Any news on proposals to build an alternative route between Exeter & Plymouth?

[takno]

Just think for a minute. Income tax makes up a small part of all tax revenues

Income tax and NI between them are about 45% of tax revenues. VAT is another 18%. I've got no objection to raising taxes substantially to support a larger state and higher investment, but you couldn't do it just from inheritance and wealth taxes - sooner or later you need to raise income taxes as well.

 

[AndrewE]

Income tax and NI between them are about 45% of tax revenues. VAT is another 18%. I've got no objection to raising taxes substantially to support a larger state and higher investment, but you couldn't do it just from inheritance and wealth taxes - sooner or later you need to raise income taxes as well.

I am astonished: 63% off the backs of the working population! No wonder they keep trumpeting the UK as a place to invest... Just look at the 37% that gets an easy ride and we could have public provision tha twas the envy of the world!

 

[Meerkat]

If you don’t want to pay tax you just don’t vote for the party suggesting it - that is what history suggests happens

 

[Clayton]

That's as maybe. We're talking about how much some extra spending would cost us. I was only pointing out that with more than 50 million people in the country a billion is less than £40 a head. Are you saying that you couldn't afford (or would begrudge) £40, or even £200, for properly funded public services?
Decent progressive taxation would mean that people who didn't have much wouldn't pay any more, while the comfortable would. I'm not even getting into the cuts in corporation tax, or financial juggling.
As I said, if you think you can pay negligible tax and still have first-world provision of healthcare, transport, water supply, Trading standards, road cleaning and surfacing, policing (add your own favourite) then you are living in cloud-cuckoo land. If you don't want to pay taxes then emigrate to the USA, somewhere in Africa or another failing state and see how you like it.

I meant that individual tax payers wouldn’t be paying 200 quid a head. Tax comes from various sources and not all rail spending is from central government. The petrolheads in here are going to have to get used to a lot more restrictions and new rail lines are one of the ways transport will need to be improved in future.

 

[The Ham]

Just think for a minute. Income tax makes up a small part of all tax revenues

The income of the government is something like £12,000 per person.

 

[Meerkat]

Oh, more tax and restrictions on car drivers!
You realise that is utterly unelectable - just look at the fuss about petrol tax....

 

[Geoff DC]

About 55p a pint tax on beer AIUI

 

[NorthernSpirit]

Every year for the last ten years, I have written to the Chancellor asking him to set aside £100m each year for rail reinstatement, as he now does for new stations, selfishly thinking of Harrogate-Ripon-Northallerton. I have not once received a reply. That is how important it is to this Government. I thought this would allow about 10 miles per year. Maybe I should have suggested a higher figure?

If I were you I would have written to the MP's of Harrogate and Ripon and would have kept pressing them to reconnect Ripon back to Harrogate and ultimately the railway network.

The same applies to those who live between Bere Alston and Yeoford, should do the same so that Tavistock, Okehampton and Sampford Courtney would once again be reconnected to the railway network.

 

[takno]

About 55p a pint tax on beer AIUI

There's nearly twice that in VAT on most of the pints I buy before you even start on the duty

 

[Dr Hoo]

Why on earth Government can't just commit £1bn a year for X number of years solely for re-openings is beyond me, especially when they CAN seem to commit XX Billions towards new road schemes on a whim.

Getting away from the current ‘taxation’ discussion, can anybody provide a list of recent new road schemes committed on a whim?
(I am aware of the recent Budget announcements on road funding but this appears to be largely re-statement of previous schemes that have in any event been developed through business analysis by the highways authorities.)

 

[yorksrob]

You are right, I was forgetting the generation that isn't learning to drive (or buying, maybe can't afford to buy cars) - millenials? Also if the rich crusties would admit that they ought not to be driving still (or really ought to give up soon - you know who you are!) but put their weight into lobbying for better public transport we might all have a better future.

and a billion is less than £40 a head - and with progressive taxation lots of us wouldn't be paying much more, or even that much anyway. However it is high time that the rail network was analysed again with the objective of identifying missing links or capacity limitations (that can't be dealt with by doubling train lengths!) and a transport strategy devised to address the deficiencies.

Indeed. How many of those 'never use the train' types end up having to pick up their children from gigs etc, where they'd be far better letting them use public transport.

Or drive up with the bags on the way to Uni, whereas they could leave them at the station and let them get on with it.

 

[yorksrob]

Getting away from the current ‘taxation’ discussion, can anybody provide a list of recent new road schemes committed on a whim?
(I am aware of the recent Budget announcements on road funding but this appears to be largely re-statement of previous schemes that have in any event been developed through business analysis by the highways authorities.)

George Osborne, when still chancellor, approved a slew of road projects as 'infrastructure improvements'. I remember desperately lookibg through the list for a rail project that never appeared.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Ah, thank you. I presume that you are referring to the 2014 Autumn Statement, supported by the June 2013 Treasury paper on Investing in Britain’s Future.
Whilst the £15bn seemed like a lot of money around £6bn was on maintenance and the rest seemed to be spread over quite a few years, subject to business cases, the Highways Agency ‘pipeline’, value for money, deliverability, feasibility studies, developer contributions and all that stuff.
Sounds just like the rail expenditure process!
Not a lot of ‘whims’ really.

 

[matacaster]

Too far from London and too few MP's in the vicinity!

 

[AndrewE]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-46156825 says

Flooding closes railway line at Dawlish sea wall...

Crosscountry said it had been advised services could not resume "until sea levels reduce and the railway line can be inspected"

with a night-time picture.

 

[swt_passenger]

Ah, thank you. I presume that you are referring to the 2014 Autumn Statement, supported by the June 2013 Treasury paper on Investing in Britain’s Future.
Whilst the £15bn seemed like a lot of money around £6bn was on maintenance and the rest seemed to be spread over quite a few years, subject to business cases, the Highways Agency ‘pipeline’, value for money, deliverability, feasibility studies, developer contributions and all that stuff.
Sounds just like the rail expenditure process!
Not a lot of ‘whims’ really.

A browse of a roads forum such as SABRE will quickly show that many road projects have very long gestation periods, indeed cancellation or deferment on a whim is not at all unusual. Endless consultations take place, just the same as rail. I agree starting things on a whim is not usual, major schemes are generally announced as under investigation many years before they ever get mentioned in budgets.

 

[snowball]

A browse of a roads forum such as SABRE will quickly show that many road projects have very long gestation periods, indeed cancellation or deferment on a whim is not at all unusual. Endless consultations take place, just the same as rail. I agree starting things on a whim is not usual, major schemes are generally announced as under investigation many years before they ever get mentioned in budgets.

Indeed some road projects have been in and out of the programme two or three times over several decades.

 

[Parallel]

The problem is when everything is running fine, the politicians forget about potentially building, and then when where's some sort of major disruption it's like "Oh, we should probably think about this more/let the public think that we are doing something about it" and when everything calms down runs normally again, it's forgotten. And repeat.

The problem is the railways are run on such political grounds, in some areas progress is very slow.

 

[yorksrob]

Ah, thank you. I presume that you are referring to the 2014 Autumn Statement, supported by the June 2013 Treasury paper on Investing in Britain’s Future.
Whilst the £15bn seemed like a lot of money around £6bn was on maintenance and the rest seemed to be spread over quite a few years, subject to business cases, the Highways Agency ‘pipeline’, value for money, deliverability, feasibility studies, developer contributions and all that stuff.
Sounds just like the rail expenditure process!
Not a lot of ‘whims’ really.

I'll happily take 9 billion for a new lines fund over several years. It would be better than what we have now.

 

[Dr Hoo]

I'll happily take 9 billion for a new lines fund over several years. It would be better than what we have now.

I think that you will find that HS2 and Crossrail are costing rather more than £9 billion. Whatever your view on these projects they will benefit rather more people than live in Wisbech, Okehampton, Bakewell, Barcombe Mills, Barnoldswick or Pocklington.

 

[yorksrob]

I think that you will find that HS2 and Crossrail are costing rather more than £9 billion. Whatever your view on these projects they will benefit rather more people than live in Wisbech, Okehampton, Bakewell, Barcombe Mills, Barnoldswick or Pocklington.

The £9 billion mentioned by George Osborne was for itty-bitty by-passes in the back of beyond, rather than trunk routes to/through London.

I have no interest in high speed rail, and while crossrail is important locally, it will be of no benefit to me in my travels around the rest of the country.

 

[eastdyke]

I think that you will find that HS2 and Crossrail are costing rather more than £9 billion. Whatever your view on these projects they will benefit rather more people than live in Wisbech, Okehampton, Bakewell, Barcombe Mills, Barnoldswick or Pocklington.

But using that simple argument you might never spend any money to benefit the good people in those places that you mention (not necessarily on railways though).

 

[Dr Hoo]

The £9 billion mentioned by George Osborne was for itty-bitty by-passes in the back of beyond, rather than trunk routes to/through London.

I have no interest in high speed rail, and while crossrail is important locally, it will be of no benefit to me in my travels around the rest of the country.

Err...
The Treasury document that I referenced was full of schemes on the M1, M3, M6, M25, A14, etc. Yes, there were some local projects but I can hardly imagine that these were where the 'big bucks' were going. Some apparently local schemes, such as Heysham-Lancaster and around Hull were about getting heavy lorry traffic to and from the docks out of urban/residential areas and hence fundamentally strategic.

 

[yorksrob]

Err...
The Treasury document that I referenced was full of schemes on the M1, M3, M6, M25, A14, etc. Yes, there were some local projects but I can hardly imagine that these were where the 'big bucks' were going. Some apparently local schemes, such as Heysham-Lancaster and around Hull were about getting heavy lorry traffic to and from the docks out of urban/residential areas and hence fundamentally strategic.

I'm afraid that a couple of large scale rail projects based on London doesn't make up for the lack of development of local rail scemes in the rest of the country to me I'm afraid.

 

[Dr Hoo]

But using that simple argument you might never spend any money to benefit the good people in those places that you mention (not necessarily on railways though).

We are going rather off-thread here (in relation to alternative routes across Devon) but this is undoubtedly a key point.
Having lived in various parts of Great Britain (generally in response to career opportunities or pressures) I have retired to a 'deep rural' area in the Peak District and accepted that it is unlikely to be a priority for major public capital spending to meet local needs. I am not surprised that areas around Exmoor that lost their trains around 50 years ago are still waiting for them to be returned.
I am less surprised that efforts are being focused on increasing the resilience of infrastructure around the more populated areas of Torbay, Teignbridge and South Hams.

 

[deltic08]

If I were you I would have written to the MP's of Harrogate and Ripon and would have kept pressing them to reconnect Ripon back to Harrogate and ultimately the railway network.

The same applies to those who live between Bere Alston and Yeoford, should do the same so that Tavistock, Okehampton and Sampford Courtney would once again be reconnected to the railway network.

Andrew Jones, MP for Harrogate, even when junior Transport Minister and not knowing the BCR, said money would never be available.
Ripon MP, now Chief Whip and in Cabinet, not interested even though he supports Skipton-Colne on the other side of the constituency.
I constantly lobby both to the point where Andrew Jones doesn't reply to my correspondence now because I do not live in his constituency even though I own property in Harrogate!
I was at a County Council meeting last Thursday where Harrogate bypass was being discussed again even though a study has concluded the gridlock is generated by local traffic and not through traffic but County are still pushing for a £148m bypass, through an AONB, of less than 4 miles.
That would reinstate as far as Ripon and a bit more toward Northallerton. It is not a level playing field.

 

[reddragon]

BCR = 0.1 it will never be built
It cost the economy £1bn when it closed it will be built
BCR doesn't work
All new railways are being built to serve new developments, support new housing along the route & it'll get built

 

[yorksrob]

I seem to recall that the official BCR for the Okehampton route as assessed in the aftermath of the 2014 breech, was based purely on the network benefits to the existing service. It explicitly mentioned that further study of potential traffic from Okehampton and Tavistock needed to be undertaken, so at present the BCR for the Okehampton route as calculated is meaningless.

 

[deltic08]

All new railways are being built to serve new developments, support new housing along the route & it'll get built

Not in Leeds. The City Council is too blinkered.
10,000 houses are being built in East Leeds either side of the Cross Gates-Wetherby trackbed. The size of the development is large enough to open two new stations along the route but no one in charge has the balls to press for future proofing the trackbed for reinstating. The trackbed is to be built over but a 4-mile dual carriageway is to be built across the development for cars and commuters are to be bused into an already gridlocked Leeds that currently far exceeds air quality limits.

 

[deltic08]

I seem to recall that the official BCR for the Okehampton route as assessed in the aftermath of the 2014 breech, was based purely on the network benefits to the existing service. It explicitly mentioned that further study of potential traffic from Okehampton and Tavistock needed to be undertaken, so at present the BCR for the Okehampton route as calculated is meaningless.

Repairing the breach and cliff landslide at Dawlish cost £50m. Repair was too quick to carry out a benefit/cost analysis. The work was just done and I didn't hear of questions being asked about doing it.