HS2 - the greatest divisive

[PR1Berske]

In the light of recent posts, below, I open this thread. It echoes a previous thread ( https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/why-is-hs2-treated-so-differently-by-some-enthusiasts.143106/ )

A project of such polarisation, never mind cost, HS2 looks set to forever drive itself through enthusiasts, and the wider public, with neither side giving an inch to their argument. So where do we go? Constant argument? Any kind of agreement?

More importantly, just why is the so decisive? How has a rail project caused such heated debate?

I would guess that it boils down to three things for those who oppose it.

First, beecause the main destination appears to be London and given the perceived lack of rail spend in the North (or southwest or any other region) means those in the North feel that this is London getting the spending yet again.

Second, those who live in the Southeast who are faced by overcrowd trains then look at the new line going nowhere near them and think that's not going to help them.

Finally, there's those who don't want the money spent. Whether that's the likes of the Taxpayer's Alliance who appear that they don't want any money spent, or those who think that it should be spent elsewhere (i.e. on the NHS or on their pet rail project). As such will oppose HS2.

Then on the other side there's a number of reasons why people think that's is a good project. They'll be some who just want more spent on rail and so think that's a good thing. They'll be those who think that it will benefit them and so support it. There'll be those who see that there's a lot of investment in the North and so see it as a way of the bring a rebalancing of rail spend from the South. Then there's probably about 200 other reasons why they support it.

HS2 proponents on here might want to reconsider some of their arguments, in light of recent experience with the DfT, and things which have in fact happened over the past 12 months:-
1. 'Of course it won't be cancelled half way through'
2. 'Of course they wouldn't build infrastructure and then not use it for the promised service's
3. 'Of course they wouldn't commit political suicide by reneging on promises of investment outside the south east'.

Consideration might also be given to whether non-London residents are going to be persuaded by an argument that they should support HS2 because it will allow them to save 10 minutes on their journeys, just so long as they don't mind going into London and coming out again (presumably, paying a hefty surcharge for doing so for much of the working day).

It might also be questioned whether one of the reasons the topic is so divisive is the clash between the almost cultish fervour some of its supporters display (who all seem to live in places which will be served by HS2), and the deep cynicism of many opponents, itself a natural result of the relentless widening of the gap between the south east and everywhere else these last few decades.

I say all this as someone who supports a new north-south railway in principle, but who does not agree that every aspect of HS2 as planned is sensible.

 

[gordonthemoron]

Lack of appropriate information

 

[NSEFAN]

The project will cost billions of pounds and will one way or another be paid for the public at some point, so it's bound to generate a lot of discussion. Given this a rail enthusiast forum, HS2 will always generate more interest here than most other places.

In the wider public sphere, most people are largely ignorant about railways and will take an opinion formed from their own personal experiences, combined with information fed to them by their preferred media outlets. This the same for all of us on most topics that we're not experts on (Brexit, the perpeptual NHS crisis, Universal Income, Heathrow 3rd runway etc. etc.).

I suppose that the division comes from the binary nature of how it's portrayed, like with Brexit. It's portrayed as "HS2 or something else", much like "In or Out of Europe". Given only two choices, people will pick a side. Reality is more complicated, but again most people aren't experts on everything and so don't have time to create a really well informed opinion, unless they're interested enough.

 

[Altnabreac]

Because the world is full of backwards (backwoods?) whingers who don't want to engage with the modern world.

Once HS2 is built people will be happy enough with it as it will offer faster, competitively priced journeys. Those who still have no interest in leaving their home town will probably not find it that useful though.

 

[PR1Berske]

Because the world is full of backwards (backwoods?) whingers who don't want to engage with the modern world.

Not entirely sure this helps but thanks.

 

[B&I]

Because the world is full of backwards (backwoods?) whingers who don't want to engage with the modern world.

Once HS2 is built people will be happy enough with it as it will offer faster, competitively priced journeys. Those who still have no interest in leaving their home town will probably not find it that useful though.

During your stint in the fire brigade, did you find that petrol was a useful substitute for water?

 

[backontrack]

Because the world is full of backwards (backwoods?) whingers who don't want to engage with the modern world.

Not sure that that applies to the environmentalists campaigning against HS2.

 

[Altnabreac]

During your stint in the fire brigade, did you find that petrol was a useful substitute for water?

Yes. Not really being emollient here. But I genuinely think HS2 is just one of those topics where some people have a gut reaction against it and to a certain extent discussing the detail of why they dislike it is a bit pointless.

Factual discussion of which routes it will serve, likely pricing etc is usually countered with emotional dislike of the concept. So there just isn't much that can be productively discussed in those circumstances.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

It's divisive because people are innately conservative as in resistive to change. A project of HS2's size and expense can appear very intimidating when seen in this context but the reality is that most of us have no concept of how to deal with projects of this size so may very well recoil from it. Thankfully such projects find themselves having to go through Parliamentary procedures which exposes them to at least some scrutiny by people (not necessarily MPs themselves) who do have expertise in dealing with large projects. HS2 however suffers from existing in a time when general disillusion with the political process means some people do not want to accept any expert opinion on anything but would rather be led by the rantings of the editor of their preferred newspaper or their favourite on-line blogger about whom they actually know almost nothing. It's also worth pointing out that HS2 enjoys cross-party support suggesting that overall there is a good degree of consensus about its benefits.

 

[Snapper]

The idea that Hs2 is 'divisive' is a load of rubbish, frankly. It's lazy journalism. Just as the same way any report that's slightly critical of things is branded 'damning' then any project that has the slightest opposition to it is labelled 'controversial'

It's only if you can be bothered to look at the facts and check the evidence that you'll see the truth. Forget easily fiddled clickbait newspaper polls & look at real statistics

For example. How many people in the Chilterns have signed the latest StopHs2 petition? 10% 15%? No. The most is in the Chesham and Amersham constituency where 1560 people have signed. That's 1.66% of ALL constituents. Only one other constituency on phase 1 has over 1% of signatures. It's even worse on phase 2. The most on the Manchester leg is 0.3%. On the Leeds leg Rother valley has 1382 or 1.46%. The next biggest is NW Leics with 0.39%. In fact, more people have signed petitions about banning fireworks or releasing balloons! Some 'controversy!

It's the same in the political arena. Hs2 isn't controversial at all. It has broad cross party support and the opposition in both the Commons and the Lords is tiny.

I've crunched the numbers following the Hs2 phase 2a vote in this blog. https://paulbigland.blog/2018/01/31/the-stop-hs2-campaigns-as-dead-as-a-dodo/

 

[PR1Berske]

The idea that Hs2 is 'divisive' is a load of rubbish, frankly. It's lazy journalism. Just as the same way any report that's slightly critical of things is branded 'damning' then any project that has the slightest opposition to it is labelled 'controversial'

It's only if you can be bothered to look at the facts and check the evidence that you'll see the truth. Forget easily fiddled clickbait newspaper polls & look at real statistics

For example. How many people in the Chilterns have signed the latest StopHs2 petition? 10% 15%? No. The most is in the Chesham and Amersham constituency where 1560 people have signed. That's 1.66% of ALL constituents. Only one other constituency on phase 1 has over 1% of signatures. It's even worse on phase 2. The most on the Manchester leg is 0.3%. On the Leeds leg Rother valley has 1382 or 1.46%. The next biggest is NW Leics with 0.39%. In fact, more people have signed petitions about banning fireworks or releasing balloons! Some 'controversy!

It's the same in the political arena. Hs2 isn't controversial at all. It has broad cross party support and the opposition in both the Commons and the Lords is tiny.

I've crunched the numbers following the Hs2 phase 2a vote in this blog. https://paulbigland.blog/2018/01/31/the-stop-hs2-campaigns-as-dead-as-a-dodo/

"HS2 isn't controversial at all" is quite the statement even from you. You accept that it's not exactly a project welcomed with open arms? Read the threads here where rail enthusiasts can't quite agree on the need for the project.

Why do you think a scheme of this kind causes such debate when, in your version of events, opposition is barely a handful of people?

 

[mallard]

I'm generally in favour of HS2, but I do find it very worrying that it's being used as an excuse to downgrade existing lines; not because HS2 "replaces" them, but because they currently offer a service that HS2 won't be able to compete with! Even if the downgrades were because the lines are "secondary" to HS2, degrading the service decades before HS2 is operational is completely unnecissary.

Additionally the stated opening dates are wildly optimistic; in reality we'll likely see Phase 1 run over time and budget and will probably not be in full operation until around 2030. Then Phase 2 will be held up in various "reviews", with pressure from Scotland (assuming it's still part of the UK; otherwise it'll probably be a legally-binding treaty rather than just "pressure") meaning that the Manchester branch gets built while the Leeds route is "postponed" until around 2040 at the least.

 

[Snapper]

"HS2 isn't controversial at all" is quite the statement even from you. You accept that it's not exactly a project welcomed with open arms? Read the threads here where rail enthusiasts can't quite agree on the need for the project.

Why do you think a scheme of this kind causes such debate when, in your version of events, opposition is barely a handful of people?

It's not 'my version of events' it's the truth backed up with the statistical analysis to prove it. The opposition is a handful of people. Using the stop hs2 petition as an example - here's some cold hard numbers for you. 6,567,433 folks live in constituencies Hs2 will pass through. How many of them have signed the stophs2 petition? Just 14,706 as of yesterday. That's just 0.22%! That's tiny! So where is the 'real' opposition to Hs2? It doesn't exist. All their national groups have folded. You confuse media comment & people questioning the need for the project on social media with genuine opposition. The 'real' opposition is tiny and its getting smaller.

 

[Snapper]

I'm generally in favour of HS2, but I do find it very worrying that it's being used as an excuse to downgrade existing lines; not because HS2 "replaces" them, but because they currently offer a service that HS2 won't be able to compete with! Even if the downgrades were because the lines are "secondary" to HS2, degrading the service decades before HS2 is operational is completely unnecissary.

Additionally the stated opening dates are wildly optimistic; in reality we'll likely see Phase 1 run over time and budget and will probably not be in full operation until around 2030. Then Phase 2 will be held up in various "reviews", with pressure from Scotland (assuming it's still part of the UK; otherwise it'll probably be a legally-binding treaty rather than just "pressure") meaning that the Manchester branch gets built while the Leeds route is "postponed" until around 2040 at the least.

Pure speculation, nothing more. This is opinion, not anything based on fact.

 

[mallard]

Pure speculation, nothing more. This is opinion, not anything based on fact.

This is a discussion forum, not a court case. Speculation and opinion are entirely appropriate. It is a fact that HS2 has been mentioned by the government multiple times while trying to explain their plans to downgrade the MML.

 

[keith1879]

"HS2 isn't controversial at all" is quite the statement even from you. You accept that it's not exactly a project welcomed with open arms? Read the threads here where rail enthusiasts can't quite agree on the need for the project.

Why do you think a scheme of this kind causes such debate when, in your version of events, opposition is barely a handful of people?

The context in which Snapper used "HS2 isn't controversial at all" is in the political arena - and as he said it enjoys cross party support - it really isn't controversial politically.

I am impressed by Snapper's qualitative analysis and I think he has taken the trouble to prove what I just suspected - the opponents of HS2 are very vocal and receive far more publicity than their numbers merit. Unfortunately these days the media insist on "balance" to an extent that means that 1 person expressing an extreme opinion gets as much publicity as 100 expressing a modest but opposing position.

 

[Chester1]

This is a discussion forum, not a court case. Speculation and opinion are entirely appropriate. It is a fact that HS2 has been mentioned by the government multiple times while trying to explain their plans to downgrade the MML.

The experience of Crossrail indicates the UK is capable of building new railways on time and on budget. If it was a NR upgrade of existing lines I would agree with you. The MML will probably continue to gain passengers but as an increasingly commuter and regional railway. Its more complicated than it being downgraded to help HS2.

 

[NSEFAN]

This is a discussion forum, not a court case. Speculation and opinion are entirely appropriate. It is a fact that HS2 has been mentioned by the government multiple times while trying to explain their plans to downgrade the MML.

When you say downgrade, do you mean adding more stops to the schedules into St Pancras? If so, this seems quite sensible to me if it improves services to/from the intermediate stations, whilst passengers from further out still have fast trains to London. Indeed, if the MML got more tracks added and more services, the end result would probably be quite similar.

 

[mallard]

When you say downgrade, do you mean adding more stops to the schedules into St Pancras? If so, this seems quite sensible to me if it improves services to/from the intermediate stations, whilst passengers from further out still have fast trains to London. Indeed, if the MML got more tracks added and more services, the end result would probably be quite similar.

Except that those "fast trains to London" via HS2 won't arrive until "2033" (by the wildly optimisitic official reckoning), but the service downgrade is happening now. HS2 overall city-to-city journey times will be only marginally faster (with the added inconvinience of changing trains) from Nottingham to London and most likely slower from pretty much everywhere else south of Chesterfield. I've been over the numbers in other threads, no need to repeat myself.

The scrapping of electrification and imposition of bi-modes means that all journey times north of Kettering will be slower (unless Hitachi or someone else can magic up a bi-mode with the diesel performance of a 222 within the next couple of years; not going to happen). Even if the overall journey time to London is the same (which is unlikely; there's not even a firm comitment to upgrade the catenary and power supplies south of Bedford to make it suitable for express services) that's of no comfort for passengers not travelling to London.

It's already planned to slow down MML services to London for the sake of Thameslink in the next timetable. Direct connections from the East Midlands to Luton Airport (Parkway) are being scrapped when the Corby wiring is done (the only non-Thameslink stops will be on Corby services). There really is no good (rail-related) news in the forseeable future for communities along the MML (north of Kettering at least), HS2 or no.

Like I said, I'm generally in favour of HS2, but the impact it's having on the East Midlands is entirely negative (due, in large part to the rejection of the obvious interchange at East Midlands Parkway on cost grounds). It would be better for everyone if it just ran non-stop between Birmingham and Chesterfield/Sheffield.

 

[PR1Berske]

It's not 'my version of events' it's the truth backed up with the statistical analysis to prove it. The opposition is a handful of people. Using the stop hs2 petition as an example - here's some cold hard numbers for you. 6,567,433 folks live in constituencies Hs2 will pass through. How many of them have signed the stophs2 petition? Just 14,706 as of yesterday. That's just 0.22%! That's tiny! So where is the 'real' opposition to Hs2? It doesn't exist. All their national groups have folded. You confuse media comment & people questioning the need for the project on social media with genuine opposition. The 'real' opposition is tiny and its getting smaller.

A fair enough reply, though something else comes to mind.

I'm struck how obsessed you are with pointing at the opposition and laughing, almost boasting. Time after time you label the opposition dead dodos, busted flushes, all of that.

I'm struggling to find you giving as much quantitative analysis in favour of the scheme itself. You have perhaps done all you need to highlight the lack of opposition. We get the point, now.

 

[Geezertronic]

If you look at the amount of abuse Snapper has received both on his blog and during his photo opportunities, I think he can almost be excused for mocking the anti-HS2 brigade as he appears to be giving them a dose of their own medicine. As he can argue based on fact rather than fiction, that is where most of antis abuse appears to have come from. I forget the name of the chap who regularly used to post nonsense and abuse on his blog, but it seems ironic that he has gone quiet as well

 

[Snapper]

If you look at the amount of abuse Snapper has received both on his blog and during his photo opportunities, I think he can almost be excused for mocking the anti-HS2 brigade as he appears to be giving them a dose of their own medicine. As he can argue based on fact rather than fiction, that is where most of antis abuse appears to have come from. I forget the name of the chap who regularly used to post nonsense and abuse on his blog, but it seems ironic that he has gone quiet as well

Indeed. They've invited ridicule through their outrageous claims and outright lies. That's why I got involved in the first place. The mainstream media were giving them an easy ride, accepting all their claims without doing any fact checks. I decided to redress the balance, which is why I've received so much abuse of them over the years. Through crunching the actual numbers and looking forensically at their groups I've pieced together the real facts, which is they're a loud minority that's shrinking...

 

[PR1Berske]

Indeed. They've invited ridicule through their outrageous claims and outright lies. That's why I got involved in the first place. The mainstream media were giving them an easy ride, accepting all their claims without doing any fact checks. I decided to redress the balance, which is why I've received so much abuse of them over the years. Through crunching the actual numbers and looking forensically at their groups I've pieced together the real facts, which is they're a loud minority that's shrinking...

What reasons do you base your support for HS2?

 

[Snapper]

What reasons do you base your support for HS2?

Capacity. The need for the UK to upgrade its transport infrastructure to stop it falling behind other developed countries even further. Regeneration. Jobs and training. The unwillingness to live in a country that seems to determined to turn itself into an economic and industrial museum.

 

[Deerfold]

Except that those "fast trains to London" via HS2 won't arrive until "2033" (by the wildly optimisitic official reckoning), but the service downgrade is happening now.

What makes you think the official dates are wildly optimistic?

HS1 was completed on time (after all the delays in deciding to build it in the first place). Crossrail 1 is running to schedule.

 

[jon0844]

People using SET and up here in GN land are all upset that to get more services, there's an inevitable reduction in speeds and other compromises - and that's before anyone has to deal with what happens when things go wrong and there's NO slack.

People moan about privatisation and think that nationalising the railway could mean lower fares, which if true would likely increase usage and force even more slowed down services (given the way to add capacity is usually to slow down trains).

So, I do wish the press would perhaps spend some time explaining how the only real way to improve things isn't just to build HS2 but start on other high capacity lines, which can then give people some decent services on lines at, or nearly at, capacity and with improvements that are really pushing the limits today - let alone what things will be like in 10 or 20 years if we don't invest in more infrastructure.

 

[jon0844]

What makes you think the official dates are wildly optimistic?

HS1 was completed on time (after all the delays in deciding to build it in the first place). Crossrail 1 is running to schedule.

I rather suspect that given the issues with Thameslink and likely delays implementing the new timetable, this will be used as an example of why HS2 will be a disaster. The irony being that Thameslink proves that upgrading existing railway lines is not as good as all-new lines.

As such, Thameslink proves we forget about upgrading the WCML or reinstating the Grand Central main line and so on and build new.

 

[yorksrob]

As someone who's a bit sceptical about the project, it boils down to a couple of issues for me:

I'm sceptical that future Governments will stick to the stated policy of HS2 spending being considered separately from spending on the rest of the railway, particularly when decisions are made behind closed doors.

The effect of HS services on existing main lines - having seen the South Eastern main line turned into a slowed down all stations backwater to make people pay a premium for HS1 (although hopefully this may be alleviated in the near future).

 

[Domh245]

having seen the South Eastern main line turned into a slowed down all stations backwater to make people pay a premium for HS1 (although hopefully this may be alleviated in the near future).

You mean, "having seen the South Eastern main line turned into a slowed down all stations backwater to improve the service and connectivity at intermediate stations."

That sounds similar to what will probably be happening on HS2, but with the advantage of the additional service and connectivity at intermediate stops actually being wanted/needed in the first place.

 

[yorksrob]

You mean, "having seen the South Eastern main line turned into a slowed down all stations backwater to improve the service and connectivity at intermediate stations."

That sounds similar to what will probably be happening on HS2, but with the advantage of the additional service and connectivity at intermediate stops actually being wanted/needed in the first place.

You'd have thought so. But actually the stops between Ashford and Tonbridge had a pretty god service even before HS1 (Marden might have gained an extra one, but the others haven't. There are just fewer trains in total).

Maidstone also seems to have lost out on some fast trains to London.