Merseyside: New stations planned

[martynbristow]

Unless I am much mistaken it is 2 buses at weird times like around 11:00 and 15:00 that go missing. The 80A is far slower than the 86A.

I can't believe you think that Mossley Hill and West Allerton (West Allerton is at the end of my road) need more services but think there should be more fasts on Merseyrail! Which stations should be cut to allow for the fasts?

From my experience catching IT the 86A gets stuck on Smithdown around student times and the 80 won't get held up as much. It's very time dependant.

I'm aware the patronage of these stations is low but why?
The bus is by far the better option because it's more frequent and comfertable.
If you ran a higher frequency with nicer trains people would consider swapping.

 

[fowler9]

From my experience catching IT the 86A gets stuck on Smithdown around student times and the 80 won't get held up as much. It's very time dependant.

I'm aware the patronage of these stations is low but why?
The bus is by far the better option because it's more frequent and comfertable.
If you ran a higher frequency with nicer trains people would consider swapping.

True but it depends on where you live and where you are going. If I am going beyond the Hardman Street area the bus is rarely the better option. It does all depend on how close you live to the station and where you are going. Swings and roundabouts.

 

[martynbristow]

True but it depends on where you live and where you are going. If I am going beyond the Hardman Street area the bus is rarely the better option. It does all depend on how close you live to the station and where you are going. Swings and roundabouts.

Indeed, just with the current setup the trains going to attract no one :/
Potentially an extra stop could be added the the South Parkway-Airport train or some other service.

 

[HowardGWR]

I've been following this thread with interest for a long time. What I miss is any definitive proposal of what local flows would best be served in Liverpool. Forgetting all the various proposals over the years, is a star shaped network (tube or tram) or a circular one best fitted for what Liverpool needs as a "transit" system (to use the American term)?

It seems to me that starting by just trying to see how the old abandoned lines and stations could satisfy the need is the wrong way to approach the issue.

 

[Camden]

I've been following this thread with interest for a long time. What I miss is any definitive proposal of what local flows would best be served in Liverpool. Forgetting all the various proposals over the years, is a star shaped network (tube or tram) or a circular one best fitted for what Liverpool needs as a "transit" system (to use the American term)?

It seems to me that starting by just trying to see how the old abandoned lines and stations could satisfy the need is the wrong way to approach the issue.

I don't think it's rocket science to be honest. It's rather like the "filling in the gaps" of the tube, just with a lot less money!

The services through to the Wirral and up into north Liverpool are great. The services into the east of the city, though, are really not. There's also appears to be a lot of disconnects (knock on effect of a system designed in the 70s perhaps) like between Lime Street Station and Liverpool Central Station, and only one way traffic between Lime Street Station and the business district (took me a little while to get to grips with that).

In the places where the system is finished, it's really great, you just need more of that.

(I think that's a star network, in answer to your question!)

 

[Wavertreelad]

Reading through all the comments a few days ago on the Liverpool and Manchester issue I think we need to consider the much bigger picture, rather than focus on just the rail link to LJL, the Northern Hub and whether Liverpool should become almost a suburb of Manchester. It is very obvious that the UK cannot continue to grow and compete in the world market if the wealth, population and infrastructure growth is all concentrated in the South East of England. The concept, and that at the moment is all it really it can be is for the Northern Powerhouse, which amongst many other things envisages that the major cities are linked by greatly improved transport infrastructure to facilitate easier and faster travel between them.

If the Northern Powerhouse concept is to be developed in any form whether we like it or not in Liverpool, Manchester will almost be inevitably at the centre in the North West whilst most likely Leeds will be at the centre east of the Pennines as the road and rail links between the two cities are upgraded, whether that be the M62 and/or HS3. Thus assuming HS2 is also constructed by 2044, ie the year that the Merseytravel 30 plan looks forward too, Manchester will be at the crossroads of all major surface transport links as well as those by air, but where will this leave Merseytravel and it's plans?

Liverpool is likely to remain the major deep sea port for the North of England region, it very unlikely that similar sized facilities will be developed on the Humber, Tees or Tyne because they invariable focus on serving the ports of North Europe and Scandinavia which are completely different markets to those served from the Mersey. Well before 2044 there will be a need to improve connectivity of the road and the rail routes to the Port in order to avoid gridlock on the local road network. Linking the Bootle Branch to the Kirkby to Wigan line would probably provide the most direct route assuming a connection could be constructed at Kirkdale, increasing the business case for the electrification of the line. In turn this would allow Kirkby trains to be extended to Wigan potentially finally also linking Skelmersdale to the rail network thus providing greater connectivity for both residents and industry alike.

The Ormskirk to Preston line will almost certainly be electrified by 2044 in one form or another allowing through workings between Liverpool and Preston if necessary by dual voltage stock. I suspect that this would facilitate further residential development along the Ormskirk to Preston section of the route, thus probably ensuring this remains a commuter line. However, reopening the North Mersey Line would potentially allow trains to reach Lime Street via the Bootle Branch which might be option to end services by "Northern" beyond Preston perhaps on a semi-fast basis again increasing connectivity and potentially capacity on the Chat Moss route which might be required for stopping Manchester or Trans-Pennine services. Routing Preston and Blackpool trains via Ormskirk would effectively provide this option and together with the Kirkby to Wigan extension would provide "matching" services to those provided to Manchester.

Extending Merseyrail to the south of Liverpool must be a priority for Merseytravel as it would increase the capacity at Central without a massive rebuild as well increasing connectivity but it is difficult to see how this could be achieved without further extensions to the network in the south. The electrification of the CLC route to Manchester via Warrington provides further opportunities for Merseyrail but like the City Line I suspect these routes will to be operated by "Northern" from Lime Street as part of through services to Manchester and beyond. However, Merseyrail services from Central could be extended to Warrington assuming the replacement stock was suitable otherwise another alternative might have to be found, such as Gatacre or perhaps Widnes where it might be possible to construct a bay platform on the north side of the station.

The Edgehill spur scheme would likely be the largest and most expensive infrastructure project in the 30 year plan, but it would offer a wide variety of journey opportunities allowing trains to reach both the WCML and Chat Moss routes from both the Wirral Lines and the Northern Line to and from the north of the network. However, like the CLC route it would then need suitable new Merseyrail stock to be capable of matching the performance of 319’s and their subsequent replacements on the City Line routes as well as being capable of negotiating the Mersey tunnels. The Chat Moss route would probably have reached capacity long before 2044, so the prospects of running more Merseyrail trains on this route would be doubtful because of the dual nature of the track even if there was a natural terminal station before Manchester. The long quadruplicate section track of the WCML, from Wavertree to Ditton does offer more scope to expand the Merseyrail network in this direction with a potential terminal station at Warrington Bank Quay via the current freight only route. This would again increase connectivity to the surrounding areas and avoids again the need to route services from Lime Street to WBQ and could be better option for Merseyrail services than trying to route them to Warrington via the CLC route.

Providing Merseyrail access to the slow lines on the WCML to Ditton also allows Ditton Station to be reopened, but whether it makes a station for LJL more likely is unclear. It does make it slightly easier to construct a spur from the WCML at the rear of Speke Retail Park, but it whether the cost of such a scheme could be justified, given the passenger numbers is the concern, even allowing for modest growth. Whilst a rail link to the airport would aid connectivity and growth of the airport, it is doubtful if the business case would be sufficient to justify the expense of the scheme, unless it was partly funded from central funds as part of a larger incentive for the region.

With the Southport and Wirral lines remaining concentrated on commuter traffic it would seem logical to keep these routes together with the Northern Line services under the Merseyrail banner, because of restrictions of the Mersey Tunnels and third rail system of the network. The City Lines would continue to be operated by "Northern" but with fares in the metropolitan areas set by the respective parties.

The political question of how local transport is organised is unlikely to be fundamentally changed as effectively it would mean having one authority covering the whole of Merseyside, Manchester, and large parts of both Cheshire and Lancashire, begging the question of how the rest of Cheshire and Lancashire would be administered and funded. Local accountability would above all be lost and there could be political stalemate when decisions had to be made because of the diverse area the authority would serve.

Thus my view would be that that Liverpool and Manchester are complementary to each other, and each location needs the other as much each other, but there does need to be more cooperation between the two in developing transport links in the region. This point is particularly important because the proposals involve infrastructure and services between the two metropolitan areas, and need the support of the authorities concerned. It’s therefore important that the plans take into consideration the travelling requirements of the population of not just Merseyside, but those requirements of Warrington, Wigan, Skelmersdale and Wrexham for example. Thus whilst the established trams network works well for Manchester because they can potentially work out from the centre in all directions, it unlikely they could stretch as far as Liverpool. It’s also unlikely that they would do not work for Merseyside because of geography of the region separated by the River Mersey and the established Merseyrail network. Merseyrail therefore, will likely survive but any new extensions will see some tracks shared with other operators to facilitate through workings.

By 2044 most of the proposed line extensions included in the Merseytravel plans could have been electrified in one form or another anyway, except perhaps the North Mersey Branch, irrespective of Merseytravel’s plans as dmu’s are phased out in the region and agreements reached with the neighbouring authorities on how services are operated. Thus apart from upgrading stations in the Merseyside area the only major infrastructure schemes would be the North Mersey Line and the Edge Hill spur scheme. The former I suspect could also be dependant on the working life remaining in the existing third rail infrastructure between Ormskirk and Aintree as converting the entire route to Bootle with OHLE would also allow through running to Lime Street assuming of course the Bootle Branch was also electrified with OHLE.
I suspect the Edge Hill Spur proposal would only see the light of day if either or both HS2/HS3 were to be constructed as this could result in some local services being transferred from Lime Street to and enlarged Central Station. Providing better connectivity to south of Liverpool would then become even more of a priority due to the need to free up space at Lime Street as well as balance movements from the north end of the network on the Northern Lines through Central.

As the second largest urban area in the North West, it is important that Liverpool and the surrounding area continues to invest infrastructure to raise the level of service and connectivity to the area which in turn will bring more investment from the private sector as well as the public sector.

 

[Camden]

As the second largest urban area in the North West, it is important that Liverpool and the surrounding area continues to invest infrastructure to raise the level of service and connectivity to the area which in turn will bring more investment from the private sector as well as the public sector.

The mistake in all the Northern Powerhouse talk is an apparent obsession by those pushing the concept with a notion of creating a single centre. Looking at "the north" (which I know isn't really the north) what you have are four neighbouring areas which each have their own potential as major regional centres.

Liverpool, centre for north Wales, west of Cheshire, the west of Lancashire.
Manchester, centre for the east of Lancashire, east of Cheshire.
Leeds, centre for West and North Yorkshire.
Sheffield, centre for South Yorkshire.

With the distance between the centres of around 30 to 40 miles they will never be one city (and nor should anyone want the urban mess that would entail!), but with a focus on building each up, each can be a powerful place for employment and tapping into those individual (and blurry) markets. Two and a half million people apiece (which is, Sheffield apart which is slightly less, the rough size of their wider areas) is plenty for a good economy, capital cities around the world are made up of less. Add in immediate access to similar sized neighbours, and you've got 4 x cities with great potential.

Connecting these areas with "high speed" rail so it takes 20 minutes or so to get between each one will help boost the attractiveness of them all, yes. Investing in the transport infrastructure within each region will enhance the attractiveness of whichever region you invest in, yes.

Fast rail links can only carry so many people, and it is expensive to use (a commuter today is looking at around 2.5 to 3.5k deducted from their pay packet for a 30 mile or so journey). Its wrong for anyone to think that this will "merge" areas, or that investing primarily in only one regional centre will change the others from underperformers to star suburbs. They are still 30 - 40 miles away, and all such a policy will do is make them further underperform.

Liverpool needs to confidently assert itself as a regional centre and start being forward with ambition, as the logic (and necessity) of its situation merits that.

 

[Gareth]

You're right, Camden but this 'Northern Powerhouse' stuff ain't new. Whitehall's had England split into artificial regions for decades now, with one city considered the administrative capital for each. It's a consequence of the UK's over-centralisation, which is almost unique in the world for a country of its size. It uniquely screws Liverpool because it's by far the largest city in the country not be be considered the 'capital' of whatever invented region it happens to have been put in. Add to that how national strategic and economic policy is skewed to optimise the South East and how Liverpool's the geographic polar opposite of this. Don't expect this latest PR wheeze to change anything substantially, however. Manchester's not going to be become another London or even a Barcelona. There's no genuine intention on Whitehall's part to realise this or make Manchester remotely important in any global context. Do, however, expect more relatively minor boondogles, like relocations of some Whitehall departments to make a 'Whitehall of the North' and a continuation of relatively favourable provision of infrastructural investment compared to other major cities and especially Liverpool (HS2 stitch up being a recent example). This provision, however, will remain rather humble when compared to similar sized cities in other, less weird, developed countries. It's smoke and mirrors for the most part, to detract from the fact that it'll be business as usual and that the country's still very much on course to become ever more London-centric.

Back on to trains: I just like to pick up on the idea of a Liverpool Airport connection. Firstly, the argument that it's not warranted on the basis that the 500 bus is often empty is overtly simple. A bus is not a train and most people appreciate this. When in a foreign city, I prefer trains if I have a choice, as not only are they usually faster and more comfortable, but they give a psychological assurance as the line is physical and it usually brings you to a main station in a central location. With buses, you often have to worry about which stop to get off at and may not be sure the route is good for you, due to poor personal knowledge of the local geography. I've used Liverpool Airport several times and have never used the 500 bus. I usually prefer taxi, as I often cannot be bothered messing around with luggage on buses. I've used the bus on occasion but it's always been a normal city one that can get me closer to where I actually live.

Second but equally important point: Manchester Airport's existence doesn't forgo Liverpool Airport's, thus, doesn't make a debate about a fixed rail link to the latter hypothetical or superfluous. No one argues that Heathrow's existence forgos Gatwick's or Stansted's, or Luton's or London City's. The relative size difference between two airports shouldn't matter if the smaller of the two can justify a link in its own right. Liverpool Airport maybe relatively small compared to Manchester but it's not especially when compared to UK airports as a whole, let alone the hundreds of smaller ones that exist in other countries. It's 12th largest (down from 10th) out of over 40 and still larger than the likes of Leeds-Bradford, London City, Prestwick etc. No one argues that these airports should disappear, let alone not have rail connections on principal. London City has a DLR station, whilst there's often talk of providing some sort of link to Leeds-Bradford. Krakow Airport in Poland is also smaller than Liverpool, yet it has a rail link; something I chose to use, despite there also being buses which were slightly cheaper (further to my previous point).

Would a link to Liverpool Airport work? I certainly think many passengers would use it if it was there but that would depend on a reasonably high frequency. The Krakow rail link has a 20 minute frequency and no intermediate stations between the airport and the central station in the city. Ideally, I think 15 minutes would be better. I can't see any airport train missing out Liverpool South Parkway, so the question here then is whether 4tph could be viable Airport-South Parkway-Lime Street. Certainly, people from further afield who often get the Scarborough TransPennine Express service or the EMT service to LSP would be grateful to change onto a frequent service to the airport terminal (which is a good couple of miles or so away). No doubt Merseyrail Northern Line users would be grateful for this connection too. I guess the service would also have to pick up a lot of South Parkway-Lime Street pax but this is already well catered for by existing services. This may mean stopping at intermediate stations, though this will incur a time penalty on the end-to-end journey time. However, only three stations (West Allerton, Mossley Hill, Edge Hill) might not make too huge of a difference. Perhaps, if the Merseyrail Northern Line extended beyond Hunts Cross, removing the Lime Street-Oxford Road stopper, then all stops Lime Street-South Parkway could be taken over by an airport service. What alignment an airport link would take is another issue that would need considering.

 

[WatcherZero]

Liverpool City Region report on Rail North. Confirms an upgraded Lime Street as home for HS2/HS3.

http://moderngov.merseytravel.uk.net/documents/s14465/MTC_CA.pdf

 

[martynbristow]

Is HS2 the new Merseytram!

 

[Wavertreelad]

Liverpool City Region report on Rail North. Confirms an upgraded Lime Street as home for HS2/HS3.

http://moderngov.merseytravel.uk.net/documents/s14465/MTC_CA.pdf

Interesting quote from page 10

"Work is currently underway to inform the development of an Interim Report which
has been requested by the Chancellor for the first week of March 2015 in order to
potentially inform announcements in the Budget."

 

[pablo]

Page 10 also includes this: "It is anticipated that the Interim Report will lead to an “in principle approval” from Government......."
They are doing nothing to anticipate the funding from governmint. You would think the author knew the difference between anticipated and expected.

 

[Camden]

Hmmnnn so Liverpool throws its hopes behind HS3 giving it a link to HS2? HS3 a far off, not entirely real proposal of which the most concrete part talked about so far is a tunnel between Leeds and Manchester, or Sheffield and Manchester (or both)? HS3, a project which "in principle" funding is only "anticipated"... Sounds pretty desperate, and sounds as if Liverpool is set to continue missing out on the HS2 party going on all around it.

As in the future it looks like more trains will be connecting Liverpool to Manchester with around the 30 minute timings anyway, and given the lack of any interest shown by the powers that be so far in connecting Liverpool nationally, pretty much shrugging shoulders at its needs as an economic entity, I consider the likelihood of east-west high speed tracks being built to Liverpool to be pretty low. Bear in mind at one point that high speed rail was going to go to Liverpool before it became the HS2 political project.

Martyn, by Merseytram you mean a tram project that never was to be? If so maybe so. What exactly is so much more difficult about a very short high speed extension to Liverpool that it can't be bolted on to Phase 2 of HS2? I've followed the events closely including the economic reports and from what I can see the answer is simply political.

 

[WatcherZero]

Page 10 also includes this: "It is anticipated that the Interim Report will lead to an “in principle approval” from Government......."
They are doing nothing to anticipate the funding from governmint. You would think the author knew the difference between anticipated and expected.

Chancellors has already signalled he would finance the One North £15bn strategy last year. Hes privately told them hes sold on their plan, they now just have to present the detail. Since initially Liverpool and later Hull were the drivers of the freight aspects of the strategy (mixed use rather than passenger only, linking ports, freight yards) that is a win for them.

 

[martynbristow]

Hmmnnn so Liverpool throws its hopes behind HS3 giving it a link to HS2? HS3 a far off, not entirely real proposal of which the most concrete part talked about so far is a tunnel between Leeds and Manchester, or Sheffield and Manchester (or both)? HS3, a project which "in principle" funding is only "anticipated"... Sounds pretty desperate, and sounds as if Liverpool is set to continue missing out on the HS2 party going on all around it.

As in the future it looks like more trains will be connecting Liverpool to Manchester with around the 30 minute timings anyway, and given the lack of any interest shown by the powers that be so far in connecting Liverpool nationally, pretty much shrugging shoulders at its needs as an economic entity, I consider the likelihood of east-west high speed tracks being built to Liverpool to be pretty low. Bear in mind at one point that high speed rail was going to go to Liverpool before it became the HS2 political project.

Martyn, by Merseytram you mean a tram project that never was to be? If so maybe so. What exactly is so much more difficult about a very short high speed extension to Liverpool that it can't be bolted on to Phase 2 of HS2? I've followed the events closely including the economic reports and from what I can see the answer is simply political.

I'm simply referring to the waste of money.
Is Merseytravels dream of being part of HS2/3 going to burn money again and leave it with egg on its face.
I'm not really convinced Merseytravel has the ability to pull off projects.
A lot of things I read is all about the city getting this connection, yet central government is giving no indication.
Its right to think of the future, but this pipe dream is a bit far off.
It just seems that toys are being thrown out of prams because Manchester has and we don't!
Liverpool has 1tph to London and 2 stoppers to Birmingham, Manchester 3tph plus 2 fasts to Birmingham.
I think Merseytravel need to look to support the present city and growth not betting on 10-20 years away!

 

[Camden]

Chancellors has already signalled he would finance the One North £15bn strategy last year. Hes privately told them hes sold on their plan, they now just have to present the detail. Since initially Liverpool and later Hull were the drivers of the freight aspects of the strategy (mixed use rather than passenger only, linking ports, freight yards) that is a win for them.

Unless there's some legal mechanism I'm not aware of, whatever this particular chancellor gives the nod to now is vulnerable to cancellation or watering down by any incoming government, and even by a same continuing government. HS2 on the other hand is a done deal. "Not worth the paper" springs to mind.

I'm simply referring to the waste of money.
Is Merseytravels dream of being part of HS2/3 going to burn money again and leave it with egg on its face.
I'm not really convinced Merseytravel has the ability to pull off projects.
A lot of things I read is all about the city getting this connection, yet central government is giving no indication.
Its right to think of the future, but this pipe dream is a bit far off.
It just seems that toys are being thrown out of prams because Manchester has and we don't!
Liverpool has 1tph to London and 2 stoppers to Birmingham, Manchester 3tph plus 2 fasts to Birmingham.
I think Merseytravel need to look to support the present city and growth not betting on 10-20 years away!

Waste of money on campaigning you mean? I'm not sure they've spent that much. The one train an hour is a pain the backside for many reasons I agree, but I think you understate the importance to Liverpool of having top flight rail connections in order to maintain and grow its attractiveness to business. Those connections come from the decisions made by government not locally, so I don't see what else they can do except lobby and make the case?

Put it this way, if HS2 goes ahead as it is you in Liverpool might get 10 or 15 minutes shaved off Liverpool to Birmingham by being able to add fast trains to the west coast line (assuming capacity from Liverpool isn't an issue, which I gather it is), but meanwhile Leeds and Manchester will have trains that take just 50 minutes or less to reach it. Forgetting about HS2 to concentrate on conventional services doesn't seem realistic when conventional services are about to be left for dust, I think it's wrong to trivialise that down to jealousy.

I'm reminded of the west coast mainline electrification programme back in the day. If Liverpool had been left out of that it would have been thought very strange, and it would have been very consequential to what it is you have to complain about today and very detrimental. This is no different.

 

[Gareth]

Spot on, Camden. No one should be ignorant of the existential threat the current HS2 plans pose to Liverpool, should they go ahead unaltered.

 

[martynbristow]

Unless there's some legal mechanism I'm not aware of, whatever this particular chancellor gives the nod to now is vulnerable to cancellation or watering down by any incoming government, and even by a same continuing government. HS2 on the other hand is a done deal. "Not worth the paper" springs to mind.


Waste of money on campaigning you mean? I'm not sure they've spent that much. The one train an hour is a pain the backside for many reasons I agree, but I think you understate the importance to Liverpool of having top flight rail connections in order to maintain and grow its attractiveness to business. Those connections come from the decisions made by government not locally, so I don't see what else they can do except lobby and make the case?

Put it this way, if HS2 goes ahead as it is you in Liverpool might get 10 or 15 minutes shaved off Liverpool to Birmingham by being able to add fast trains to the west coast line (assuming capacity from Liverpool isn't an issue, which I gather it is), but meanwhile Leeds and Manchester will have trains that take just 50 minutes or less to reach it. Forgetting about HS2 to concentrate on conventional services doesn't seem realistic when conventional services are about to be left for dust, I think it's wrong to trivialise that down to jealousy.

I'm reminded of the west coast mainline electrification programme back in the day. If Liverpool had been left out of that it would have been thought very strange, and it would have been very consequential to what it is you have to complain about today and very detrimental. This is no different.

A lot of suggested plans are being hinged on HS2/3 progress with Liverpool even the mayor is waffling on about it.
The issue isn't as big as Manchester which includes Manchester, Stockport, Bolton and Salford in its catchment area, we simply have Liverpool (city) and Birkenhead. If you live in South Wirral you might as well use Chester and if your well North of the city you can hop over to Wigan.

You could get 1hour40 into London fast potentially and Birmingham in 1hour. But how many people want Birmingham-Liverpool by train.
I think the focus of Merseytravel needs to be sorting the present and ignoring the future, otherwise there won't be one! They have just spent a fortune adding effectively cosmetic changes to the Underground, ignoring the warnings of the Network Rail RUS. The problem is Liverpool isn't a business centre its a PORT and manufacturing area. Manchester has much larger prospects.
Personally I would like to be able to get HS2 from Liverpool, but I'm not paying for a load of white elephants!

 

[Camden]

A lot of suggested plans are being hinged on HS2/3 progress with Liverpool even the mayor is waffling on about it.
The issue isn't as big as Manchester which includes Manchester, Stockport, Bolton and Salford in its catchment area, we simply have Liverpool (city) and Birkenhead. If you live in South Wirral you might as well use Chester and if your well North of the city you can hop over to Wigan.

You could get 1hour40 into London fast potentially and Birmingham in 1hour. But how many people want Birmingham-Liverpool by train.
I think the focus of Merseytravel needs to be sorting the present and ignoring the future, otherwise there won't be one! They have just spent a fortune adding effectively cosmetic changes to the Underground, ignoring the warnings of the Network Rail RUS. The problem is Liverpool isn't a business centre its a PORT and manufacturing area. Manchester has much larger prospects.
Personally I would like to be able to get HS2 from Liverpool, but I'm not paying for a load of white elephants!

Don't worry I don't think anyone is going to expect you to pay personally! I think maybe you were born in the wrong place in the wrong era, as you sound like you could be about to give a speech about not wasting money on the stoney banks of the Mersey!

It's got much less to do with the convenience of using Chester (although if Liverpool Lime Street was faster, more frequent that wouldn't necessarily be the case), it's to do with the future of Liverpool as a centre of commerce and as a city economy providing employment to its large population, and money in taxation to cover its spend. There is absolutely no reason why Liverpool can't be every bit as successful as Manchester as a business centre and in fact it's economically essential to the country that it at least goes some way towards that. Manchester does have better present day prospects because it has been invested in. You say Liverpool isn't a business centre, but as someone involved in frequent business in the north I can assure you it very much is. The differences between these economies performances (a measure known as GVA per Head) isn't especially large and most urban regions outside London underperform, which is the countrys historical problem. You don't fix that by just having one economy up to the average and just give up on all the others, you need as many places as possible performing at the top of their game else it's all for nothing.

I think it is a bit of a conflict that on the one hand you complain about present day services not being concentrated on, talking about Liverpool only having two slow trains to Birmingham, and then saying but who wants fast trains, so which do you want? My information on that incidentally is that broadly similar numbers of people travel between Liverpool and Birmingham as between Manchester and Birmingham so are you campaigning for the HS2 fast services between them to be axed? I hope not and I presume not, so why aren't you campaigning for matching fast services to boost your city too?

Suggesting Merseytravel ignores the future is a singularly awful piece of advice, no business or organisation can ever afford to do that its the path to decline and extinction.

The sums involved on the station refurbishments, notably their first since construction in the 70s, are miniscule, so why complain about that? If that's not concentrating on the present day I'm not sure what is. You don't actually spell out specifically what it is you want Merseytravel to do that they are supposedly not doing. If you list specifics then I think some objective light might be able to be cast on them.

I bet that most if not all of them will be related to needing a growing city economy to see them through though, which is something you seem content to unnecessarily concede defeat on without any sort of fight.

 

[Wavertreelad]

A lot of suggested plans are being hinged on HS2/3 progress with Liverpool even the mayor is waffling on about it.
The issue isn't as big as Manchester which includes Manchester, Stockport, Bolton and Salford in its catchment area, we simply have Liverpool (city) and Birkenhead. If you live in South Wirral you might as well use Chester and if your well North of the city you can hop over to Wigan.

You could get 1hour40 into London fast potentially and Birmingham in 1hour. But how many people want Birmingham-Liverpool by train.
I think the focus of Merseytravel needs to be sorting the present and ignoring the future, otherwise there won't be one! They have just spent a fortune adding effectively cosmetic changes to the Underground, ignoring the warnings of the Network Rail RUS. The problem is Liverpool isn't a business centre its a PORT and manufacturing area. Manchester has much larger prospects.
Personally I would like to be able to get HS2 from Liverpool, but I'm not paying for a load of white elephants!

Liverpool has to continue to campaign for a direct connection for the very reason you have stated, it is a Port and it is no good investing millions of Pounds in the terminal facilities if the inland moves cannot be completed. Now I know at the moment there are no intermodal trains from Seaforth, but when Liverpool2 opens they will become vital as simply the road transport industry and road infrastructure will not be able to cope with the additional throughput. The road transport industry estimate there is shortage of 45000 drivers nationally with Liverpool being one of the major area of concern.
http://www.ukhaulier.co.uk/news/roa...ited-in-call-for-grants-to-haulage-companies/

Without the additional capacity that direct HS2 and HS3 lines will bring, the Port and City will be starved of capacity in thirty years or so, making it vital that the City of Liverpool and Merseytravel both continue to campaign for these long term projects. In the meantime, Liverpool has also to campaign for more and better direct passenger links to Scotland, South Wales and the South West as well as Birmingham and of course London in order to attract visitors and business to City area to drive the local economy forward.

Of course the population of Greater Manchester is considerably larger than Merseyside, but Manchester also benefits because it is at the centre of all the towns that form the region so the local transport infrastructure has been established to focus on the centre. Liverpool, bounded by the river and Irish Sea is not in the same position, and as you point out there are areas of Merseyside and surrounding regions that already have their own direct connections to for example London, Birmingham and Scotland in the same way as Manchester.

I'd also agree that Merseytravel's record on infrastructure projects is not exactly brilliant, and they do need to step up a few levels and get to grip with moving the Merseyrail network forward. However, the problem is that without the agreement of neighbouring authorities and of course the Government, it is difficult to see how the network can be extended beyond it's current boundaries. As a result there is grave risk that the next thirty years could be confined tp replacing the existing rolling stock, building a few new stations on the existing network and buying more potted plants for the office.

 

[Gareth]

^^ Pretty much what the 20 Miles More report covers and what Martyn should be reading.

What depresses me about Martyn's comments is that it just goes to show how powerful propaganda actually is. The 30/40 year drip, drip, drip approach by national media (and Granada sometimes) and government policy, all repeating the narrative that Liverpool is much smaller than it actually is (can fit in Manchester several times over) and is geographically isolated and "out on a limb", business is an anathema to the city, city is super dangerous etc has taken its toll so much so that locals are now starting to believe it. It's all BS but if it's stated in perpetuity over a number of years than a depressingly large amount proportion of folk will eventually come to believe it. Local people believing this is a relatively recent development though and I fear it's a sign that, with the help of HS2, Manchester Powerhouse and various other unhelpful interventions that Whitehall comes up with over the next few years, the city will actually do what its detractors have long wanted it to do: it will die.

 

[martynbristow]

Right so let me clarify
Liverpool has Media City UK?
Liverpool has the headquarters of major international businesses!
It question isn't how much do the people of Liverpool want it, but are the Goverment going to invest in this direction
Manchester already has a healthy economy in sectors relevant to this, partly assisted by the geographic footprint, it has 4 sides on the compass Liverpool has 2.5.
The Liverpool economy is dominated by retail, manufacturing, ports, education and other services.
The figures on GVA are Manchester: £35 billion, Liverpool: £10 billion (source ONS).
Liverpool should focus it provide support to Manchester . So better more reliable services across and better interchange should be the focus.

And when did HS2 benifit freight, I, confused they explicitly state NO friendly operation, but it would open up paths on the classic WCML for more frieght, so HS2 going to Manchester would benifit Liverpool in that regard easily

 

[fowler9]

Right so let me clarify
Liverpool has Media City UK?
Liverpool has the headquarters of major international businesses!
It question isn't how much do the people of Liverpool want it, but are the Goverment going to invest in this direction
Manchester already has a healthy economy in sectors relevant to this, partly assisted by the geographic footprint, it has 4 sides on the compass Liverpool has 2.5.
The Liverpool economy is dominated by retail, manufacturing, ports, education and other services.
The figures on GVA are Manchester: £35 billion, Liverpool: £10 billion (source ONS).
Liverpool should focus it provide support to Manchester . So better more reliable services across and better interchange should be the focus.

And when did HS2 benifit freight, I, confused they explicitly state NO friendly operation, but it would open up paths on the classic WCML for more frieght, so HS2 going to Manchester would benifit Liverpool in that regard easily

I have been very negative about development in Liverpool but that was mostly based on the fact I wonder who would spend the money but I don't see why Liverpool should exist to support Manchester. A lot of Manchesters wealth exists because of wealth and trade brought in through Liverpool. Without Liverpool and its tradesmen Manchester wouldn't exist as it does now. I don't see why we should just have to provide cafes and shops for people commuting to Manchester to sit in an office. New York is stuck on the coast like so many of the worlds great cities and seems to have no problems dominating many industries.

 

[martynbristow]

I have been very negative about development in Liverpool but that was mostly based on the fact I wonder who would spend the money but I don't see why Liverpool should exist to support Manchester. A lot of Manchesters wealth exists because of wealth and trade brought in through Liverpool. Without Liverpool and its tradesmen Manchester wouldn't exist as it does now. I don't see why we should just have to provide cafes and shops for people commuting to Manchester to sit in an office. New York is stuck on the coast like so many of the worlds great cities and seems to have no problems dominating many industries.

We provide a lot more than that, but thats the simple was of putting it. Liverpool serves as a successful Satellite providing some of the workforce across to Manchester, the Port of Liverpool will assist and a large number of businesses will trade across to Manchester. Liverpool needs to work WITH Manchester and not try and compete against it. Given how far HS2-2 is off theres plenty of scope for development. Liverpool Airport primarily serves sunny beaches and not businesses. Virtually all of my work trips are via Manchester Airport.

 

[fowler9]

We provide a lot more than that, but thats the simple was of putting it. Liverpool serves as a successful Satellite providing some of the workforce across to Manchester, the Port of Liverpool will assist and a large number of businesses will trade across to Manchester. Liverpool needs to work WITH Manchester and not try and compete against it. Given how far HS2-2 is off theres plenty of scope for development. Liverpool Airport primarily serves sunny beaches and not businesses. Virtually all of my work trips are via Manchester Airport.

I don't entirely agree. Liverpool doesn't serve as a successful satellite of Manchester, some people commute to Manchester because they have to, I know many who have stopped doing it as soon as they were able. Liverpool Airport does not primarily serve sunny beaches, although I am being petty there, there is a large amount of leisure travel. I couldn't possibly comment on your work trips although I would imagine it has more to do with the airlines your employer uses. Liverpool currently has approx naff all charter flights heading out whereas Manchester has loads. I do agree that Liverpool has to work with Manchester though, not just concede defeat and become a commuter village.

 

[Wavertreelad]

I don't entirely agree. Liverpool doesn't serve as a successful satellite of Manchester, some people commute to Manchester because they have to, I know many who have stopped doing it as soon as they were able. Liverpool Airport does not primarily serve sunny beaches, although I am being petty there, there is a large amount of leisure travel. I couldn't possibly comment on your work trips although I would imagine it has more to do with the airlines your employer uses. Liverpool currently has approx naff all charter flights heading out whereas Manchester has loads. I do agree that Liverpool has to work with Manchester though, not just concede defeat and become a commuter village.

Speaking as one the many of thousands of travelling Scousers who commute daily to Greater Manchester I'd agree most would love to commute across Merseyside rather than endure either the congested M62, M56 or rampacked trains to and from Manchester. Unfortunately, the fact of the matter is that many skilled jobs in the North West are concentrated on a single location to reduce industry costs and despite the advances in technology, this trend is unlikely to reverse.

Manchester Airport was able to expand over the decades largely because the councils that run the operating company were also able to attract the private sector to locate at the airport. This attracted both freight and passenger operators, although much of freight moving through the airport complex tends to move in and out of the airport moves by road. Liverpool Airport did not have these advantages until it was purchased by Peel who have invested substantially in the airport in order to attract further business. The two airports mainly serve different markets in the passenger sector and thus are mainly complementary to each other, but due to way the airlines structure their road network to deliver freight to provincial airports from their hub airports, it is often quicker and cheaper for customers in the west of the region to route their airfreight via Manchester rather than wait for it to arrive at Liverpool.

The northern towns around Manchester together with the City itself probably had more industry than in Liverpool, but as manufacturing reduced, the region became a major area for imports and distribution, particularly from China, the Far East and Indian Subcontinent. This has in turn lead to an influx of freight related industries concentrated around Manchester Airport and parts of the Trafford Park Industrial estate, in many cases at the expense of those in Liverpool. However, Liverpool has been able to attract most of the major shipping lines and still has a vibrant freight industry and those who travel up and down the M62 will now see the growing distribution centres being constructed at Warrington which have been attracted the proximity of site to Liverpool2 which is on course to open later this year. This recent video from Peel Ports provides an impression of how the terminal could change the region, and I can confirm that the project is on time, with the backfill process underway and the new gantry cranes due for delivery in August this year.

http://youtu.be/X8_--QOCFHc

 

[HowardGWR]

This recent video from Peel Ports provides an impression of how the terminal could change the region, and I can confirm that the project is on time, with the backfill process underway and the new gantry cranes due for delivery in August this year.

http://youtu.be/X8_--QOCFHc

The rail interface didn't look too clever. 'Why can't the boxes go straight from ship to rail' is what came over to me?

 

[Camden]

Right so let me clarify
Liverpool has Media City UK?
Liverpool has the headquarters of major international businesses!
It question isn't how much do the people of Liverpool want it, but are the Goverment going to invest in this direction
Manchester already has a healthy economy in sectors relevant to this, partly assisted by the geographic footprint, it has 4 sides on the compass Liverpool has 2.5.
The Liverpool economy is dominated by retail, manufacturing, ports, education and other services.
The figures on GVA are Manchester: £35 billion, Liverpool: £10 billion (source ONS).
Liverpool should focus it provide support to Manchester . So better more reliable services across and better interchange should be the focus.

And when did HS2 benifit freight, I, confused they explicitly state NO friendly operation, but it would open up paths on the classic WCML for more frieght, so HS2 going to Manchester would benifit Liverpool in that regard easily

Martyn, I'm about urban development so I consider it my business to be informed on these matters.

The figures you quote are comparing the urban borough of Liverpool (460k people) to an large area called Greater Manchester South, which contains several boroughs of Greater Manchester, including the city centre and the not entirely millionaire-free southern parts, and has a population of 1.5m people. Arguably this might be considered comparable to Merseyside (1.5m), which has a GVA of £28bn (source, the Department of Regional Accounts, Office for National Statistics).

While you may still point to the remaining difference of just £7bn, there is more as the rest of the picture lies with the other half of the Greater Manchester NUTS picture, Greater Manchester North, which has a population of 1.2m but a GVA of just £17bn, nearly £9bn lower than Merseyside.

Comparing them all together using a statistically comparable area around Liverpool (known as the Wider Liverpool City Region) of roughly two and a half million to Greater Manchester's 2.7, which some would argue gives more balance to the "South Manchester question", it isn't actually Manchester that comes out on top per head, and in absolute figures they are more or less equal.

Now looking more objectively, Greater Manchester has a GVA per head of 88% the national average, and Merseyside 76% the national average. Neither especially wonderful. This can be compared to some of your cheshire neighbours who score well over 100%. Meanwhile, in the "other services" you say dominates the Liverpool economy, did you know that Liverpool is a major european centre for pharmaceutical science? Or that its financial investment industry is the largest centre outside London? Seems not.

Perhaps your time in Birkenhead (a very low GVA area) has coloured your experiences, or perhaps you're just on a downer about Liverpool, but quite honestly if you feel that badly about the city you reside in why on earth don't you pack your things and move.

A 1.5 million city cannot logistically be a "satellite" with its entire populace commuting 35 miles every day nor can it be sustained on the residual earnings that would entail. Everything you have said involves Liverpool packing up shop over time, as more and more of everything about it becomes completely dramatically unsustainable. Your signature says you like trains, well if Liverpool follows the path you'd have it follow you wouldn't be seeing many of those in the area in the future, as trains are for cities with functioning economies. I don't know what your specialty is but you either don't get economics, or maybe you actually want the city to die on its backside.

As to that sustainability of the city, it is vital far beyond its borders. Did you know, for instance the pivotal importance of the city within the atlantic gateway, on which Greater Manchester will be relying to provide tens of thousands of jobs? Remember that 88% of the national average GVA? It's not a matter of "competition", it's a matter of the entire north west region not being able to reach its maximum while there is a huge wedge of it underperforming. It's essential to Greater Manchester and closing that GVA gap that Liverpool also thrives, and logically vice versa.

There are a good number of people making strong efforts to rejuventate the Liverpool economy and a recognition that the size of the metropolitan area makes doing anything else utterly unaffordable both to the city and to the UK. These people are putting themselves out there, to no detriment to you in the slightest, making effort so that the city grows stronger and offers a better future to its 1.5m inhabitants, and I think they deserve more respect than throwing unrepresentative figures around and wildly proclaiming that the city has no future as a city (which is the sum of what your path would entail).

I note you didn't actually respond to my challenge to specify what exacly it is that you feel Merseytravel should be doing that you feel they are not doing (I hope the suggestion isn't just "disband" though). I'm coming to the conclusion that maybe you just like a bit of a moan, and perhaps aren't enjoying your time in Liverpool much.

 

[martynbristow]

Martyn, I'm about urban development so I consider it my business to be informed on these matters.

The figures you quote are comparing the urban borough of Liverpool (460k people) to an large area called Greater Manchester South, which contains several boroughs of Greater Manchester, including the city centre and the not entirely millionaire-free southern parts, and has a population of 1.5m people. Arguably this might be considered comparable to Merseyside (1.5m), which has a GVA of £28bn (source, the Department of Regional Accounts, Office for National Statistics).

While you may still point to the remaining difference of just £7bn, there is more as the rest of the picture lies with the other half of the Greater Manchester NUTS picture, Greater Manchester North, which has a population of 1.2m but a GVA of just £17bn, nearly £9bn lower than Merseyside.

Comparing them all together using a statistically comparable area around Liverpool (known as the Wider Liverpool City Region) of roughly two and a half million to Greater Manchester's 2.7, which some would argue gives more balance to the "South Manchester question", it isn't actually Manchester that comes out on top per head, and in absolute figures they are more or less equal.

Now looking more objectively, Greater Manchester has a GVA per head of 88% the national average, and Merseyside 76% the national average. Neither especially wonderful. This can be compared to some of your cheshire neighbours who score well over 100%. Meanwhile, in the "other services" you say dominates the Liverpool economy, did you know that Liverpool is a major european centre for pharmaceutical science? Or that its financial investment industry is the largest centre outside London? Seems not.

Perhaps your time in Birkenhead (a very low GVA area) has coloured your experiences, or perhaps you're just on a downer about Liverpool, but quite honestly if you feel that badly about the city you reside in why on earth don't you pack your things and move.

A 1.5 million city cannot logistically be a "satellite" with its entire populace commuting 35 miles every day nor can it be sustained on the residual earnings that would entail. Everything you have said involves Liverpool packing up shop over time, as more and more of everything about it becomes completely dramatically unsustainable. Your signature says you like trains, well if Liverpool follows the path you'd have it follow you wouldn't be seeing many of those in the area in the future, as trains are for cities with functioning economies. I don't know what your specialty is but you either don't get economics, or maybe you actually want the city to die on its backside.

As to that sustainability of the city, it is vital far beyond its borders. Did you know, for instance the pivotal importance of the city within the atlantic gateway, on which Greater Manchester will be relying to provide tens of thousands of jobs? Remember that 88% of the national average GVA? It's not a matter of "competition", it's a matter of the entire north west region not being able to reach its maximum while there is a huge wedge of it underperforming. It's essential to Greater Manchester and closing that GVA gap that Liverpool also thrives, and logically vice versa.

There are a good number of people making strong efforts to rejuventate the Liverpool economy and a recognition that the size of the metropolitan area makes doing anything else utterly unaffordable both to the city and to the UK. These people are putting themselves out there, to no detriment to you in the slightest, making effort so that the city grows stronger and offers a better future to its 1.5m inhabitants, and I think they deserve more respect than throwing unrepresentative figures around and wildly proclaiming that the city has no future as a city (which is the sum of what your path would entail).

I note you didn't actually respond to my challenge to specify what exacly it is that you feel Merseytravel should be doing that you feel they are not doing (I hope the suggestion isn't just "disband" though). I'm coming to the conclusion that maybe you just like a bit of a moan, and perhaps aren't enjoying your time in Liverpool much.

ERMMM I'm from the area originally. I was born in the area and have moved away and come back.
I'm just not of the opinion to waste tax payers money, both national and council level money.
I'm ignoring the difference in area because there its not relevant. Manchester has a larger footprint and will attract more global interest.

Why do large pharmaceuticals need HS2 and why do outposts of financial institutions.
I'm yet to hear 1 reason why HS2 is coming to Liverpool, a petition in the echo is hardly going to make politicians hearts bleed.
I don't believe it will be of any net benefit than what is already been offered.
How is it actually going to benefit the city!
Liverpool can grow in other ways than a super fast link to London brings.

 

[Camden]

ERMMM I'm from the area originally. I was born in the area and have moved away and come back.
I'm just not of the opinion to waste tax payers money, both national and council level money.
I'm ignoring the difference in area because there its not relevant. Manchester has a larger footprint and will attract more global interest.

Why do large pharmaceuticals need HS2 and why do outposts of financial institutions.
I'm yet to hear 1 reason why HS2 is coming to Liverpool, a petition in the echo is hardly going to make politicians hearts bleed.
I don't believe it will be of any net benefit than what is already been offered.
How is it actually going to benefit the city!
Liverpool can grow in other ways than a super fast link to London brings.

I don't see why where you're from has anything to do with it. You live in Birkenhead, a highly depressed place 100% reliant on Liverpool succeeding as a city in order to see any hope of improvement (yes, brutal truth Wirral Waters means naught to anyone outside Wirral except for its position relative to the well known Liverpool), yet your answer for Liverpool is not to equip it to succeed as a city that contains Birkenhead but instead to turn it into another Birkenhead. Genius.

As I say, if you have such a downer on the place and you're convinced it has no future why not pack your things and leave.

HS2 going into Liverpool wouldn't be any more of a "waste" of "tax payers money" than any other part of it (less so in fact according to the economics I've seen), yet you don't appear to be calling for its cancellation to the cities it does go to. Talk of ignoring the realities of Liverpool's economy because somewhere has a "larger footprint" is a rather immature argument (Liverpool has a larger "footprint" than Leeds and Sheffield, so what big deal?), and as for "global interest" what a waste it would be if Liverpool and the UK didn't get every penny of value from the city's global and instant name recognition, where London, Edinburgh and Liverpool are the UK's most known cities by some distance. As I say, it sounds like you're on a downer over Liverpool, and this seems to be blinding you to some rather close to home truths.

Your talk of Liverpool growing in "other ways" like everything else you've said is not spelled out with either substance or logic, with everything you've said about being or becoming a satellite pointing to the very opposite of a city becoming self funding. You talk of the city's economy being centred on retail when just 15 years ago anyone would have been called potty if they said they were going to Liverpool for the shops and you'd be an intrepid explorer if you were going for a weekend. The same goes for Manchester over slightly longer timescales. It's called regeneration and it actually works when you put the money and effort in.

I'm not going to get into the general merits of HS2 with you, which I think anyway has already been made clear why having top flight connections are vital to the city, but especially when you still haven't answered the question asked of you.

Third time asking what specifically is it that you feel Merseytravel should to be doing that you feel they aren't already doing? Do you have anything to actually further this conversation beyond just general moaning or further insistence?