Why are people opposed to HS2? (And other HS2 discussion)

[sprinterguy]

no doubt as woefully unreliable as the rest of the network,

I'm fairly confident that the UK's only current purpose built 21st century high speed line, HS1, is significantly more reliable than any of the other electrified main lines in Britain.

it really only benefits people living in London and Birmingham

I'm not sure why this opinion prevails when HS2 services will serve all WCML destinations including Manchester, Liverpool, Preston and Glasgow. If Phase 2 gets built then one of the primary benefits in my mind is significantly improving journey times and capacity on the oft neglected corridor between Birmingham to Yorkshire and the North East.

finally the money could be better spent else ware on things such as electrification (even though I don't support that either), a Dawlish Avoiding line as well as reopening closed lines.

But it wouldn't be, no more than the "£350 million a week" supposedly saved from leaving the EU would go to the NHS!

 

[underbank]

I'm not sure why this opinion prevails when HS2 services will serve all WCML destinations including Manchester, Liverpool, Preston and Glasgow.

You say ALL, will it really? No guarantee it will include ALL stations. The info given out by HS2 shows Preston and Glasgow, but makes no mention at all of Lancaster, Oxenholme, Penrith, Carlisle. It clearly suggests the London<>Glasgow expresses will only stop at Preston. That's causing a lot of worry and there is nothing forthcoming from HS2 about correcting that impression if it's wrong, so we can only conclude it's correct. The impression those of us here in the North are getting is that places like Lancaster will get slower stopping services to Euston on the existing WCML instead of the current pretty fast services that run non stop South after Wigan/Warrington, or have to change at Preston/Manchester/Crewe to get onto the new HS2 line, where the faster service South of Brum is pointless due to lost time on slower services to get there and time changing at stations. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong - our local MPs are working hard on this and seemingly not getting any promises we won't be worse off.

 

[sprinterguy]

You say ALL, will it really? No guarantee it will include ALL stations. The info given out by HS2 shows Preston and Glasgow, but makes no mention at all of Lancaster, Oxenholme, Penrith, Carlisle. It clearly suggests the London<>Glasgow expresses will only stop at Preston. That's causing a lot of worry and there is nothing forthcoming from HS2 about correcting that impression if it's wrong, so we can only conclude it's correct. The impression those of us here in the North are getting is that places like Lancaster will get slower stopping services to Euston on the existing WCML instead of the current pretty fast services that run non stop South after Wigan/Warrington, or have to change at Preston/Manchester/Crewe to get onto the new HS2 line, where the faster service South of Brum is pointless due to lost time on slower services to get there and time changing at stations. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong - our local MPs are working hard on this and seemingly not getting any promises we won't be worse off.

I admit that I was just presuming that the stopping pattern of the London - Scotland services would remain the same post-HS2. Thinking about it, Chester and the North Wales coast will also be off-piste for HS2 trains. Perhaps "most principal WCML destination" would have been a fairer appraisal.

 

[AndrewE]

I admit that I was just presuming that the stopping pattern of the London - Scotland services would remain the same post-HS2. Thinking about it, Chester and the North Wales coast will also be off-piste for HS2 trains. Perhaps "most principal WCML destination" would have been a fairer appraisal.

which is the same as saying "HS2 will just serve Liverpool, Manchester, Preston and Glasgow!" Out of about 50 destinations currently served by express trains from Euston.

 

[quantinghome]

which is the same as saying "HS2 will just serve Liverpool, Manchester, Preston and Glasgow!" Out of about 50 destinations currently served by express trains from Euston.

It's not the same really is it though?

The point is that it's not HS2's job to serve all the current express-served destinations from Euston. By removing "principal destinations" onto HS2 it allows the towns and cities on WCML which are currently less well served to be given a more intensive service (though a bit slower in some cases to give a more regular stopping pattern to other poorly served destinations).

The other point to consider is that we are 14 years away from a full HS2 timetable being implemented. The timetabling work done to date is largely to demonstrate a business case, not to set everything in stone. We have plenty of time to answer questions about whether Scotland trains could split at Carlisle rather than Carstairs, extending the Preston train to Lancaster, how Oxenholme Penrith and Lockerbie should be served etc.

 

[Charlie Smythe]

You could equally apply your logic to any other large infrastructure project that we've built over the last few decades. For example...

HS1 - only benefits people in Kent
M25 - only benefits London
M62 - only benefits Manchester and Leeds
Crossrail - only benefits central London
WCML upgrade - only benefits London and Birmingham
Derby station rebuild - only benefits Derby
A1(M) upgrade - only benefits Newcastle
Manchester Metrolink - only benefits Manchester
Norwich bypass - only benefits Norwich

So none of these should have been built, right?

Motorways are excellent ideas and needed building, they are a very good system. We already have a rail link to Birmingham from London and don’t need another especially when it’s going to cost over 100bn.

As I said in my original post, it’s not just who it’s benfitis, it what it’s going to cost, the damage it will do and where the money can be better spent.

 

[Charlie Smythe]

I'm fairly confident that the UK's only current purpose built 21st century high speed line, HS1, is significantly more reliable than any of the other electrified main lines in Britain.

I'm not sure why this opinion prevails when HS2 services will serve all WCML destinations including Manchester, Liverpool, Preston and Glasgow. If Phase 2 gets built then one of the primary benefits in my mind is significantly improving journey times and capacity on the oft neglected corridor between Birmingham to Yorkshire and the North East.

But it wouldn't be, no more than the "£350 million a week" supposedly saved from leaving the EU would go to the NHS!

If the goevernment has 50, 60 or 100bn to spend on railways they can start with Dawlish and reopening some closed lines.

Once again the obsession with journey times come out. Reducing journey times is, in my opinion, pointless especially when it’s costing all this money.’

 

[tbtc]

we are 14 years away from a full HS2 timetable being implemented. The timetabling work done to date is largely to demonstrate a business case, not to set everything in stone. We have plenty of time to answer questions about whether Scotland trains could split at Carlisle rather than Carstairs, extending the Preston train to Lancaster, how Oxenholme Penrith and Lockerbie should be served etc

This bears repeating.

At the moment we don't even know what the May 2019 timetables will look like on a number of lines (e.g. Northern Rail) but people are getting upset because the timetables for the mid 2030s aren't set in stone?

It takes a certain cognitive dissonance to accept that we don't know how many regular trains will be running in each WCML station in around a couple of months time but start throwing toys out of the pram because the number of High Speed services stopping at each WCML station in the 2030s isn't guaranteed yet

There are plenty of things to criticise HS2 for, there are plenty of compromises that have had to be made, there are plenty of other things that we could be spending the money on - all of these are also valid points on other railway schemes - but the fact that they aren't giving cast iron guarantees about the level of service that Oxenholme will be receiving in the mid 2030s seems a pretty flimsy criticism to make of the project!

 

[underbank]

There are plenty of things to criticise HS2 for, there are plenty of compromises that have had to be made, there are plenty of other things that we could be spending the money on - all of these are also valid points on other railway schemes - but the fact that they aren't giving cast iron guarantees about the level of service that Oxenholme will be receiving in the mid 2030s seems a pretty flimsy criticism to make of the project!

This thread is about why some people are opposed to HS2. I think it's entirely reasonable to explain that some people are opposed to it because they feel it may well give them a poorer service than they enjoy today.

Others in Northernland suffering 2 carriage Pacers are quite right to wonder why they have to wait 15-20 years for HS2 to finally reach them to get a train they can actually squeeze onto, when a much quicker/simpler solution would be to fast track some longer trains to make them 4 carriage instead of 2.

Sadly HS2 and the railway industry as a whole are not giving such people any answers, hence the opposition to HS2. It's very similar to Brexit - the politicians and industry leaders are simply not communicating properly and, to the people, look to be making illogical decisions. If we want HS2 to be popular, then it needs much better publicity to highlight the benefits and allay peoples' fears.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The whole point of the West Coast Partnership is to put services on the WCML and HS2 under the same operator, in order to integrate them together.
HS2 Ltd (the construction project) won't have the final say on where their services go.
I agree that maps and service descriptions are currently vague, but we know the trains will be classic-compatible and available in 200m lengths (doubled up to 400m on HS2 itself), so they can serve all WCML places north of Lichfield that are on the wired network.
The only services excluded are Chester/North Wales/Shrewsbury as there is no electric solution proposed for those routes.

 

[tbtc]

This thread is about why some people are opposed to HS2. I think it's entirely reasonable to explain that some people are opposed to it because they feel it may well give them a poorer service than they enjoy today.

Others in Northernland suffering 2 carriage Pacers are quite right to wonder why they have to wait 15-20 years for HS2 to finally reach them to get a train they can actually squeeze onto, when a much quicker/simpler solution would be to fast track some longer trains to make them 4 carriage instead of 2.

Sadly HS2 and the railway industry as a whole are not giving such people any answers, hence the opposition to HS2. It's very similar to Brexit - the politicians and industry leaders are simply not communicating properly and, to the people, look to be making illogical decisions. If we want HS2 to be popular, then it needs much better publicity to highlight the benefits and allay peoples' fears.

I agree that there are simple/ quick solutions to people being crammed onto a two coach Pacer (hence why they are all being replaced with at least a two coach 150 - i.e. a train that is at least a third longer, though some lines will also see frequency increases and/or even longer trains - e.g. twenty three metre carriages instead of a twenty metre carriage, three coach trains instead of two coach trains, EMUs instead of Pacers).

That's a problem that is being tackled with a combination of electrification of some Northern lines around Manchester, new trains (195s) and additional trains (150s, 158s, 170s etc).

Brexit suffered from the "Leave" campaign making several different promises to attract voters with contradictory demands (e.g. some voted Brexit for "free trade" reasons, some voted Brexit because they wanted protectionist policies as a reaction to the UK losing industry to foreign countries). Did we vote for Norway/ Canada/ Unicorn deals or no deals whatsoever?

HS2, on the other hand, are in a position where they cannot guarantee the minutia of the timetable in the 2030s - it'd be wrong to promise an hourly Oxenholme - Glasgow service because who knows how the final timetable will look (remember, we can't even know what the May 2019 timetable will look like just yet, so any "guaranteed" HS2 timetable would be a hostage to fortune).

I'm all for trumpeting the benefits of this huge rail investment but the kind of things that people are criticising it for on here (like the Oxenholme example) seem pretty minor/petty.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Others in Northernland suffering 2 carriage Pacers are quite right to wonder why they have to wait 15-20 years for HS2 to finally reach them to get a train they can actually squeeze onto, when a much quicker/simpler solution would be to fast track some longer trains to make them 4 carriage instead of 2.

You do realise that Pacers are for the scrap heap at the end of the year, and that Northern and TPE are in the middle of upgrading all their trains in the north?
It will be a different network in the next 2 years.
This plan is completely independent of HS2.
HS2 will also benefit all WCML destinations (and connections) from Day 1 in 2026/27 when it reaches Lichfield/Crewe.

 

[The Ham]

This thread is about why some people are opposed to HS2. I think it's entirely reasonable to explain that some people are opposed to it because they feel it may well give them a poorer service than they enjoy today.

Others in Northernland suffering 2 carriage Pacers are quite right to wonder why they have to wait 15-20 years for HS2 to finally reach them to get a train they can actually squeeze onto, when a much quicker/simpler solution would be to fast track some longer trains to make them 4 carriage instead of 2.

Sadly HS2 and the railway industry as a whole are not giving such people any answers, hence the opposition to HS2. It's very similar to Brexit - the politicians and industry leaders are simply not communicating properly and, to the people, look to be making illogical decisions. If we want HS2 to be popular, then it needs much better publicity to highlight the benefits and allay peoples' fears.

Three thing is there's lots which could be said by industry:
- Pacers are on their way out (should be by the end of this year, but there's much discussion on this. However needless to say even if they aren't all gone there's going to be a LOT less of them).
- for the last year that there's figures NR spent £4bn on enhancements on the existing network (the highest since 2009 and had been generally increasing since then too)
- the Trans Pennies upgrades are due to happen (although what those upgrades are and exactly when we don't know yet)

 

[squizzler]

Those opposed to HS2 don't like that being pointed out:

https://twitter.com/joerukin/status/1095442798566883328?s=19

Talking of Twitter, the journalist behind that Dispatches HS2 programme has apparently managed to rub both the editor and star columnist for Rail up the wrong way:

http://zelo-street.blogspot.com/2019/02/hs2-hatchet-job-presenters-meltdown.html

HS2 Hatchet Job Presenter’s Meltdown


After Channel 4 screened an edition of Dispatches fronted by Liam Halligan, who, let us not drive this one around the houses for too long, presented a slanted and highly selective take on the HS2 project which failed to even consider why the new railway is needed more than ever right now - never mind in 10 years or so - some in the rail industry called him out for shoddy journalism and bias. And he didn’t take it too well.


Now, I know that those who chant the mantra of “It’s a waste of money, it’ll only mean rich people getting to London a bit quicker, why not invest in transport in the North, we could invest in bus services or light rail systems instead, it’ll really cost [insert very scary made up figure here], just cancel it cos I don’t want to hear any more as I’ve made my mind up” will continue to hold their views. But Halligan’s reaction was telling.


One of those calling him out was Nigel Harris at Rail magazine, pointing out one example of the Halligan selective approach. “This is selective and misleading tosh Liam. You’re so much better than this. ‘One line’ that creates massive new capacity on its own, plus major new capacity on three existing main lines - WCML, MML and ECML. So, four lines then”.


The Great Man was not happy. “I know you desperately want High Speed Rail, Nigel. Fair enough. But my film in part reflected the view of serious rail insiders - Tomaney, Glaister, Darling, Tony May, Jonathan Tyler - who think economic case doesn’t stack up”. If you select pundits who are agin the project, they will pass adverse comment on it.


But do go on. “Government has spent MILLIONS employing 17 PR companies to ram pro-HS2 message down our throats [objective journalism, not] So, given huge doubts re HS2 within rail industry that you KNOW exist [no citation], I thought it was time public heard expert testimony from other side of the argument. If that’s OK with you”.



Harris had seen enough. “Clearly, I was being too kind. When a journalist reacts like that, conversation is pointless. How sad”. And that induced a total meltdown. “What is ‘sad’ is that your magazine is in the pocket of the huge corporate vested interests driving the case for HS2 to such an extent that you have become impervious to independent thought”. That’s an accusation Halligan cannot stand up. Because it’s not true.


At this point, Christian Wolmar - not a fan of HS2 - had also seen enough of Halligan’s ranting and put him straight. “Liam, that is quite daft. I have been writing a column for the mag for over 20 years and I am firmly anti-HS2. I have written several anti HS2 pieces as Nigel is keen on having a wide set of views, so your accusation is nonsense - you could have interviewed me for your prog!” What say The Great Man to that?


Out of the frying pan and into the fire, sadly: “And you clearly want to keep that column Christian. What’s daft - but not surprising is that I broadcast film featuring views of Stephen Glaister, John Tomaney & Alistair Darling and instant response of Rail Magazine is ‘complete tosh’ followed by stream of personal invective”. Another nasty smear.


Wolmar was unimpressed. “That's a fatuous insinuation. Nigel has never interfered in my column and only ever queries potential factual errors. He certainly has a broader view of what can go in his mag than Telegraph newspapers!”. And Harris had had enough.

“Oh dear. Abuse. The last resort of the lost argument. Your comment will cause hollow laughter amidst those whose pocket you believe we rest in. Have a great day Liam”. Halligan was left chanting over and over again the names of those pundits he had carefully selected to present the views in support of the conclusion he wanted to reach.

Despite that, I’m sure those who have already passed adverse judgment on HS2 will remain unmoved - despite the presenter of the latest hatchet job falling apart under a small fraction of the adverse comment he assembled for his programme.


We clearly need an informed debate about HS2. Liam Halligan does not appear too keen to be a participant. Others should draw their own conclusions.

 

[PR1Berske]

Nigel Harris blocked me for suggesting that Rail was a mouthpiece for HS2. It is a touchy subject for him. He knows that the magazine publishes almost entirely universal praise for HS2 and I think from recent editions it's becoming increasingly obvious.

 

[Chris Bird]

As the title says.

I am a supporter of high speed rail in general, but I believe that the current plans for HS2 are far from perfect. Nevertheless I am a (reluctant) supporter of HS2. However, many people are opposed to HS2. Why is this?
Reasons I can think of include:

• Causes fairly significant environmental damage (although significantly less than a motorway!)
• Is built for speeds twice as fast as what we currently have
• Isn't a rebuild of an existing alignment
• Exists entirely so that businessmen and well paid bankers and executives can get to London quicker

Is there anything I haven't thought of? Replies from both sides of the debate are welcome.

************************************************************************************
My main reason for the anti feelings is it simply hasn't been explained properly. My experience talking to non supporters or enthusiasts - why spend huge sums of money to save a few minutes on the journey. The wider picture does not include such things as:
* Freeing up other existing routes to expand more focussed journeys.
* Creating "space" for freight. A neglected aspect.
* Support from regional Authorities and businesses who believe HS2 will benefit their areas.
* How HS1 internal services have benefitted Kent.
* A lack of good positive publicity from HS2 management.

A good example of negative thinking came from Despatches "The Great Train Robery" on Monday last on Channel 4. A really bad and biased report that could be believed by the un informed.

 

[tbtc]

Nigel Harris blocked me for suggesting that Rail was a mouthpiece for HS2. It is a touchy subject for him. He knows that the magazine publishes almost entirely universal praise for HS2 and I think from recent editions it's becoming increasingly obvious.

If only Nigel Harris realised that we could significantly increase capacity on the WCML (beyond the current eleven/twelve coach trains running at up to 125mph every three minutes) by simply having signals that were "intelligent", eh?

You can portray anyone who accepts HS2 as some kind of zealot/fanboy (who are unable to see any flaws in the project) if you want but there's the usual deathly silence about serious alternatives, just some carping about very minor points of HS2 and some complaints that aren't brought up against any other railway scheme.

 

[EM2]

If only Nigel Harris realised that we could significantly increase capacity on the WCML (beyond the current eleven/twelve coach trains running at up to 125mph every three minutes) by simply having signals that were "intelligent", eh?

Don't forget 'smart timetabling' too.

 

[Esker-pades]

Don't forget 'smart timetabling' too.

No, no. "Flexible" timetabling. Much more reasonable.

 

[PR1Berske]

If only Nigel Harris realised that we could significantly increase capacity on the WCML (beyond the current eleven/twelve coach trains running at up to 125mph every three minutes) by simply having signals that were "intelligent", eh?

You can portray anyone who accepts HS2 as some kind of zealot/fanboy (who are unable to see any flaws in the project) if you want but there's the usual deathly silence about serious alternatives, just some carping about very minor points of HS2 and some complaints that aren't brought up against any other railway scheme.

Neither Nigel Harris or Rail magazine are experts.

 

[thenorthern]

On Question Time now they are discussing HS2 but it seems that the audience and then panel don't seem to know much about trains.

 

[Ianno87]

Neither Nigel Harris or Rail magazine are experts.

What does that matter to you anyway; experts in this subject post on this very forum and you still ignore them?

[You're only saying the above because RAIL's rhetoric, based on journalistic reasoning and fact, does not align with your own....which doesn't, as has been pointed out to you many, many times]

 

[squizzler]

Nigel Harris blocked me for suggesting that Rail was a mouthpiece for HS2

Quite right too. There's no arguing with conspiracy theorists. The anti-HS2 lot are in danger of becoming for the rail industry what the anti MMR vaccine lot are for medicine.

Neither Nigel Harris or Rail magazine are experts.

According to Michael Gove (I think it was), we've all had enough of "experts" too.

 

[kylemore]

Quite right too. There's no arguing with conspiracy theorists. The anti-HS2 lot are in danger of becoming for the rail industry what the anti MMR vaccine lot are for medicine.

Why not just come out and call them HS2 DENIERS?

There are to say the the least huge questions over this project - the sheer grandiosity of the new city centre developments seem to have more to do with enriching developers rather than economically providing extra capacity is one of them.

 

[anme]

Why not just come out and call them HS2 DENIERS?

There are to say the the least huge questions over this project - the sheer grandiosity of the new city centre developments seem to have more to do with enriching developers rather than economically providing extra capacity is one of them.

So if we make the city centre stations drab, cheap and functional, will you be in favour of the project?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Why not just come out and call them HS2 DENIERS?

There are to say the the least huge questions over this project - the sheer grandiosity of the new city centre developments seem to have more to do with enriching developers rather than economically providing extra capacity is one of them.

Of course there are questions about the project. There will always be questions about any project. I can think of several aspects of the design of HS2 that make me a little uneasy (though not enough to outweigh the likely benefits). But it's possible to object to something by engaging in rational debate and considering the points that people on the other side present - and also by giving suitable weight to the opinions of those with professional knowledge in the field. The impression I have from this thread and other discussions is that too many of the people opposing HS2 are not doing that. Too many of the anti-HS2 arguments are based on repeating stuff that is either absurd, speculative, or demonstrably untrue, and continuing to repeat that stuff even after being corrected. PR1Berske in particular seems to have a strong record on this thread of ignoring evidence and repeatedly making ludicrous claims. That's not a reasonable way of arguing, and to my mind, in that context, squizzler's remarks that you were replying to seem to me perfectly reasonable.

 

[The Box Photter]

On Question Time now they are discussing HS2 but it seems that the audience and then panel don't seem to know much about trains.

Since when did politicians and most "meeja" commentators know anything about trains (or any form of public transport for that matter)? Likewise, the general public is, by nature, massively ignorant of pretty much anything that doesn't involve "slebs" or "reality TV". That's one of the main reasons why we get the politicians we currently have.

 

[boxy321]

It seems that Coventry will get a poorer service after HS2. There's talk of adding more local services that stop at halts like Marston Green and Lea Hall with less expresses. I avoid 350s and Cross Country like the plague. Trains like the 16:50 from New St are full now, even in 1st class to Coventry.

With Curzon St being at the wrong end of beggars' alley underneath the Bullring shopping centre, I feel a lot of business travellers will be sticking with the WCML to New St and eating breakfast on a 390 of a morning. The station location near the NEC also adds so much more travel time to the airport that people won't bother buying the more expensive HS2 tickets with it's less direct service.

People are happy to pay rock bottom to go to Euston on the slow trains or spend all day on Chiltern going to Marylebone. HS2 will probably be more expensive than flying for a ticket.

 

[underbank]

the general public is, by nature, massively ignorant of pretty much anything that doesn't involve "slebs" or "reality TV". That's one of the main reasons why we get the politicians we currently have.

Which is where the media, and the BBC in particular are spectacularly failing in that it's their job to inform the masses, but they're failing miserably. Where are the factual news programs, documentaries, etc., re HS2? The Beeb is far too obsessed with slebs and personalities, climate change, gay rights, discrimination, etc and are failing to produce proper news about other things. It's exactly the failing of mainstream media that leads to an information vacuum, and people believing the first post they see on Facebook or Twitter - they've nothing else to inform them. The Beeb can have a full week of "special reports" on climate change, NHS cuts, or whatever taking up part of every news report, so where are the similar reports for HS2 or all the other things that people need to be informed about?

 

[The Ham]

Nigel Harris blocked me for suggesting that Rail was a mouthpiece for HS2. It is a touchy subject for him. He knows that the magazine publishes almost entirely universal praise for HS2 and I think from recent editions it's becoming increasingly obvious.

I agree they only employ those who are clearly in favour of HS2, those like Christian Wolmar.....

...oh wait he's opposed to it and defended his editor in the linked to Twitter debate.