New high speed rail link ...is it worth it ?

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Alan Fry

I agree with the Fact the we need HS2, But I would make some changes to the plan:

1. Add Stations at Stoke-on-Trent, the East Midlands and the Chilterns

2. Extend the Manchester Branch to Glasgow

3. Extend the Leeds Branch to Edinburgh (via Newcastle)

4. Add a branch to Liverpool

5. Build Crossrail 2 as part of the plan, as well as upgrade trasports links in areas were HS2 service to maximise the benifits

6. build it in one phase

7. Try to open it by 2020, not 2026!

You're a genius, I hope whoever gets the contract signs you up as chief planner.

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by Pierre

You're a genius, I hope whoever gets the contract signs you up as chief planner.

Thanks for the complement!

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Damien

This isn't chucking money anyway, we'll get some of it back, mostly indirectly if it succeeds in improving the prospects for businesses.

No its not chucking money away. I don't think I've said or implied that. I'm merely making the point that at this time the financial implications of this have to be very carefully considered and IMHO they don't add up and there isn't any prospect of a financial surplus to plunder. We all know massive cuts are coming and the electorate won't much like vast sums of money being allocated to this over the years if other budgets are suffering at the same time. If things go wrong I fear we'll wind up with the railway equivalent of funding crisis hit PFI hospitals - great facilities which are rapidly becoming too expensive to run. If we'd won the 2016 or 2020 Olympics instead of 2012, I think the same would be being said about those now such tough financial choices are having to be made.

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by Osem

No its not chucking money away. I don't think I've said or implied that. I'm merely making the point that at this time the financial implications of this have to be very carefully considered and IMHO they don't add up and there isn't any prospect of a financial surplus to plunder. We all know massive cuts are coming and the electorate won't much like vast sums of money being allocated to this over the years if other budgets are suffering at the same time. If things go wrong I fear we'll wind up with the railway equivalent of funding crisis hit PFI hospitals - great facilities which are rapidly becoming too expensive to run. If we'd won the 2016 or 2020 Olympics instead of 2012, I think the same would be being said about those now such tough financial choices are having to be made.

Your right is it a big risk, but if we do not get HS2 then we need to further upgrade the WCML as soon as possible!

[Damien]

Originally Posted by Osem

No its not chucking money away. I don't think I've said or implied that. I'm merely making the point that at this time the financial implications of this have to be very carefully considered and IMHO they don't add up and there isn't any prospect of a financial surplus to plunder. We all know massive cuts are coming and the electorate won't much like vast sums of money being allocated to this over the years if other budgets are suffering at the same time. If things go wrong I fear we'll wind up with the railway equivalent of funding crisis hit PFI hospitals - great facilities which are rapidly becoming too expensive to run. If we'd won the 2016 or 2020 Olympics instead of 2012, I think the same would be being said about those now such tough financial choices are having to be made.

I think this is a good time to be making such investments/ It will lead to more jobs and businesses right away amongst those building the new rail line and it may increase confidence amongst foreign firms that the UK will continue to be a good place to do business. Birmingham itself should see a boost from the knowledge that London will soon be closer. I have seen many arguments that infrastructural investments are more effective in times of slow economic growth, likely because of the reasons I mentioned.

Besides, the sooner we get started the sooner it will get completed. The estimates for us finishing just the Birmingham branch are ridiculous enough as it is. At this rate most of us will be dead before they complete the Manchester branch. We spend far too long on these things and think up many reasons why we shouldn't do them, we should be more proactive. A lot of mainland Europe have these trains, America is starting to think about it and parts of Asia just got on with it ages ago. There isn't any point putting it off longer. Let's go.

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by Damien

I think this is a good time to be making such investments/ It will lead to more jobs and businesses right away amongst those building the new rail line and it may increase confidence amongst foreign firms that the UK will continue to be a good place to do business. Birmingham itself should see a boost from the knowledge that London will soon be closer.

Plus I have seen many arguments that infrastructural investments are more effective in times of slow economic growth, likely because of the reasons I mentioned above.

Now all they need to do is upgrade local tranport links at the same time, extend HS2 to scotland and start earlier!

[martyh]

Originally Posted by Damien

I think this is a good time to be making such investments/ It will lead to more jobs and businesses right away amongst those building the new rail line and it may increase confidence amongst foreign firms that the UK will continue to be a good place to do business. Birmingham itself should see a boost from the knowledge that London will soon be closer.

Plus I have seen many arguments that infrastructural investments are more effective in times of slow economic growth, likely because of the reasons I mentioned above.

I agree with that but i am wary that this is the best use of the money .We do need more job creation but we need it now not in 5-10 yrs .Other shorter term projects may be of more benefit

[Damien]

Originally Posted by martyh

I agree with that but i am wary that this is the best use of the money .We do need more job creation but we need it now not in 5-10 yrs .Other shorter term projects may be of more benefit

The jobs created in building the track will be more immediate.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Damien

I think this is a good time to be making such investments/ It will lead to more jobs and businesses right away amongst those building the new rail line and it may increase confidence amongst foreign firms that the UK will continue to be a good place to do business. Birmingham itself should see a boost from the knowledge that London will soon be closer.

Plus I have seen many arguments that infrastructural investments are more effective in times of slow economic growth, likely because of the reasons I mentioned above.

Infrastructure certainly isn't a bad thing to be investing in now but there are plenty of other infratsructural issues which would could be tackled with this money and create jobs etc., like getting the existing network up to scratch which might not be quite as groundbraking and high profile but could benefit more people over a wider area. Just my opinion of course...

[Will21st]

Originally Posted by Osem

Infrastructure certainly isn't a bad thing to be investing in now but there are plenty of other infratsructural issues which would could be tackled with this money and create jobs etc., like getting the existing network up to scratch which might not be quite as groundbraking and high profile but could benefit more people over a wider area. Just my opinion of course...

You're right in principle but bringing the whole network up to scratch will probably cost more like £200 billion +.

A couple of High speed rail links are a good start,couple that with new runways at Gatwick and Heathrow,plus a new Airport in the Thames estuary and we may just be ok economically for another couple of decades...

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by Damien

I think this is a good time to be making such investments/ It will lead to more jobs and businesses right away amongst those building the new rail line and it may increase confidence amongst foreign firms that the UK will continue to be a good place to do business. Birmingham itself should see a boost from the knowledge that London will soon be closer. I have seen many arguments that infrastructural investments are more effective in times of slow economic growth, likely because of the reasons I mentioned.

Besides, the sooner we get started the sooner it will get completed. The estimates for us finishing just the Birmingham branch are ridiculous enough as it is. At this rate most of us will be dead before they complete the Manchester branch. We spend far too long on these things and think up many reasons why we shouldn't do them, we should be more proactive. A lot of mainland Europe have these trains, America is starting to think about it and parts of Asia just got on with it ages ago. There isn't any point putting it off longer. Let's go.

You not concerned we seem to paying ,uch more per mile than france did?

The concerns are multiple.

The fact I have used trains and the service wasnt bad enough that I ever thought it needs billions spent on it. France and Germany have more land mass so arguably it benefits them more. a 20min saving on a journey is nothing significant, There is a few specific scenarios where it could be a saver but typically the person can just catch an earlier train.
The fact some cuts have been made elsewhere and in some cases severely, the merits of business men getting 20mins of their journey time over the vulnerable getting proper care and support. More to the point we have had cameron saying we all in it together and a message put out that the country was close to going bust unless sharp action was taken quickly, this hardly supports that message and loses the government a lot of credibility.
Trains are already out pricing many people and this will outprice even more. 32billion investment in what will primarily benefit business men who are paying less tax due to tax cuts. The business case is very poor.

I can think of many better ways to spend 32billion which the government has now shown they got. Building more houses, restoring welfare cuts, building a nationwide fibre network, even tax cuts I would support over this.

Some middle men somewhere are going to get very rich out of this.

Not to mention europe's investment seemed to be done in earlier years before the recession took hold more, the article I pulled was from 2009. This rail link should be costing 1 billion not 32billion.

[martyh]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

I can think of many better ways to spend 32billion which the government has now shown they got. Building more houses, restoring welfare cuts, building a nationwide fibre network, even tax cuts I would support over this.
.

The government haven't got 32billion ,they will have to raise 32billion over the next 10-15yrs.It's totally incorrect to assume that 32billion is sitting in the government vaults waiting to be spent .Most of that money will be borrowed .It is more correct to say that the government can afford to spend the money because savings made mean we can afford to borrow the money

[Chrysalis]

I didnt say it was sitting in vaults, I said they had it available to spend, 2 different things.

Does borrowing make it ok? wasnt you advocating reducing government debt in other threads about welfare cuts? Or is it fine when it sspent on something you want.

[Damien]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

You not concerned we seem to paying ,uch more per mile than france did?

I don't know the differences between building a rail network in France and building one in the UK. It isn't the same country, there may be different challenges. I suspect the spending stats have been skewed.

The fact I have used trains and the service wasnt bad enough that I ever thought it needs billions spent on it. France and Germany have more land mass so arguably it benefits them more. a 20min saving on a journey is nothing significant, There is a few specific scenarios where it could be a saver but typically the person can just catch an earlier train.

20 minutes can be significant. It can tip a journey from something that is a inconceivable and uncomfortable to something that people don't think twice about doing. More importantly this is simply a step into a national high speed network and when we're reaching places like Manchester then the time saved will really begin to mount up. As I mentioned before it's possible to have a situation where a large amount of the population can comfortably do a return trip to one of these cities and back within a single day.

The fact some cuts have been made elsewhere and in some cases severely, the merits of business men getting 20mins of their journey time over the vulnerable getting proper care and support.

But it's dishonest to frame the argument as saving businessmen 20 minutes of their time, that's not what anyone in favour of high speed rail has been making that argument. Again, this is a step towards a national high speed network with Birmingham being a stop along the way to Manchester. We talk of the time saved and how this will be of benefit to commerce and tourism - as well as simply useful to the rest of us.

More to the point we have had cameron saying we all in it together and a message put out that the country was close to going bust unless sharp action was taken quickly, this hardly supports that message and loses the government a lot of credibility.

This is being seen as an investment. There is also a difference between one-off expenses, such as building infrastructure, and cutting down on services. The cuts have been aimed at reducing the deficit, this train network would simply add to the debt.

Trains are already out pricing many people and this will outprice even more. 32billion investment in what will primarily benefit business men who are paying less tax due to tax cuts. The business case is very poor.

It's not poor. You just say it's poor because your making attacking a strawman. I have also provided evidence that the current high speed network isn't dramatically more expensive than the standard service.

[Hugh]

Tax cuts?

Did I miss something?