Integrated Rail plan for Midlands and North of England: Could more be done to level things up?

[Glenn1969]

I would say you are actually after the opposite. Much of what you want is entirely for the benefit of your local area, but will be paid for by everyone else.



And as I've already explained a *strategy* document (which this is) won't necessarily have *all* the details. That's not the point of a strategy - check out askoxford.com.

They aren't "wills" because there are far too many unknowns at this point.



Tough. Get over yourself. It's not about you and your demands, it's about what is best for everyone - that includes those of us who will be paying the bill.

There is nothing in the document for most of the North. Or do we not matter in a Southern-centric world?

 

[Irascible]

There is nothing in the document for most of the North. Or do we not matter in a Southern-centric world?

I've started thinking the current investment in the South-West is the reduction in flight taxes. Keep the attributions to those who're benefiting.

 

[irish_rail]

I've started thinking the current investment in the South-West is the reduction in flight taxes. Keep the attributions to those who're benefiting.

Exactly. So sick of hearing this north south divide crap. The south west does much worse than the north in all spending descions. Its a south east vs the rest divide.

 

[The Ham]

Exactly. So sick of hearing this north south divide crap. The south west does much worse than the north in all spending descions. Its a south east vs the rest divide.

If you look at the infrastructure spending reports is often that the South East has a lower figure than some of the Northern areas, it's very much spending in London is higher and everywhere else is lower.

Having said that, just because spending happens in one area doesn't mean that others don't benefit.

The remodeling of Reading is a classic example, it's South East spending but provided more services to other regions (such as the semi fast services to Exeter).

The other thing such infrastructure spending reports don't count is the total transport spending. For example if SWR had the same level of subsidy per passenger as TPE then Crossrail 2 could have been built years ago with that extra money.

I'm not saying that there's not a need for now spending in the Northern regions (in fact I'd have liked for there to have been more over the years), rather such comparisons aren't as clear cut as some simplifications would like us to think.

 

[irish_rail]

I'm no Tory supporter, very very far from it, but I saw an interview with Andy Burnham on BBC news earlier which was shocking.
He implied the north deserves to benefit from the same spending being spent on the south on HS2! Does he not realise that the south does not benefit one iota from HS2?!

He also banged on about how hard done by mancunians are with their poor transport systems, yet you only need to look at the 100s of Trams they have and countless NR stations and trains, not to mention cheaper fares than say down here in the south west.
These metro mayors need to get their facts right before preaching on the news programs about how hard done by they are.

I'm not exactly happy my taxes will be paying for the HS2 and NPR stuff, it won't benefit me one little bit , so frankly if the Government have scaled things back a little and it might cost an extra 4 minutes between Manchester and Leeds then Tough.

 

[irish_rail]

If you look at the infrastructure spending reports is often that the South East has a lower figure than some of the Northern areas, it's very much spending in London is higher and everywhere else is lower.

Having said that, just because spending happens in one area doesn't mean that others don't benefit.

The remodeling of Reading is a classic example, it's South East spending but provided more services to other regions (such as the semi fast services to Exeter).

The other thing such infrastructure spending reports don't count is the total transport spending. For example if SWR had the same level of subsidy per passenger as TPE then Crossrail 2 could have been built years ago with that extra money.

I'm not saying that there's not a need for now spending in the Northern regions (in fact I'd have liked for there to have been more over the years), rather such comparisons aren't as clear cut as some simplifications would like us to think.

True, its just this North South divide phrase which irks me, rather too simplistic and misleading.

 

[Purple Orange]

I'm no Tory supporter, very very far from it, but I saw an interview with Andy Burnham on BBC news earlier which was shocking.
He implied the north deserves to benefit from the same spending being spent on the south on HS2! Does he not realise that the south does not benefit one iota from HS2?!

He also banged on about how hard done by mancunians are with their poor transport systems, yet you only need to look at the 100s of Trams they have and countless NR stations and trains, not to mention cheaper fares than say down here in the south west.
These metro mayors need to get their facts right before preaching on the news programs about how hard done by they are.

I'm not exactly happy my taxes will be paying for the HS2 and NPR stuff, it won't benefit me one little bit , so frankly if the Government have scaled things back a little and it might cost an extra 4 minutes between Manchester and Leeds then Tough.

Sorry but London is the prime beneficiary of HS2. The capacity released on the south WCML in to Euston and the MML in to St. Pancras is the main prize!

Manchester also has a very bad local heavy rail network, with cities like Birmingham, Glasgow, Liverpool, Newcastle all having far better commuter rail networks.

 

[Requeststop]

Exactly. So sick of hearing this north south divide crap. The south west does much worse than the north in all spending descions. Its a south east vs the rest divide.

Totally Correct. Shapps was on Spotlight last night (Wednesday) dressed up to wave off the new service from Okehampton and promising announcements of some more investments for the South West. What did we get? Nothing.

 

[21C101]

Totally Correct. Shapps was on Spotlight last night (Wednesday) dressed up to wave off the new service from Okehampton and promising announcements of some more investments for the South West. What did we get? Nothing.

As they were announcing a plan for the North and Midlands today that is hardly surprising.

Although politically he has covered bis backside in that the announcement today includes diverting Plymouth to Birmingham Cross Country services to Snow Hill via Moor Street giving much faster NE-SW journey times, albeit with a change at Moor/Curzon St.

 

[Roast Veg]

Although politically he has covered bis backside in that the announcement today includes diverting Plymouth to Birmingham Cross Country services to Snow Hill via Moor Street giving much faster NE-SW journey times, albeit with a change at Moor/Curzon St.

Sort of. It's what I'd like to see them do with Moor street, but the actual service provision is very much up in the air.

 

[A0]

Totally Correct. Shapps was on Spotlight last night (Wednesday) dressed up to wave off the new service from Okehampton and promising announcements of some more investments for the South West. What did we get? Nothing.

Perhaps because today's annoucements were about the Midlands and North and not the South West? There wasn't anything abput Wales, Scotland or East Anglia in today's package either.....

 

[Starmill]

Totally Correct. Shapps was on Spotlight last night (Wednesday) dressed up to wave off the new service from Okehampton and promising announcements of some more investments for the South West. What did we get? Nothing.

In the Integrated Rail Plan for the Midlands and the North? Indeed you're right. Nothing.

 

[A0]

Sorry but London is the prime beneficiary of HS2. The capacity released on the south WCML in to Euston and the MML in to St. Pancras is the main prize!

Manchester also has a very bad local heavy rail network, with cities like Birmingham, Glasgow, Liverpool, Newcastle all having far better commuter rail networks.

The capacity released benefits London - Birmingham. There's not much capacity which will be freed up on the MML.

But HS 2 in terms of service volumes and journey time, those benefits are all realised by the Midlands and North. Places like Northampton or Banbury aren't going to be getting faster London services where places like Manchester, Nottingham, Sheffield and the north of the WCML will.

 

[Starmill]

But HS 2 in terms of service volumes and journey time, those benefits are all realised by the Midlands and North.

Once again, totally wrong.

 

[Starmill]

Yes it does. It removes long distance trains from the south WCML and in doing so relieves the capacity constraint and allows a better local and regional service.

I feel like I need to have t shirts made with this on, it needs to be repeated so many times.

 

[Bertie the bus]

Yes it does. It removes long distance trains from the south WCML and in doing so relieves the capacity constraint and allows a better local and regional service. Indeed, without that need the business case would be very, very weak.

And that is what HS2 supporters keep banging on about when anybody who opposed to HS2 says does it really matter whether you can get from Birmingham - London a few minutes quicker? HS2 primarily benefits the South East. Somehow some people have manged to convince others it is a Northern thing when it isn't.

 

[ABB125]

And that is what HS2 supporters keep banging on about when anybody who opposed to HS2 says does it really matter whether you can get from Birmingham - London a few minutes quicker? HS2 primarily benefits the South East. Somehow some people have manged to convince others it is a Northern thing when it isn't.

It also benefits the north.

Is it unacceptable that a project which benefits the north also benefits London?

 

[Bertie the bus]

It also benefits the north.

Is it unacceptable that a project which benefits the north also benefits London?

Except it is the other way round. It is a project which mainly benefits London and the Home Counties which does have some benefits for the North.

 

[A0]

Once again, totally wrong.

No, I'm not.

Birmingham will get a London journey time reduction of about 40% and a frequency of at least 6 tph that's more than anywhere south of Birmingham will see.

Manchester London journey times will drop by almost half.

Similar improvements are on the cards for Nottingham and Sheffield from East Mids.

Name me one place south of Birmingham which is seeing benefits like that from HS2.

 

[A0]

And that is what HS2 supporters keep banging on about when anybody who opposed to HS2 says does it really matter whether you can get from Birmingham - London a few minutes quicker? HS2 primarily benefits the South East. Somehow some people have manged to convince others it is a Northern thing when it isn't.

When Birmingham and Manchester are seeing a 40%+ reduction in journey time to / from London and a significant capacity increase into the bargain, I'm not sure how anyone can, with a straight face, claim HS2 primarily benefits the south, when most places south of Birmingham won't see any journey time improvements.

 

[Mikey C]

No, I'm not.

Birmingham will get a London journey time reduction of about 40% and a frequency of at least 6 tph that's more than anywhere south of Birmingham will see.

Manchester London journey times will drop by almost half.

Similar improvements are on the cards for Nottingham and Sheffield from East Mids.

Name me one place south of Birmingham which is seeing benefits like that from HS2.

The Southeast won't benefit from decreased journey times AND while there will be capacity benefits, it's only a small number of places in the Southeast which will benefit from this, between Milton Keynes and Euston

Indeed, if HS2 had been designed for the benefit of southerners, there would have been intermediate stations on the way

 

[Bertie the bus]

When Birmingham and Manchester are seeing a 40%+ reduction in journey time to / from London and a significant capacity increase into the bargain, I'm not sure how anyone can, with a straight face, claim HS2 primarily benefits the south, when most places south of Birmingham won't see any journey time improvements.

How London centric can you be? Strange how people in Manchester and Birmingham are supposedly major beneficiaries because they can get to London quicker but people in London don't benefit from getting to Birmingham or Manchester quicker. Getting somewhere a bit quicker isn't everything or even the most important thing. It removes long distance services from existing routes thereby increasing paths available for more services from the Home Counties into London. It's a London project. As I said it does have some incidental benefits for the North but it is a project that mainly benefits London and the South East.

 

[The Ham]

How London centric can you be? Strange how people in Manchester and Birmingham are supposedly major beneficiaries because they can get to London quicker but people in London don't benefit from getting to Birmingham or Manchester quicker. Getting somewhere a bit quicker isn't everything or even the most important thing. It removes long distance services from existing routes thereby increasing paths available for more services from the Home Counties into London. It's a London project. As I said it does have some incidental benefits for the North but it is a project that mainly benefits London and the South East.

Creating extra platforms in Manchester, Leeds and Birmingham (OK they were/are due long distance services only, but that didn't stop local services from using then) benefits the South East how exactly, especially given that they also could have been made to be useful to the full NPR scheme (further removing long distance services from the existing platforms)?

Yes this does full in a lot of the gaps in what's happening with the existing network which could have been filled in, however much like there's a lot of scepticism about what's happening in 2040, the same way have been true about 2030 of it was announced 10 years ago.

Also whilst a lot of the headlines were about London to Northern City stations there had also been some information about journey time improvements between Birmingham and those cities and between cities in the Eastern arm if people looked for them.

My overall view of this is:

We're building the first bits of HS2, but to appease those opposed to HS2 we've cancelled the Eastern Arm.

We're still looking at how we can get HS services to Leeds (including keeping the HS2 route as an option by protecting it, but shhh don't tell stopHS2).

We've raised that we need to keep doing what we're doing with improvements to the existing rail network, so here's some electrification of lines were should have done years ago.

We've realised that HS2 cut off XC services from connecting to it so have fixed that.

Overall there's still plenty of scope for more things to be added, including a lot of detail. Likely to be announced at times which suit us politically.

 

[21C101]

The capacity released benefits London - Birmingham. There's not much capacity which will be freed up on the MML.

But HS 2 in terms of service volumes and journey time, those benefits are all realised by the Midlands and North. Places like Northampton or Banbury aren't going to be getting faster London services where places like Manchester, Nottingham, Sheffield and the north of the WCML will.

Northampton wont necessarily be getting faster trains but will be getting more frequent trains, as will places like Nuneaton and Milton Keynes.

Cant see it releasing any paths for extra passenger trains on the MML as Leicester will still need two fasts an hour with one going on to each of Nottingam and Sheffield.

However electrificaation to Leicester in combination with HS2 will allow the second hourly train to each to be replaced with a semi fast split/joined from the Corby service and run to Nottingham/Derby which will release two paths an hour into London, in turn allowing more Thameslink fast line running, which will create an extra two freight paths an hour as well as all fast Thameslinks being able to call at West Hampstead.

 

[A0]

However electrificaation to Leicester in combination with HS2 will allow the second hourly train to each to be replaced with a semi fast split/joined from the Corby service and run to Nottingham/Derby which will release two paths an hour into London, in turn allowing more Thameslink fast line running, which will create an extra two freight paths an hour as well as all fast Thameslinks being able to call at West Hampstead.

Not this nonsense about split / join on the MML *again*. It's been debunked as impractical more times than I care to count.

It also limits capacity - so EMR have aspirations to run 8/12 car between Corby & London, Leicester to London will continue to be busy post HS2, because HS2 doesn't help Leicester, so most trains on there will be at least 5 car - so on platform lengths alone that's not going to work.

 

[irish_rail]

I feel like I need to have t shirts made with this on, it needs to be repeated so many times.

Oh right so it benefits a few dormitory towns between London and Birmingham like Milton Keynes, how on earth is that comparable with the lavish spending on the north? The vast vast vast majority of the south gets absolutely nothing from HS2.

 

[Ianno87]

Oh right so it benefits a few dormitory towns between London and Birmingham like Milton Keynes,

Good way to dismiss benefits to at least half a million or so people (probably quite a bit more). Milton Keynes itself (plus Northampton and Rugby) are very sizeable, and fast-growing towns. And railways are built to support economic growth.

 

[Mikey C]

Oh right so it benefits a few dormitory towns between London and Birmingham like Milton Keynes, how on earth is that comparable with the lavish spending on the north? The vast vast vast majority of the south gets absolutely nothing from HS2.

Good way to dismiss benefits to at least half a million or so people (probably quite a bit more). Milton Keynes itself (plus Northampton and Rugby) are very sizeable, and fast-growing towns. And railways are built to support economic growth.

Northampton and Rugby aren't in the southeast, they're in the East and West Midlands respectively. As I've said before, the amount of people in the southeast who benefit from HS2 is relatively small, just the towns between MK and Watford really.

 

[Ianno87]

Northampton and Rugby aren't in the southeast, they're in the East and West Midlands respectively. As I've said before, the amount of people in the southeast who benefit from HS2 is relatively small, just the towns between MK and Watford really.

Plus everybody in Greater London, Kent, Sussex and parts of Hertfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Essex who have a dramatically reduced journey time to reach Birmingham, Manchester, Liverpool and Scotland via Euston and HS2.

For example, Cambridge-Birmingham and Cambridge-Manchester (in particular the latter) will become dramatically faster via Euston/HS2 than any other route.

 

[Bald Rick]

I find it fascinating that the Government announces an eye watering amount of capital investment in the railways of the Midlands and North, and yet the elected representatives of the population who will benefit from it are complaining! You can see why the Treasury doesn’t want to bother, and I suspect they won’t in future if promises to spend big on railways is met by a reaction like this.

Meanwhile Mr Burnham only has to look at the published HS2 maps to see that the elevated part of the station and approaches is right next to Piccadilly, and immediately after crossing Midland Street drops rapidly down into the tunnel. If anything it will significantly improve the area!