead and make it look like they've 'saved' a project that would otherwise have been a disaster.

Call me cynical, but I doubt any politician wants to be associated with something that is currently seen as a huge burden on the taxpayer - even if privately it's seen as a good thing and something that's inevitable.

 

[jones_bangor]

The poll shows that people don't want HS2. Let's take this poll to be an accurate sample of public opinion, even though (judging by the way it is worded) it probably isn't. This means the industry needs to work harder in informing people why it is necessary. Most people think HS2 is to get businessmen to Birmingham 10 minutes faster. It isn't.

When even the French are no longer investing in high speed rail beyond existing projects, it is time to look at all the options afresh.

I don't believe options like teain lengthening / double deck trains on WCML and ECML have been assessed properly.

The fact that high speed rail has led to the deterioration of non high speed lines in France is also a warning to what will happen here.

 

[Clip]

John Swinney said (did?) something similar in Scotland I believe.

My gut feeling is that Labour will scrap HS2, with limited spending at the southern end of the WCML. They know that they're tarnished with a bad reputation for spending so the moment this reaches a penny over £40 or so billion they would have to pull the plug.

Quite happy to handout lots of my money to more hours of free childcare though. They wont be in power by the time it gets to £40Bn anyway as that will be 10 years AFTER they have started to build it.


Over the expected time of the project it works out around £4Bn per year which is a tiny portion of the UKs total spend so I am unsure why you keep dragging up the cost?

 

[Manchester77]

Have the lines in Kent deteriorated post HS1?

Are you actually being serious in double decking the trains? A quote from a double decker thread on district dave

You are never going to fit double decker coaches within our very tight loading gauge. GB has the tightest loading gauge for a standard (track) gauge network in the world. You would need to spend billions to allow true double deckers to run on our network.

The old Southern Railway had their 'double decker' Class 4DD EMUs which were in reality split level. I believe these were not effective.

Until I see it, I'm sceptical of anyone claiming that DD coaches can be made to fit the C3 gauge.

I'm unsure what the loading gauge of RER lines are but for comparison below are some images comparing our C3 (Mk3 coach) gauge with PPI ('Berne gauge'), UIC A, B, C gauges. UIC B is common in France. UIC C is common in Germany and countries east of her.

http://districtdavesforum.co.uk/thread/22528/missing-double-decker-trains

The link also has diagrams showing the differences between our gauge compared with the continental larger Double Deck gauge.

Just for starters you'd have to rebuild bridges, replace all overhead line gantries with higher ones for higher strung lines, then there's Euston it's self. Is it actually tall enough to have double deck infrastructure (higher lines etc). Additionally dwell times would probably increase to allow people up above on a busy service to get down in time.

 

[Clip]

When even the French are no longer investing in high speed rail beyond existing projects, it is time to look at all the options afresh.

I don't believe options like teain lengthening / double deck trains on WCML and ECML have been assessed properly.

The fact that high speed rail has led to the deterioration of non high speed lines in France is also a warning to what will happen here.

So you are prepared to shut both the main arteries of the UK rail network for very long periods of time to enable the works so we can have double deck trains? Thats maddening.

What happens in France really has no bearing on the duscussion either IMO because we are still going to have people who live in the big towns and cities that will not get HS2 and they will still need the infrastructure that is already in place so that they can commute too. Just because France has stopped building them doesnt mean we should not start. We dont all wear hooped jumpers and wear onions round our necks Or drive on the wrong side of the road and make really bad films just because the French do do we?

 

[jones_bangor]

Quite happy to handout lots of my money to more hours of free childcare though. They wont be in power by the time it gets to £40Bn anyway as that will be 10 years AFTER they have started to build it.


Over the expected time of the project it works out around £4Bn per year which is a tiny portion of the UKs total spend so I am unsure why you keep dragging up the cost?

He drags up the cost because £4 billion is a lot of money to spend on a rail network that only a minority of the public taxpayers ever use. Average person on the street can't afford rail travel..

Spending money on childcare will probably do more for the UKs GDP than HS2 anyway!!

 

[PR1Berske]

"We dont all wear hooped jumpers and wear onions round our necks"

Oh well if this is the level of debate, I'll grab a shovel to join you........

 

[Clip]

"We dont all wear hooped jumpers and wear onions round our necks"

Oh well if this is the level of debate, I'll grab a shovel to join you........

You really have not got a good grasp of sarcasm and taking the mick have you? Ive been doing it a few posts now and pointing it out to you but still, nothing.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

He drags up the cost because £4 billion is a lot of money to spend on a rail network that only a minority of the public taxpayers ever use. Average person on the street can't afford rail travel..

Spending money on childcare will probably do more for the UKs GDP than HS2 anyway!!

Facts and figures to back up your claim please.

It really isnt a lot per year when you consider that we spend £560Bn overall per year anyway, so 4 is going to be,what 2% per year of that. its not a lot of money for something that will safeguard the future of travel in this country unless you think we should spend it all on roads,again.

And also think of the jobs and the deliver and supply chain that will be created to not only go with the build but future maintenence. THAT will bring in more benefits to the economy through higher tax reciepts to enable everyone to have a kid and recieve tax credits. Dishing out money on free childcare will come nowhere near that.

 

[ainsworth74]

He drags up the cost because £4 billion is a lot of money to spend on a rail network that only a minority of the public taxpayers ever use.

And yet more than ever before use it and that number continues to grow...

Average person on the street can't afford rail travel..

Source? Seeing as it's possible, for example, to get to London and back from Darlington for about £20 I struggle to see how the average person can't afford rail travel at all (which is what your statement suggests). Again I refer you to more people than ever before traveling on the railway. Rather suggests that the average person can afford rail travel...

Spending money on childcare will probably do more for the UKs GDP than HS2 anyway!!

Source? KPMG have produced a detailed report on the economic benefits to the country of HS2 do you have a similar report to back up your statement?

 

[Manchester77]

He drags up the cost because £4 billion is a lot of money to spend on a rail network that only a minority of the public taxpayers ever use. Average person on the street can't afford rail travel..

Spending money on childcare will probably do more for the UKs GDP than HS2 anyway!!

You could say that about anything:
I've never used Thameslink in my life; most northerners haven't so why was it built?
My mother (lives in London) and her friends have never used MerseyRail so why was that built?
However we've both used the WCML, more people will use an InterCity line than a Commuter line / Network

You see my point

 

[tbtc]

Fairly straightforward stuff from Balls - all oppositions have to be seen to moan a bit about big infrastructure projects that will take years to build (like another runway at Heathrow) - knockabout politics.

If he can promise to deliver on HS2 whilst ensuring that the costs are well looked after then I don't think anyone can complain, can they? Well, almost anyone...

I've said before that I expect a majority will be against HS2 at the moment - like people are generally against long term infrastructure projects with little "jam today". Although of the two polls referred to in this thread, the "anti" vote has come down from something like two-thirds to 55% in a couple of years, which may suggest that it'll become more popular as it becomes closer. The question isn't how we deal with short term public opinion (which would probably mean Jeremy Clarkson as Prime Minister), its how we deal with long term problems. Apart from the "lets build a new railway from Sunderland to Blackpool" suggestion that one poster made, I've not seen a lot of alternatives...

When even the French are no longer investing in high speed rail beyond existing projects, it is time to look at all the options afresh

Just a guess, but maybe they've stopped building high speed lines (apart from the ones that they are still constructing) because they've got a lot now, and there becomes diminishing marginal returns after a while?

You could argue that we in the UK are "no longer investing in Motorways" - doesn't mean that Motorways are a bad idea or that any other country should shun Motorways?

 

[Ironside]

Fairly straightforward stuff from Balls - all oppositions have to be seen to moan a bit about big infrastructure projects that will take years to build (like another runway at Heathrow) - knockabout politics.

If he can promise to deliver on HS2 whilst ensuring that the costs are well looked after then I don't think anyone can complain, can they? Well, almost anyone...

I've said before that I expect a majority will be against HS2 at the moment - like people are generally against long term infrastructure projects with little "jam today". Although of the two polls referred to in this thread, the "anti" vote has come down from something like two-thirds to 55% in a couple of years, which may suggest that it'll become more popular as it becomes closer. The question isn't how we deal with short term public opinion (which would probably mean Jeremy Clarkson as Prime Minister), its how we deal with long term problems. Apart from the "lets build a new railway from Sunderland to Blackpool" suggestion that one poster made, I've not seen a lot of alternatives...



Just a guess, but maybe they've stopped building high speed lines (apart from the ones that they are still constructing) because they've got a lot now, and there becomes diminishing marginal returns after a while?

You could argue that we in the UK are "no longer investing in Motorways" - doesn't mean that Motorways are a bad idea or that any other country should shun Motorways?

As I understand the French have several high speed lines being built but they are postponing some projects that are only at an early planning stage until about 2020. They are not reducing spending but are refocusing their investment in the classic network that has been underinvested in for a few decades. This has come about because of a change in president and a high profile accident on the classic line. it is not because the French govement have changed there minds about the value of high speed rail.

 

[jon0844]

Childcare will probably do more for the UKs GDP than HS2 anyway!!

Labour intends to fund that from a tax/levy on banks, so HS2 wouldn't affect that anyway.

And 25 hours a week still isn't enough that parents (like myself) can pay nothing when both working, and you get 15 hours free already.

Last week I got the impression it was free childcare for as long as you needed it, which would cost a fortune - especially if they ever considered doing more for 1-3 year olds! Frankly, the offer is pretty unimpressive.

 

[edwin_m]

As I understand the French have several high speed lines being built but they are postponing some projects that are only at an early planning stage until about 2020. They are not reducing spending but are refocusing their investment in the classic network that has been underinvested in for a few decades. This has come about because of a change in president and a high profile accident on the classic line. it is not because the French govement have changed there minds about the value of high speed rail.

It's also that the French have been building high speed lines for 30+ years and most journeys between major cities are now on the high speed network at least for a major part. Not surprisingly therefore, most of the unbuilt routes serve much smaller populations so are a lot more marginal in terms of benefits.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

So, the thing that gets me is that we're quite happy to shunt the Birmingham end into its own station and make interchange a menace, yet the London end is being pointlessly forced through into Euston! This seems like madness to me.

The situation might be a bit different if there was a suitable empty space half a mile from Euston or indeed anywhere else as close to central London as there is to central Birmingham (excluding parks - underground stations there were considered but ruled out). If there had been a suitable site then the HS2 station would have been put there with travelator/tube/tram/peoplemover links as necessary.

With hindsight it's a shame the Kings Cross railway lands were sold off for development within the past decade or so.

 

[SkinnyDave]

It's also that the French have been building high speed lines for 30+ years and most journeys between major cities are now on the high speed network at least for a major part. Not surprisingly therefore, most of the unbuilt routes serve much smaller populations so are a lot more marginal in terms of benefits.

Nick Robinson on Twitter mentioning that Ed Balls now questioning benefits of HS2 not just cost...

Its getting a bit of a mess now

 

[jon0844]

Ed Balls isn't exactly someone I would trust to have good judgement on just about anything, but I still suspect there's an agenda here - namely being able to perhaps go away and come up with a more affordable alternative (even if it's much the same) and say Labour could deliver for less money.

 

[Morgsie]

The Party that came up with the idea now might cancel it

Labour cannot be trusted at all

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

"We dont all wear hooped jumpers and wear onions round our necks"

Oh well if this is the level of debate, I'll grab a shovel to join you........

I had a vision of the Celtic football team when I first read your posting...

 

[Tobbes]

As has been said, the French have built lines / are building lines to their major population centres. Here's a map from wikipedia.

Let's crack on with HS2....

Tobbes

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The Party that came up with the idea now might cancel it
Labour cannot be trusted at all

They are just trying to sound "prudent" and "macho".
The shadow chief secretary (Rachel Reeves) was on Radio 4 and sounded completely at sea about the project.
She mentioned £70bn as the cost, but had no idea about the benefits.
It's just treasury-wonks sounding off for the conference journos.

 

[PR1Berske]

From the journalist Paul Waugh -

"Balls ups the ante again on HS2. Says Q is whether £50bn "cd be used on other transport or housing" projects. Says money is "spongible""

 

[HSTEd]

And now Osborne's nonsense about having only a shared (between infrastructure and day to day expenditure) limited pot of money to spend comes home to roost.

And perhaps the ProHS2 campaign should do a mock up of the "future of intercity travel" as it will unfold without HS2.
3+2 seating and 3hr journey time to Manchester to fit more people in.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

Ed Balls isn't exactly someone I would trust to have good judgement on just about anything, but I still suspect there's an agenda here - namely being able to perhaps go away and come up with a more affordable alternative (even if it's much the same) and say Labour could deliver for less money.

But what is this affordable alternative, I hear it mentioned all the time but no one ever says what it is. :roll:

 

[HSTEd]

But what is this affordable alternative, I hear it mentioned all the time but no one ever says what it is. :roll:

Inflation plus five percent fare rises every year.

A "Rail Fare escalator".

 

[MidlandMainlie]

The Party that came up with the idea now might cancel it

Labour cannot be trusted at all

Hardly shows them as having a clue does it?

 

[AndyLandy]

The situation might be a bit different if there was a suitable empty space half a mile from Euston or indeed anywhere else as close to central London as there is to central Birmingham (excluding parks - underground stations there were considered but ruled out). If there had been a suitable site then the HS2 station would have been put there with travelator/tube/tram/peoplemover links as necessary.

The other thing, as I see it, is that if you're building to facilitate ongoing connections, there's far more to be gained at the Birmingham end than the London end. If HS2 has quick and easy interchange with Moor & New, you've made the service accessible to everyone who can already get a train into Birmingham.

At the London end, we've already got the hopeless situation of a multitude of terminals for any ongoing journeys, so there's little to be gained by running the HS services into any existing London terminal, especially the one terminal where the only services are ones that go back the way you came...

 

[HowardGWR]

Why not?

You seem to be living under an illusion that YouGov is above all forms of politics.
It is not.

They will inevitably produce a poll that agrees with what the commissioner wants to hear.
Otherwise not many polls will be commissioned with them in the future.

Although I am totally against the nonsense that is pedalled here by the PR1Berserk colleague, I am afraid you are wide of the mark with YouGov. If YouGov is corrupt, then they all are, and it would be the reverse of what you say, as the independence of the pollster is its strongest recommendation.

The choice of questions will be influenced by the client, but thereafter, only approved sampling and weighting methods are used.

The point is it would be stupidity for long term planning to take any account of temporary public opinion, as this is solely influenced by media hype.

 

[Ironside]

It's also that the French have been building high speed lines for 30+ years and most journeys between major cities are now on the high speed network at least for a major part. Not surprisingly therefore, most of the unbuilt routes serve much smaller populations so are a lot more marginal in terms of benefits.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I agree with you to a degree, the lines between the Paris and the second and third biggest cities (Lyon and Marseille), whilst Bordeaux is under construction and Toulouse is planned. The latter are still large (metropolitan areas of over 1 million) but further away and smaller than the former two cities so I can understand why they were built first.