Scrap Heathrow expansion & build HSR

[Mojo]

Finally someone else has seen sense that it would be pointless to expand Heathrow when we have so many domestic flights!

Tories would scrap Heathrow plan from BBC News

The Tories say they would scrap plans for a third runway at Heathrow and build a high-speed rail line instead.

They are proposing to create a new line linking London St Pancras, Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds - saying it would cut Heathrow flights by 66,000 a year.

Transport spokeswoman Theresa Villiers said it had been a hard decision but the party would "not run" from it.

The party says it would cost £1.3bn a year for 12 years. Taxpayers would fund 75% and the private sector 25%.

Ms Villiers, the shadow transport secretary, told the party's conference in Birmingham: "This is one of the hardest decisions we have faced as a party and we will not run away from it.

"That's why I can announce this morning that a Conservative government would say no to a third runway at Heathrow."

She said rail could offer a viable alternative to short-haul flights and mean 66,000 fewer flights a year, about 44% of the planned capacity of the third runway.

The proposed 180mph rail link would run between St Pancras in London - the terminus for Eurostar - and Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds. It would be a new railway with a new track freeing up the West Coast Mainline for more commuter journeys.

Ms Villiers told the conference: "A high-speed link from St Pancras to Heathrow, connecting to the north, could we believe replace up to 66,500 flights now coming into Heathrow.

"That would free up almost a third of the capacity that would be provided if a third runway were to be built.

"A national high speed network could provide around 44% of that capacity, with the potential to rise much further as the European network improves and expands. And it could deliver this without the environmental penalties of a third runway."

Earlier she said, a few years ago it would have been "inconceivable" for a Conservative leader to "put the brakes" on Heathrow expansion, which is supported by business leaders and airport operator BAA.

On the second day of the party conference in Birmingham, Ms Villiers announced a Tory government would spend £15.6bn over 12 years on the project. The private sector would contribute a further £4.4bn.

Journey times would be cut from 125 minutes to 80 minutes from London to Manchester, and from 55 minutes to 17 minutes between Manchester and Leeds.

The Conservatives have also proposed a high-speed link between St Pancras and Heathrow.

Environmental campaigners have strongly opposed the expansion of Heathrow, but business leaders have backed development plans.

Heathrow, the UK's largest airport, handles more than 500,000 flights a year. Its owner BAA says it is "jam packed" and needs a new runway to compete with other major European airports.

Last week at the Labour conference, Transport Secretary Ruth Kelly said London needed a "hub" airport to support the British economy.

London's Conservative mayor Boris Johnson has suggested an airport on an artificial island in the Thames estuary could be used to ease overcrowding instead. Ms Kelly dismissed that idea as "irresponsible".

A government decision on whether to go ahead with a third runway is expected later this year.

The Liberal Democrats also oppose it and have pledged a 15-year rail network improvement programme - including high-speed links between London, Heathrow airport, Birmingham and Manchester.

Greenpeace welcomed the Conservative announcement and said it would put "real pressure" on the government.

But executive director John Sauven added: "The true test of their commitment will come when, like the Liberal Democrats, this position is written into their manifesto."

 

[175001]

...................from a party who ripped up our railways? Too good to be true!

 

[theblackwatch]

I can just see it, twice the price of the normal fare to travel on a train over the high speed line. Hopefully I'm just too cynical and will be proved wrong!

 

[djw1981]

...................from a party who ripped up our railways? Too good to be true!

Do you mean ripped up as in lifted track, or do you mean fragmented it? A policy, which Labour says they would have introduced in 1997, even if it had not already happened.

It is at least a forward step from Albour who want more runways at Heathrow and Stansted, which will be used by some domestic flights. Also, DfT (despite claiming to support envirnomentally friendly and green ideas) is modally agnostic and does not favour one type of transport over another, so the railways do not get the funds for additional infrastructure that are required.

Note also (see Private Eye for fulld etails) the number of policy officers / spin doctors who have worked for DfT or Number 10 and BAA during the Blair/Brown eras. So it seems that Nu Labour is in quite tight with the airlines and BAA.

 

[gordonthemoron]

DfT (despite claiming to support envirnomentally friendly and green ideas) is modally agnostic and does not favour one type of transport over another

As opposed to pro-road which is what most informed people believe

 

[djw1981]

I think the Rail ministers comment was in the context of alternatives to road - it is interesting that we all see their pro-road bias (though allegedly anti- motorist by them) when HA,ORR and CAA are all run at arms length (allegedly).

If rail and road fans both think they are biased against us, and in favour of air, maybe it is true?

 

[PhilipW]

... and what route is this new line going to take ? The announcement is vague (to put it mildly). How a single new line could serve both Manchester and Leeds would be quite a geographical feat.

Would the line have the support of all Conservative MPs in whose constituency it would run through ? I doubt it.

Unless the proposal is fleshed out, it remains just an idea and is hardly worth talking about. Just a sound-bite for some gullable voters.

 

[djw1981]

Equally, can we afford 2 High Speed lines, or would it be easier to build new lower speed lines instead and remove slow traffic from ECML and WCML which could then run at high speed?

 

[me123]

Good idea; as has been said earlier, I hope it's put into practice without side effects such as insane fares. If the line were built with potential to extend to Scotland, it could well be a successful idea to finally but Britain on the High Speed Rail map "proper".

Certainly, the best way to relieve congestion at Heathrow is not the inclusion of a third runway, but by reducing domestic flights and diverting people onto the railways, particularly for Manchester, Birmingham and Leeds where the flight times are so short anyway that rail can actually compete when you take waiting times and security checks into consideration.

 

[djw1981]

But to do it woithout high fares means we need to fund it from Uk capital infrastructuyr investment. This means the government either cutting spoending elsewhere, or borrowing more money.

In the current political climate, the former is not popular, and identifying areas to cut is not easy.
The second is tricky in the financial climate, with the cost (in terms of interest and arrangement) of government borrowing from banks rising in line with the shortage of money on the wholesale money markets.

 

[Mojo]

The Conservatives presided over a huge line and station reopening programme in the 80s and early 90s, most of which took place in urban areas. Not to mention the majority of our urban tramway schemes were started under the Conservatives.

 

[djw1981]

but by reducing domestic flights and diverting people onto the railways, particularly for Manchester, Birmingham and Leeds

IIRC there are no Birmingham - London flights (maybe to London City?) and the Virgin journey times to Manchester and Birmingham have pretty much decimated the rail markets between those cities, though as their walk up fares increase, this effect has slowed and may start to reverse as the airlines start to undercut the rail option.

In an effort to reduce journey times to Newcastle and Scotland, NXEC have transfered many of the stopping trains (Newark, Grantham etc) over to the Leeds trains, thus lengthening the journey time, however it is still fairly competitive with air, especially if traveling to central London.

Even from Edinburgh, the time saving is minimal, but the journey times (i.e. first service / last service) are more suitable to day trip travelers. This is partly why Virgin are introducing new early morning services from Glasgow.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The Conservatives presided over a huge line and station reopening programme in the 80s and early 90s, most of which took place in urban areas. Not to mention the majority of our urban tramway schemes were started under the Conservatives.

Were the line openings after BR was sectorised and allowed semi-autonomy prior to privatisation?

 

[gordonthemoron]

are there flights from Leeds/Bradford to London?

Presumably the line would use the Woodhead tunnels between Manchester & Leeds?

 

[djw1981]

Leeds/Bradford Int'l Airport to London Heathrow with BMI - it would appear to be 2 morning return flights, with nothing in evening. This could explain the growth of GNER patronage on that route!

 

[Waverley125]

it needs to be several different lines. One central route, branching off at rugby to Birmingham, at Sheffield to Manchester & Liverpool, At Leeds to York & Newcastle, and at Carlisle to Edinburgh.

 

[me123]

Don't forget Glasgow! There's more people here than in Edinburgh!

 

[devon_metro]

A faster link along the M4 corridor wouldn't go amiss as far as Cardiff linking two capital cities along with Bristol which is the faster growing city economically outside of London afaiaa. At the same time, since when has Birmingham of all places been a Tory hot spot :?

 

[45002]

Finally someone else has seen sense that it would be pointless to expand Heathrow when we have so many domestic flights!

Tories would scrap Heathrow plan from BBC News

Do you really believe that the tory party are going to do that,come on :roll:

Never trust what a politician says and from All parties,anyway the fares would be so high only tory toffs could afford the fare !

MARTIN

 

[djw1981]

Don't forget Glasgow! There's more people here than in Edinburgh!

Split the difference and have the Scottish terminus near Falkirk, near M80/M9/M876 triangle. An ultimate Central Belt parkway station.

Good connections to Ediinburgh and Glasgow of sub 30 min and also good service from the commuter hinterland. Nar motorways for car access to stations. Falkirk also has connections to Stirling, and Aberdeen/Inverness. Ad by the tiem this is ever built,could also have connections via SAK-Dunfermline to Fife.

 

[466.networkers]

Boris Johnson has said he wants to spend £70billion on an airport on an artificial island off the coast of the Isle Of Sheppey where I live.

That's all well and good, but there's one tiny snag - this.

If the govt. allow these plans to go ahead, Sheppey will have to be evacuated for up to 3 months whilst the obstacle is removed.

Like that's ever gonna happen .....

Dream on mate.

 

[flymo]

This high speed line is all well and good but there are still an awful lot of people who only use the domestic flights to connect at Heathrow to other flights overseas. One of the reasons I use (or have used) domestic flights with BA is that when arriving from Asia into Heathrow, it is much easier to stay at Heathrow and get another flight. This connecting flight is often free or only a few pounds more than the London fare, at least in my experience.
If this high speed line was to be used instead of the plane, travelling domestic would then mean getting to Heathrow, picking up the bags, train to Paddington, and/or Taxi / tube to St. Pancras and then train up north. Hardly the easiest of connections. So until there is a direct high speed train network from Heathrow to various parts of the country it will still be domestic BA for me I'm afraid.

 

[djw1981]

Boris Johnson has said he wants to spend £70billion on an airport on an artificial island off the coast of the Isle Of Sheppey where I live.

That's all well and good, but there's one tiny snag - this.

If the govt. allow these plans to go ahead, Sheppey will have to be evacuated for up to 3 months whilst the obstacle is removed.

Like that's ever gonna happen .....

Dream on mate.

Entirely possible... how much money would you like to move to a nice hotel for 3 months...... Heathrow is not fit for purpose - it has poor transport links from the rest of the UK (except by air), the road network is saturated, it is running at near capacity and the airport infrastructure is creaking at the edges, to be partly relieved (allegedly) by Heathrow East.

I guess it depends which bits BAA sell off as to what the future holds. The residents of Stansted don't want it there, and the suggestion of North Kent (Manston) was shot down due to RSPB nature reserves (the birds have a bad effect on aircraft engines). Manston could have had a spur from HS1 allowing both continental travel (i.e. fly to Heathrow then HS1 to Paris); and a HS link into St Pancras (for fairly easy interchange to everywhere except the areas with easy access to Heathrow now.....). Crossrail could easily have a spur added to connect with this line but as ever the problem is land/access/space. Sea reclamation airports do seem to work quite well - Hong Kong's new (1999) one is very nice and accessed by a dedicated 6 lane motorway.

 

[Broken Viking]

"Dr. Beeching to Consulting Room one please...That's Dr. Beeching to Consulting Room one..." :roll:

That's all I have to say on the subject of ripping up, splitting and closure of lines...
>> Death <<

 

[Mojo]

The plan would also include a spur to Heathrow because it has been accepted that a lot of domestic passengers are making International Connections.

 

[me123]

As much as I don't like air travel, I can see the benefit of running a line to Heathrow. Rail will never compete for flights to New York (well, not in the foreseeable future) and Spain is still a bit far off at current speeds. If we can reduce short haul travel, we can free up space for more flights at Heathrow, expand the rail network and probably reduce carbon emissions, within the UK anyway.

And those who do commute by train or plane do know that the train provides a more relaxing environment, enables them to get on with some work, or even just a comfortable chair to spend the next few hours in, with food easily available. The planes, on the other hand, put you in a tiny space, search you as though you are a terrorist, require ID, have extensive check in, security, passport and boarding queues and, after I personally fly, I feel suspicious of others and I certainly do not feel relaxed at the end. If a fast option was available, most people probably would take the train.

 

[466.networkers]

"Dr. Beeching to Consulting Room one please...That's Dr. Beeching to Consulting Room one..." :roll:

That's all I have to say on the subject of ripping up, splitting and closure of lines...
>> Death <<

Have a guess where Dr. Beeching was born?

That's right, the Isle of Sheppey!

Posted from a mobile device on the place where Beeching was born!

 

[175001]

Boris Johnson has said he wants to spend £70billion on an airport on an artificial island off the coast of the Isle Of Sheppey where I live.

Well if this WAS to happen, Bo Jo is contradicting the policy of his OWN party!! Ah you have to love the Tories!

 

[djw1981]

I thought their policy was just not to expand Heathrow.... Anyway AIUI the Boris plan would also lead to the blocking of further expansion at Gatwick or Stansted (Iand maybe Luton and Southampton too), so

 

[CosherB]

...................from a party who ripped up our railways? Too good to be true!

That was a labour government following Beeching, not the Tories.

CS

 

[Mojo]

Every Party has made mistakes in the past and many can be different to how they are now. You've got to mention that decisions that were taken at the time may have been appropriate for them and short-term-ism. Even a few years ago I would have never thought I'd end up being a Conservative Party member but my attitudes changed and so did the party.