HS2 doomed??

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14198290

So that's it? Or is it . . . . .
Still, it's not all bad news in the papers and on the beeb.
At least the Murdochs and their cronies are still DEEPLY in the pschitt!!

Up yours, Rupert!

To be honest, as the Tories have said it wouldn't be built until 2018 or somewhere in the region of, I doubt they at all plan to do anything whatsoever about making progress with HS2, because they may be out of government by that time.

There is a "good case" for the government's HS2 high-speed rail link between London and Birmingham and beyond, a committee of MPs has said.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15619461

Plus, a map of the proposed route:

http://highspeedrail.dft.gov.uk/in-your-area

92220 wrote:There is a "good case" for the government's HS2 high-speed rail link between London and Birmingham and beyond, a committee of MPs has said.

And here is one good case for no HS2
The current estimated cost of this white elephant is £32 billion and from past government estimates on capital expenditure projects you could probably double this figure.

Misfit does have a good point - what exactly what are we getting for our money? I can't recall which station it was - but I imagine somebody on this forum might as it was featured in Railway Herald - which was upgraded recently, with a tiny shelter - possibly no more than 1.5m wide running for a small length of a platform, seemingly few other features on this new 'station' - for something in the region of at least £20m!

Yet there was an article in I think the same issue of RH which stated that a bridge over a railway line - a stone structure, had cost less, something like £800k?

It begs questions as to why these prices fluxuate so much...

But they are saying it's going to cost £32b to construct HS2 - I'm under the impression that some of this money won't just be for construction costs, but for property purchase, moving of certain buildings as was the case on the construction of HS1 - but this project is going to be watched closely by the nation - so it is going to be harder for middle-men to cream off money for doing nothing, as people are already opening their eyes to this sort of thing happening in local government up and down the country...

But who knows? Maybe the construction budget will go down before the project commences? Perhaps when completed it will come in under budget?

I still think the route should follow the M1 corridor more - there are cities like Leicester and Nottingham etc, which served by the Midland Mainline and all of it's speed restrictions and curves - is nowhere as fast as it's ECML and WCML counterparts - plus going back to the question of money - going along this route means that not only is time shaven off, but you're also looking at making the route easier geographically to connect at the Northern end to Manchester and Leeds in a proper 'Y' shape, instead of backwards, lowercase 'y'.

Choosing a route following the M1 corridor also means that they could minimize the number of people and businesses which would have to be re-homed, and would also mean fewer objections during construction, and complaints once it's up and running!

Misfit wrote:

92220 wrote:There is a "good case" for the government's HS2 high-speed rail link between London and Birmingham and beyond, a committee of MPs has said.

And here is one good case for no HS2
The current estimated cost of this white elephant is £32 billion and from past government estimates on capital expenditure projects you could probably double this figure.

You'll be too young to remember the TSR2, I presume? Then there was the Millennium Dome? Governments have always wasted money.

No Evening Star (92220) not to young at all being one of the many silver surfers. Governments have always wasted money on ludicrous projects but we as a country have not got money to waste. With massive debt and the borrowing we currently have, how on earth would this project be financed.

I've a feeling that with some of the deep cuts made last year, some of these are going to recede soon, as some debts are already starting to actually become paid off - others aren't. Nobody can really safely say what the government is going to spend money on - that is up to them - but bear in mind railways do have a high turnover, as a lot more people are using them today than they were 10 years ago.

To be honest, if they spend money on HS2 it wouldn't surprise me at all, seeing as the income from ToC's, RoSCO's and of course the passengers probably would finance most of HS2 more or less directly - but don't quote me on this.

Also - don't believe what the media tells you at face value; simply because I know for a fact that some research crews, (I won't name names) don't have good researchers - some do, some don't - but as a rule of thumb, always see what the other news sources and agencies are saying.

The government, by definition, has its own agenda. They always do. It is up to the public to decipher whatever chicanery is being planned and if it is not in the public interest (which case applies 80% of the time) to scupper it.

Goodness knows how many years of passenger revenues would be needed to cover the costs of this ludicrous project if it ever goes ahead.
The fares would more than likely be so steeep that the vast majority of the travelling public would not be able to afford them.
David Cameron said only last night at the Lord Mayor's Banquet “We should look sceptically at grand plans and utopian visions.” After all what is the necessity of being able to travel from London to Birmingham in 45 minutes it still will do nothing to eradicate the north-south divide.

Take heart and do not despair. Many years of experience have taught me one unassailable fact which is, if there's one single thing you can truly, dependably and totally rely on it is Her Majesty's Government . . . . making the wrong decision.

graymac wrote:if there's one single thing you can truly, dependably and totally rely on it is Her Majesty's Government . . . . making the wrong decision.

Only to true. Lost confidence in the politicians to get things correct a long while ago when Blair and Brown were having a good try at wrecking the country.

What dismays me is all these politicians claim to be doing what they do for the benefit of the voters. I hardly know anyone who agrees with them, so who are they representing? It certainly ain't ME!! And over time it seems to get worse and less representative for the majority. So that's democracy, is it?? The freedom to SAY what we like as long as we DO as we're told. God bless you, Mr Cameron, what a luvverly man you are, grovel, grovel.
It's not perfect here, mind you! But at least we have a classless society and don't have to take shite from the toffs. And our politicans may be dodgy (no, not MAY BE, they definitely ARE dodgy) but they sometimes talk straight. One of 'em had a dig at another recently, told yer man "You're so bent that if ye swallowed a nail, ye'd shit a corkscrew." That's good plain talking

It seems to me that the biggest political problem is party politics. We vote for a person with the right views and ideas, and once voted in, those ideas become the party's ideas and views. Any political party's main objective is to look after the party's best interests, not the country's future and well-being.
That's why, no matter what party is in government, we still make no progress.

.

Well we certainly are not going to make much progress with Clegg and Cameron trying to agree on policies they do not. Take for example the current monetary crises, Clegg, pro european that he is, would have us rushing to join the bankrupt euro wheras Cameron (bless his little cotton socks) seems to becoming more of a euro sceptic.

Off now to have a look at Graymacs new loco.

@Egg, you are right, although party politics is the tip of the iceberg. The whole system of monetarism, economic growth and consumerism is built on a lie. It is also unsustainable in environmental terms and unfair to the majority of the people who exist to feed the mill of greed owned by the money men who have more power than even governments do. Many governments are merely puppets whose strings are pulled by the fat cats, and who sell us down the river to oblige their demands. Take a look at history from even before the industrial revolution, I recommend every one of you to study the Levellers. You can look them up on Wikipedia
(I don't mean the band either, though they are bloody brilliant too!!)

@Misfit Clegg, Cameron, Merkel, Schmerkel . . . it makes no difference. They are all intrinsically part of the problem, not of the solution. The time for putting sticky tape over the cracks has long gone. We're out of resources globally, mainly due to inequality and greed. There needs to be massive change, it's like the Captain of the Titanic going full steam ahead, why can't they see the iceberg? Because of all the vested interests of the few in power. That's why.

No matter where Ismay or the other vested interests came into the equation though, Smith was always in control of the Titanic though - he could have slowed down, just as the coalition could review their overly-tight budget cuts when they absolutely need to.

Not so. Being in control is only an illusion. Governments aren't in control, quite the reverse, theyre out of contol and far from being pro-active are only reacting with knee-jerk response to the self evident truth. Which is, that the capitalist economic model is a totally false and unsustainable construction and will collapse. The only unknown in the equation is how many people get destroyed in the process.