Quote:
Originally Posted by richard1960
Well the debate on the radio is expanding for those that care to listen.
In times of austerity when we are told there is no money where is 32-40 billion coming from surely there must be better things.
Also the butchering of the chiltern countryside.
It will cost many billions for HS2 to be part of any national infrastructure .
Like the present railway system it may never pay for itself due to cost and the taxpayer may for ever more be liable for huge subsidies is a major fear also on this one and the expense of a ticket may mean few will use it..
|
Does it have to pay for itself? Does the road network pay for itself? The point of State-sponsored infrastructure developments is their wider enabling effect on the economy, not that they should be profitable in and of themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by martyh
I think it is the point .Should we use all the money and have one link between London and Birmingham taking 15-20yrs to complete leaving the rest of the network to run into disrepair or do we spread the money over the existing network achieving similar if not better results .I see no point in having a super dooper high speed link between 2 cities if the rest of the network is rubbish
|
I'm not certain that a convincing argument has been made that spending money on HS2 means not spending it on the existing WCML.