High Speed Two (HS2) discussion

[jon0844]

I've always said I'd like to see it built quicker, but have been conscious of the fact that it may introduce other issues (other than funding) in terms of specialist staff and equipment.

As long as the MPs are also aware of that, we might be okay!

Otherwise, trying to do both phases at once might actually make problems with falling behind, and then overspending as a result, more likely.

 

[gordonthemoron]

Building phase 1 & 2 at the same time is a non starter, they can only build as much as the yearly Crossrail budget will permit (after it gets transferred to HS2). It's amazing how many HS2 critics have not worked out where the money is coming from

 

[YorkshireBear]

Building phase 1 & 2 at the same time is a non starter, they can only build as much as the yearly Crossrail budget will permit (after it gets transferred to HS2). It's amazing how many HS2 critics have not worked out where the money is coming from

This is what concerns me. However (i don't understand economics properly) could we spend 4 billion a year for half the time then spend nothing for the other half.

 

[Tobbes]

Building phase 1 & 2 at the same time is a non starter, they can only build as much as the yearly Crossrail budget will permit (after it gets transferred to HS2). It's amazing how many HS2 critics have not worked out where the money is coming from

Yes and no. It is where the planning assumption is coming from, but it is only a policy choice - if concurrency would provide much better value for money, then I'd expect the Government to go and do it. Them same applies to building it to Scotland.

Tobbes

 

[The Ham]

Yes and no. It is where the planning assumption is coming from, but it is only a policy choice - if concurrency would provide much better value for money, then I'd expect the Government to go and do it. Them same applies to building it to Scotland.

S41

If (by spending £2bn per year on HS2 and then it only opening in 2033) it results in the need for all sorts of patches needing to be built to cope with demand whilst HS2 is built it may be better to spend and extra £1bn* for a few years to allow HS2 phase 2 to open early. Note that the extra is only really extra spend for those years rather than extra to the total build cost.

* bearing in mind that would likely only get you one scheme like the Reading station works which would then only have a short life span until HS2 is finished and then will need to be maintained for decades until there was then again enough demand for it to justify it being built, if it was used at all. Note that this extra would be in addition to the HS2 budget.

 

[WatcherZero]

Funding envelope of £2bn per year is a simple continuation of the transport funding envelope. They could spend faster (in which case debt rises faster) or cut spending elsewhere.

It is true theres a bit of a deadzone in planning between 2020 and 2026 where investment may be needed but wouldnt be worthwhile as it would quickly become redundant, bringing the final completion date further forward would probably exacerbate that as then you cant say x is okay because we would get nearly 15 years out it. Im thinking in particular of the small investment in stations, track improvements, passenger facilities, etc.. Rolling stock might end up in that quasi state too.

The other thing to remember of course is that to build HS2 and connect to the existing network theres something like 250 weekend closures planned.

 

[Tobbes]

If (by spending £2bn per year on HS2 and then it only opening in 2033) it results in the need for all sorts of patches needing to be built to cope with demand whilst HS2 is built it may be better to spend and extra £1bn* for a few years to allow HS2 phase 2 to open early. Note that the extra is only really extra spend for those years rather than extra to the total build cost.

* bearing in mind that would likely only get you one scheme like the Reading station works which would then only have a short life span until HS2 is finished and then will need to be maintained for decades until there was then again enough demand for it to justify it being built, if it was used at all. Note that this extra would be in addition to the HS2 budget.

Exactly right, Mr. Ham. What I hope the incoming HS2 chairman has at the top of his list is determining a "best value" phasing of the project, which I suspect will significantly reduce the timing on phase 2.

In terms of HS2's environmental credentials, it is also striking - but obvious - why there is so little modal shift from air; very few people fly to Manchester or Leeds unless they're already at Heathrow. Scotland's central belt is a different proposition, and abstracting a significant proportion of air travel from London to Scotland would have the added benefit of freeing slots at Heathrow and Gatwick for long haul (read: more useful) traffic.

Tobbes

 

[Ironside]

In parliament today the reporting phase of the paving bill was undertaken and any amendments were in favour of the project. At this moment the third reading is under way.

Passed through third stage by 350 for and 34 against. Bill off to the house of lords now.

 

[IKBrunel]

http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=13974

350 in favour 34 against.

a few more opponents since 2nd reading but still a very strong majority.

Ah ironside posted the result at the same moment

 

[swt_passenger]

Does that suggest the 60 Conservatives 'expected to vote against' according to the recent negative press must have been delayed on the WCML?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Funding envelope of £2bn per year is a simple continuation of the transport funding envelope. They could spend faster (in which case debt rises faster) or cut spending elsewhere.

It would take a huge leap of faith to spend more quickly.
One of the anti arguments is that it effectively hijacks public capital spending for the duration.
Whatever the rail benefits, politicians are not going to give it special priority ahead of things like schools and hospitals (and Trident).
The best bet would be to rephase the spend so that benefits flow early and across the country - but that's not easy.
It would also need a second bill passed by parliament before a sod was turned - also not easy.

It's also a problem that HS2 does not lend itself to staged construction.
Unlike the TGV lines which deliberately intersected the old lines so that portions could be built and brought into service early.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

Exactly right, Mr. Ham. What I hope the incoming HS2 chairman has at the top of his list is determining a "best value" phasing of the project, which I suspect will significantly reduce the timing on phase 2.

Tobbes

I think that is what David Higgins is hinting at. As I understand it the Phase 1 timetable is determined by the rebuilding works at Euston which is expected to take 7 years. The actual construction of the line to Birmingham is expected to take less so there will be a busy period of construction from 2018-2023/24ish then construction will stop for a couple of years until the rebuilding works are completed and the line opens in 2026;. then work on phase two would begin. If work on phase 2 started as soon as the phase 1 route was completed (but before it opens) it would shorten the completion date for phase two by a couple of years and allow the workmen to transfer and avoid the disruption of workers being laid off only to rehire 2 years later.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Does that suggest the 60 Conservatives 'expected to vote against' according to the recent negative press must have been delayed on the WCML?

Only 18 Conservatives voted against and 11 Labour MP's agreed with the shadow chancellor + 5 others (not sure if Libdems or other parties)

 

[IKBrunel]

I'm interested in amendment 17 proposed by Lilian Greenwood which seemed popular. In particular it adds reference to connectivity with walking & cycling. I'm not clear if it made reference to the HS2 parallel walking/cycling route.
Difficult to unpick from parliamentary documents the detailed content of amendment 17 or if it will be included in the final bill or if that isn't yet decided.
I would welcome clarification from anyone who understands parliamentary procedure better than me.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Does that suggest the 60 Conservatives 'expected to vote against' according to the recent negative press must have been delayed on the WCML?

The actual figure was rather less than the 60 stated in your posting.

 

[swt_passenger]

The actual figure was rather less than the 60 stated in your posting.

That was the whole point. :roll:

Some of the media were reporting that 60 would vote against only a few hours ago, e.g. ITV here:

A Conservative MP planning to vote against the government on HS2 this afternoon tells me there are 60 of his colleagues who would like to do the same.

http://www.itv.com/news/2013-10-31/...-vote-against-government-on-crucial-hs2-bill/

It has also been commonly reported in print over a period of weeks...

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Some of the media were reporting that 60 would vote against only a few hours ago, e.g. ITV here:

I wonder how they will react to having their "reported" figures contradicted by the actual numerical facts.....:roll:

 

[swt_passenger]

I wonder how they will react to having their "reported" figures contradicted by the actual numerical facts.....:roll:

I predict none of them will mention it again...

 

[YorkshireBear]

I wonder how they will react to having their "reported" figures contradicted by the actual numerical facts.....:roll:

Anti HS2 don't like facts...

Someone said the other day what good will HS2 do for WCML commuters?

I said taking away express trains will allow more commuter services.

There reply. "If you believe that you will believe anything"

:roll::roll::roll:

I banged my head repeatedly on the desk until i passed out.

 

[Ironside]

I'm interested in amendment 17 proposed by Lilian Greenwood which seemed popular. In particular it adds reference to connectivity with walking & cycling. I'm not clear if it made reference to the HS2 parallel walking/cycling route.
Difficult to unpick from parliamentary documents the detailed content of amendment 17 or if it will be included in the final bill or if that isn't yet decided.
I would welcome clarification from anyone who understands parliamentary procedure better than me.

I don't know any more than you but I imagine it allows the govt to buy land for the extra pathway and spend money on plans and designs. I guess that if their arnt any declared details of exactly what the walking and cycling facilities are supposed to be then their is no need to commitment to details at this time. I wonder if the antis are pushing this so that if the govt agrees the costs go up and if they don't then the govt can be accused of not being green enough. Perhaps the govt has called their bluff and worked out they can afford it. But this is all my speculation.

 

[WatcherZero]

Anyone see the negative response when Cheryl Gillan compared HS2 to Concorde as a white elephant. Uproar in the house that took a long time to settle and a lot of booing from her own bench. Must say she and Frank Dobson (Euston constituency) where really the only ones leading the anti brigade.

 

[jon0844]

Anyone see the negative response when Cheryl Gillan compared HS2 to Concorde as a white elephant. Uproar in the house that took a long time to settle and a lot of booing from her own bench. Must say she and Frank Dobson (Euston constituency) where really the only ones leading the anti brigade.

I read recently that Concorde still managed to turn a profit right up until the end. And it was a moment in history that might not be beaten in our lifetime.

Only an idiot would consider it to have been a white elephant. Heck, even the dome turned out to be good in the end, with loads of development around it.

Who in 100 years from now would ever believe there were people opposing HS2, or other new lines we'll hopefully build.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Must say given the hysteria and ratcheting up by sections of the media the conversion of more MP's into opponents seems to have fallen well short of what the anti brigade were hoping given the airing they were allowed over the last 3 months. I suspect that constituency MP's across the UK just don't get correspondence about it and its not the national issue they believe it to be.

 

[WatcherZero]

Indeed, there were fewer Conservative opponents than at the last vote.

 

[jon0844]

Tell me you all watched This Week this week. It was on HS2 and the stuff said by Stanley Johnson was comedy gold!

 

[YorkshireBear]

Tell me you all watched This Week this week. It was on HS2 and the stuff said by Stanley Johnson was comedy gold!

I am currently catching up on Autumnwatch... fun times you see.

What was said? Can you enlighten as i wont have time to watch?

 

[jon0844]

I am currently catching up on Autumnwatch... fun times you see.

What was said? Can you enlighten as i wont have time to watch?

Well, all were for it (even Andrew Neil was defending it mostly) and Stanley was clearly just angry about not getting sufficient compo, as well as wanting no expansion or spending on anything.

As Michael Portillo pointed out, what was said was quite telling and showed the flaws in the anti HS2 arguments.

Of course Portillo was bound to be clued up, but even Diane Abbott was clearly pro HS2.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Good, well maybe the point has got across to politicians at least. That is a good step.

 

[jon0844]

Good, well maybe the point has got across to politicians at least. That is a good step.

I doubt Michael Portillo ever needed convincing though. He knew exactly what the benefits are and how it will improve the WCML. I suspect he'd have gone into far more detail given half a chance.

 

[The Ham]

I think that is what David Higgins is hinting at. As I understand it the Phase 1 timetable is determined by the rebuilding works at Euston which is expected to take 7 years. The actual construction of the line to Birmingham is expected to take less so there will be a busy period of construction from 2018-2023/24ish then construction will stop for a couple of years until the rebuilding works are completed and the line opens in 2026;. then work on phase two would begin. If work on phase 2 started as soon as the phase 1 route was completed (but before it opens) it would shorten the completion date for phase two by a couple of years and allow the workmen to transfer and avoid the disruption of workers being laid off only to rehire 2 years later.

Which then leads to an intresting question, how far up the country could the extended phase 1 reach whist the Euston Station works are on going?

Would it, for instance be possible to get to one of the next junctions with the WCML? Maybe the one at Crew so that Liverpool benefits more from Phase 1 than it was due to, which then make keep them a bit happier about not being part of Phase 2.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Now the attention turns to Scotland: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/next-phase-of-work-for-high-speed-2-and-scotland

It looks interesting, but gives nothing away about the route or improvements.
Once again they play the wrong speed card, talking about London-Glasgow journey times of 4 hours after Phase 1 (when the current best time is already 4h08m).