Do You Agree With The Construction Of High Speed 2 From London To Birmingham?
| Related: | Personal Finance•Financial Services•Government |
The Coalition government has approved the construction of a high speed rail network linking London with cities in central and northern England from 2026 at a cost of almost £33 billion.
Supporters of High Speed 2, which will see journey times between London and Britain's second biggest city Birmingham slashed to 49 minutes from around 1.5 hours now, say it will boost Britain's financial economy in both the short and long term.
I cannot see how it will boost anything financially in the short term if it wont arrive for another 14 years.Also, imagine what the cost of tickets will be for long distance doemstic rail travel in 14 years' time.I am not convinced still that it bring substantial and overwhelming
economic benefits.
Responses (14)
£33 BILLION pounds to shave 25 minutes off your journey time between London and Birmingham. AND maybe in a million years hence, a further costly extension to Manchester, Leeds, Newcastle and Glasgow.
I understand the reasonong of High Speed rail across Europe, where countries are interconnected through geology but in the UK I cannot see the justification.
I believe this project will never happen.
Perhaps if more money (a fraction of what is being spent on this vanity project) were spent on improving the current existing infrastructure there wouldn't be a need for this unwarranted and in most areas unwanted train service.
Having had a long career in the railway industry, I feel qualified to comment on this.
Billions were spent on the 'upgrade' of the West Coast Main Line and there were years of disruption. Journey times have not been much reduced, and people using intermediate stations now have a very much inferior service. I will give one small example. From Milton Keynes, we used to have four trains an hour to Birmingham, now we have one. The through trains we had to many destinations now require several changes and take bloody hours. Sorry, that was two examples!
Evidence from many countries proves that high speed lines are more efficient and cheaper in the long run. Many jobs will be created.
BTW, I live in the picturesque Buckinghamshire countryside, very near to the proposed route for HS2. I look forward to the economic growth and send a hex on the bloody Nimbys.
What I want to see is a detailed analysis of just how the hell it is supposed to cost £33 BILLION..?!!!
It was mentioned that it will save money and add business etc. Billions of £s of business.? I doubt it. The news yesterday said it cuts travel time bla bla bla... who for.? the hundreds of people who travel from Birmingham to London every day for work.? Just how many people are there who need this high speed daily service for work.? The news never stated any statistics..
Let us consider the costs are: materials, construction personnel and land purchase... £33 BILLION..? My left foot. Somebody is going to get extremely wealthy over this deal. I wonder who at Whitehall has recommended its go ahead..
In the grander scheme of the economy, frenchy, £33 billion is not that much, considering the creation of jobs and all that will go with this.
I appreciate you want to see some figures and I will find them and post them on the Forum.
Um.. in the grand scheme of the economy, this is the total annual Defence Budget... now there's some perspective..
I appreciate that jobs will be created, mostly in the construction industry during construction who will then be jobless afterwards and then many personnel working for the railway when it is up and running. I doubt their pay will increase tax revenue by any substantial amount.
I am just a tad disheartened by the Government not being transparent about the whole thing, bearing in mind that any government scheme is mismanaged and is never truely accountable. For example the MoD still does not know how it spent over £1 Billion last year, and spends £10 on a 50p lightbulb and £15 on paper that would cost you and I £2.50.
[that last example is fact..]
The argument for the boost to business and the economy has not been proved and can only be projected and estimated.
The legal wrangles regarding this are only just beginning and these aren't just in the picturesque parts of the country but Ruislip!
The whole of Euston Station and its surrounds will also have to be majorly rebuilt and this alone is estimated to cost billions.
The costs will escalte and a number of people who also work for the rail industries say it isn't needed and the money could be spent on more worthwhile projects that improve transport for the whole and not just the business classes who are expected to make use of this service over and above others because of the projected ticketing costs.
Who is going to get rich? The civil engineering contractors whose 'costs' will quite unexpectedly spiral (as always happens with public works projects) and the Bankers who lend our money to the government to fund it all. As for who in Whitehall recommended it, just remember that the Bankers and their fellow illuminati are all-powerful, so if Bankers decide that there is an opportunity to get even richer off the backs of the ordinary population, then the government will implement the scheme.
I may be stuck in the past about all of this but wasn't the Beecham axe on the railway system one of the biggest mistakes of the 1900s. So surely the accent should be on restructing the railway system to benefit people for local transport, jobs and of course the economy. To create a 250mph line from London to Birmingham may be great for those that it matters to but what about the people marooned in areas with zero rail access, particularly where it had existed before. I honestly believe that as cars are priced off the roads and more people than ever are having to travel to work, an expansion of the rail network is a must .... not super highways .... just regular and reliable point to point rail travel like the Victorians wanted.
I agree with you Snoopy.
Although I will say that I don't think public transport will ever be a viable mode of transport for families. Yes a train journey may be cheaper than using the car for the individual, but when you have to pay £50+ for a family of 4 [even with a railcard] to get from the south coast to London for a day trip, it is cheaper and more convenient to drive and park - if you know where.. That is until they hike fuel up even more, and take away 'free' parking areas and charge more for parking... all to come no doubt..
bah!
Just to set the record straight, Snoops, Beeching did his cuts in the 1960's, not the 1900's.
The folly of some of this has been recognised and some services have been restored.
But we have to move with the times. Since the ill-exectued (you note I don't say ill-advised as a railway privatised in the right way could have worked very well) nothing can happen without a business case because the railway now exists for its shareholders rather than for social reasons.
The fact that the government has stepped up and approved a major railway infrastructure project - with all the attendant benefits to the economy - can only be a good thing.
So London to Birmingham in 45 minutes is there really a need to have a domed resturant car on the upper deck?
Travelling at those speeds and with so much going through tunnels and underground you won't be able to see anything in detail, the beauty of the countryside will be lost both for those dining in their window clad restaurant and forever for those whom live in it!!
Visually it looks amazing but is it practical?
a domed restaurant car is a complete waste of time and money!
Where on earth did you get the 'domed restaurant car' thing, Parch?
As one who knows, I can tell you that you have been sold a load of bollox there!
I remember the film Top Secret and Val Kilmer painting the countryside on his train journey... classic :D
I have seen this included in CGI images of what the trains will look like as well as an upper deck and this was being discussed on Radio 5 too.
Next you'll be telling me not to believe everything we see and yet this is the imagery that is being used to sell this to future investors. I'd hate that they are selling them a futurist cartoon dud!!
As no final decisions have been made regarding the design of these trains there is a great deal of speculation. The images I've seen and many others are;
http://forum.themessroom.co.uk/viewtopic.php?style=11&f=8&t=5977
I hope these are viewable.
We need to improve our infrastructure... however will time catch us out ..
We are moving away from high st shops to the internet ... so will working from home/small local office and using the net supersede the HR2 ?
I think they are calling it the Ethnic highway!
Perfect for the airport - they can all get off the plane and straight into their ethnic slums in the Birm.
Birmingham has to be the ugliest place on the entire planet.
I really don't know Birmingham at all well OD, but I have been to the pretty bit by the canal near the new(ish) shopping centre, much better than the bullring.
My friend Scott just calls it "The Grey Prison"
One of the bits we drove through was very colourful with all the sari shops, felt like I was on holiday!
Cheap and tacky!
Gone is the quality and class of Great Britain to be replaced with pound shops , dimly lit scabby newsagents festooned with luminous money off deals , betting shops and lidl.
How sad!
Is that the end of the UK!
And as for Scotland one of the greatest inventors and adventurer producers we now can only produce shortbread , tartan gonks and whisky that even the Japanese can produce better than we can now!
>;o(((
I'm awa for a wee tear!
I have recently worked in Birmingham and it has vastly improved. Considerable funds have been invested in making it a vibrant and successful commercial and cultural centre.
There are some really beautiful and expensive suburbs Edgbaston and Harborne to name but two, but like most Cities there are areas of considerable social deprivation and perhaps these are best avoided.
All major Cities have cultivated an ethnic area, which houses an array of food establishments and shops that cater for that ethnic grouping.
However, with most High Streets all resembling one another this makes major shopping centres all an undistingushed blur.
My commiserations parchester I would rather cut off my nads than work anywhere near London , Birmingham or Leeds.
London is my idea of hell on earth and it seems John Cleese and Prince Phillip agree!
My work has taken me to every major City in the UK and I have to admit that they all have their pluses and minuses.
Some more than others but in each their is a true oasis of calm and beauty waiting to be discovered. In Glasgow I find the architecture (especially when you look above the shop fronts to be stimulating and beautiful) Rennie-Macintosh is a particular favourite of mine.
It is too easy to dismiss all places as being ugly, even in London what is available and accessible and often for free far outweighs many of the negatives.
I am not talking fo the architecture I am commenting on the crime and hidden underbelly.
How many times do you go out in London at night in the dark - After what I saw in my limited time with the copshop down there I would never let my children go anywhere be it west east or otherwise in London and others!
Its sad that even our old people are too afraid to go out at night and whether you like it or not the ethnics are the ones who have made certain areas no-go. They cant even go out in their own neighbourhoods.
The turk and albanian gang wars in Leeds were truly horrific its like being in a third world country.
I go out at night all the time in London.
Yes there are areas that I give a wide berth to but I don't feel any less safe in London as I do in any other major City in the UK.
Being in a police station is going to affect your perception as only negative things take place in police stations, it's the same as in accident and emergency departments in hospitals.
I think that if people accentuate the negative too much then they live a very limited life. Only negative stories makes headlines as these sensationalise and project that the streets of out Cities are no go areas. Not true.
I am 50 years old and have lived the majority of my life in London by and large, and have never encountered any crime towards me whilst out and about. Yes, when I have been out, my house has been broken into but that isn't a unique statistic to me, personally, or London.
If you have associates or friends whom live an undesirable life and frequent the 'underbelly' establishments then you are bound to increase the likelihood of being exposed and maybe even affceted by those whom deal in violence and aggression, gladly I don't!
I am not and never will be a victim of perception!
I'm intrigued by Justine Greening's (Transport Secretary's) rationale for the need for the high speed rail. She has said that this will allieviate the overcrowding that exists on other lines and make travelling by train less stressful. It also makes economic sense.
Well that's helpful. I look forward to the next time I'm travelling from London to Southampton and unable to get a seat and remind myself that this shouldn't be the case as the High Speed 2 was to have sorted this out!!
Miss. Greening, to speak so generally about rail travel and overcrowding and believing that HS2 will be a magic wand to ridding the rail network of overcrowding is misguided and whollly ignorant. It might reduce the overcrowding that exists on a specific line but only overall investment in the main rail network will help to make commuting a near bearable experience.
If the HS2 can be given the green light on the premise that it will help the economy and ease overcrowding. Just imagine if Britain had a transport infrastructure that enabled people and goods to travel with certainty and without delay, how much better the economy might develop!!
Specific investment will aid that specfic, what is truly needed is a holistic approach to general improvements to Britain's overall infrastructure. Similar to Roosevelt's New Deal in 1930's America.
The problem is the overcrowding of certain UK cities and no amount of investment will overcome it as the numbers increase year on year particularly London.
Window dressing by the government they would be far better spending their time geting rid of the all the conmen , illegals and criminality in our society than waste billions on plastering the cracks. If not then spend it on new prisons without pool tables and luxuries and make criminals suffer for what they have done. These are the things we really need first!!!
Either pull the wall down and rebuild it if its beyond repair and stop patching it up like they do with the roads.
The fall of the Roman Empire is a direct reflection of our society!
Hard to understand how anybody could believe that there will be economic benefits outweighing the cost of this project. First of all, who will own it? If the taxpayer is going to pay for it, then it should be state-owned and revenues extracted to repay the development costs. Once the revenues exceed the development costs, THEN the government can claim that it's worthwhile. Secondly, I understand that the spurious figure for economic benefit is derived from adding up all the 25 minutes of journey time reduction and multiplying by the salary rates of the travellers - but I've never heard of any journey where money is generated out of thin air, so in reality this claim is just complete utter rubbish. So people will be able to travel between London and Birmingham 25 minutes quicker? All it means is that they'll get home 25 minutes sooner - it isn't going to pay them 25 minutes worth of wages.
And you will still have to sit on the floor or get backache from standing all the way once all the seats have been vandalised by thugs and taken up by drunks sleeping it off!
>;o)
Well said, Parch. I lived in London for years and felt perfectly safe.
ITS A LOT OF MONEY JUST TO TAKE 23 MINUTES OFF A JOURNEY TO THE SMOKE
IF THE GOVERMENT WANT TO CREATE WORK FORTHE COUNTRY WHY NOT REPLACE ALL THE SEWER PIPES AND ALLSO GET ALL THE LEAD WATER PIPES OUT OF HOUSES
YES IT WILL BOOST THE FINANCIAL ECONOMY AND ALLSO GIVE THE BANK MANAGERS BIGGER BONOUS,S IS THAT GOOD OR BAD
The "consultation" on this hairbrained scheme was a farce! I live in the Ruislip area and know that compulsory purchase orders were issued and bridge strengthening took place last September, add to that the MP who sold his house that was near the route and you have yet another politically sleazy situation. The main supporters of this project are those who expect to make money from the taxpayer (who will be footing the bill) in return for the large donations made to the political parties, and have no interest whatsoever about any environmental damage it will cause or lives that will be made hell.
I saw suggested in a newspaper at the weekend that building a water pipeline network would be a much better investment for the future.
Posts within the money.co.uk community represent the views, experiences and opinions of members only. They should not be taken as financial advice and should not be followed without further research.
More Discussions for Government
Get fast answers to your money questions, Expert insight, top tips & much more...
I'm with you on improving the current network first parchester, my train service is appalling in the extreme!!
Appalling and bloody costly.
It is unacceptable that the rail companies have their 'customers' over a barrel and that the government talk about reducing their financial commitment to the rail companies, whilst at the same time pledging £33 Billion (minimum) to build loads of tunnels and ruin large swathes of the countryside.
It just doesn't make sense.
Sadly, I think this project is doomed to happen, but I'll wager any amount of money that: a) it doesn't start by 2016 due to budget constraints; b) it isn't completed by 2026 due to 'unforeseen problems' (finding the wrong kind of rock when they dig the tunnels?); and c) it isn't completed within budget. I totally agree that £33bn is ridiculous money to spend on a rail line that few people will be able to afford to use - how much road space could be developed all around Britain for that instead?
Oh - and I forgot to add to my previous comment - d) the trains won't run at 250mph because it will be too noisy (ie environmental noise pollution) and whatever top speed they do achieve (200mph perhaps) will only be a few minutes during each journey because of the time/space needed to accelerate/decelerate and safety worries about travelling at top speed through tunnels.