Budget 2020 - Anything for Rail?

[CaptainHaddock]

Good news for railway pubs!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-51833138

The chancellor scrapped a planned increase in duty on beer and spirits, while tax on all other kinds of alcoholic drinks will also be frozen.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Actually, sorting some of the long standing bottlenecks like Stonehenge (A303) and Birdlip (A417) will reduce emissions because people will not be crawling along at 10 miles and hour in second gear. Also the A303 mess encourages traffic for the south west from London and the SE to go M4/M5 a very long diversion, again adding to emissions.

That logic would only hold if no-one drove any additional journeys because of the improvements. But that's not what happens. It's been shown time and time again that when you improve roads to remove a bottleneck, the released road capacity almost invariably simply fills up with additional car journeys: Some people will swap from train to car because the car has become a bit quicker. Some will make additional journeys. The result is more emissions, and very likely a new bottleneck somewhere else. It is extremely unlikely that these road improvements will reduce emissions once you take into account those effects.

No amount of spending on rail is going to encourage a family of 4 to ditch the car, and spend a fortnight touring around Cornwall by rail - except for a small number from here perhaps. Oh, 2 of us did try it once, never again.

Yeah, but that's just one example. I agree with you to the extent that a family of four travelling together is one of the least likely groups to swap from the car. But not every car is carrying a family of 4. Most will be carrying far fewer people. Rail improvements might not induce a family of 4 to swap, but they may well induce a person travelling on his/her own to swap to the train, or a group of 2 people in a car to swap. If you can free up road space that way, then you've still achieved your objective of reducing congestion and making our transport network both more efficient and more sustainable - even if that family of 4 are still going by car.

 

[PartyOperator]

Actually, sorting some of the long standing bottlenecks like Stonehenge (A303) and Birdlip (A417) will reduce emissions because people will not be crawling along at 10 miles and hour in second gear.

Not true. Even the government's own analysis (which doesn't properly account for changes in land use and lifestyles due to road investments) predicts that the A417 scheme will increase CO2 emissions. The increase in traffic (which is the main point of the scheme) more than cancels out any improvements in vehicle efficiency.

https://highwaysengland.citizenspac...417_missing_link_scheme_assessment_report.pdf

 

[65477]

Every year she gives I more serious thought. It's a dreadful drive from East Anglia, and every single year our journey home is even worse.

Mrs 65477 and I have toured Cornwall by train twice now. The first time we travelled down by train from Paddington as at that time we lived within the M25. We then moved to the very South of East Anglia and discovered the cheapest way was to drive to Norwich Airport, leave the car there and fly to Exeter and then train to Cornwall, With the demise of Flybe this is no longer possible. At the fares they were charging I am not surprised they went under.

The various Rovers/Rangers available in Cornwall made it a viable and enjoyable holiday

 

[WatcherZero]

What exactly does that mean? Does he mean re-opening old highways, or upgrades to ones we already got ("smart motorways", bike lanes etc)?

Newish Road Investment Strategy RIS2 is kinda like Control Periods. Its £27.4bn over five years as the full highways (national and strategic roads) budget for maintenance, renewals and enhancements. For Comparison RIS1 had a budget of £17bn.

RIS2 breaks down as
£1.2bn for structure renewals with some of that to found from 'savings' (That's 1% of the book value of the assets) including a £450m programme for rolling renewals of safety barriers and £500m on bridges
£400m to replace concrete roads with asphalt
£1.4bn general surface renewals
£6bn on operations
£470m for planning RIS3

£17.4bn on Enhancements 'over half by value in the North and Midlands' which is blatantly a lie as on the same page it breaks it down as
£2.3bn for the North
£1.5bn for the Midlands
£2.2bn for the East
£4.5bn on London and the South East and South West
£6.4-8.2bn on a new Lower Thames crossing

 

[Tomos y Tanc]

It's worth remembering that Highways are devolved to Scotland, Wales and NI, whose Governements seem less keen on road-building than the UK Government, whose remit in this area is confined to England.

The devolved governments can spend the Barnett consequential of the increased spending on highways in England in any way they choose, and may well invest some of it in rail or light rail.

 

[Mikey C]

My family of four (last year five) have spent 3-4 days out of a week touring around Cornwall every year by rail for the last ten. Admittedly, I'm the youngest out of that lot.

It all usually goes fine, until we try and get to Padstow using a rail/bus connection. When we try that it goes wrong.

This budget would have been a nice opportunity to announce that £5 billion fund for connecting communities to the rail network. Oh well, maybe next time.

It makes no economic sense to reinstate, for example, the railway line to Padstow. It would cost a fraction to improve the bus connections to Bodmin and Newquay

 

[yorksrob]

It makes no economic sense to reinstate, for example, the railway line to Padstow. It would cost a fraction to improve the bus connections to Bodmin and Newquay

I suspect you're right, although it is a crying shame for several reasons.

I suspect that the main reason it's not with us today is Western Region antipathy to a former Southern Region line.

 

[InOban]

I't's worth remembering that Highways are devolved to Scotland, Wales and NI, whose Governements seem less keen on road-building than the UK Government, whose remit in this area is confined to England.

The devolved governments can spend the Barnett consequential of the increased spending on highways in England in any way they choose, and may well invest some of it in rail or light rail.

As far as Scotland goes, the ScoGov has spent a higher proportion of its infrastructure spend on roads v rail than in England. Their green claims are largely greenwash.

 

[Edders23]

I can't believe you've all missed the BIG ONE

• Red diesel subsidies will remain for farmers and rail operators

 

[swt_passenger]

I can't believe you've all missed the BIG ONE

• Red diesel subsidies will remain for farmers and rail operators

We didn’t really miss it, as it was mentioned already in this thread, post #27...

 

[RPI]

Not true. Even the government's own analysis (which doesn't properly account for changes in land use and lifestyles due to road investments) predicts that the A417 scheme will increase CO2 emissions. The increase in traffic (which is the main point of the scheme) more than cancels out any improvements in vehicle efficiency.

https://highwaysengland.citizenspac...417_missing_link_scheme_assessment_report.pdf

But with more and more zero emission vehicles, which will only increase, then in the long term emissions will be reduced.

 

[Class 170101]

Good news for railway pubs!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-51833138

Personally they should have put alcohol prices up in shops but agree they should (and have done) leave pub prices alone.

 

[Edders23]

It's tricky to have two different rates for alcohol duty how do you police it ?

 

[47271]

As far as Scotland goes, the ScoGov has spent a higher proportion of its infrastructure spend on roads v rail than in England. Their green claims are largely greenwash.

I don't disagree with you, but to the out of Scotland reader, rail route expansion and electrification appears to have been more prolific in Scotland over the past ten years. It's often commented on in this forum.

Do you have any stats to back up the road vs rail Scotland vs England investment figures over the past ten years?

 

[bassmike]

No mention of the millions wasted on the so-called "smart" motorway scheme. The person who thought this up should be prosecuted for manslaughter . was it under Grayling-cant remember?

 

[Dai Corner]

I don't disagree with you, but to the out of Scotland reader, rail route expansion and electrification appears to have been more prolific in Scotland over the past ten years. It's often commented on in this forum.

Do you have any stats to back up the road vs rail Scotland vs England investment figures over the past ten years?

They've had some massive road projects

Forth Bridge £1.35bn
M74 extension £600m
A9 dualling £6bn

 

[47271]

A9 dualling £6bn

Source?

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Cottam Parkway station being confirmed is pretty big for the local area - and much needed, given the poor performance of buses in the area

I did not spot that. Great news. I still have a home in the UK and the proposed station is less than 4 miles from my UK house. Good news

 

[Mogster]

Nothing mentioned about the central Manchester rail gridlock then... Is the DfT hoping it’ll magically go away if they do nothing for long enough...

 

[Crisps]

Although I didn’t see the Budget, the local rag is reporting funding has been approved for the redevelopment of Darlington station: https://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/n...on-railway-station-redevelopment-will-funded/

 

[Grumpy Git]

Nothing mentioned about the central Manchester rail gridlock then... Is the DfT hoping it’ll magically go away if they do nothing for long enough

I did read (maybe on here) that the short term fix is less trains!

 

[InOban]

They've had some massive road projects

Forth Bridge £1.35bn
M74 extension £600m
A9 dualling £6bn

Plus the M8 completion and its associated works. Another 1 bn, I think.
And I can't remember if they paid some of the Aberdeen bypass.

 

[Dai Corner]

Sorry, the £6bn I stayed for the A9 dualling includes the A96 and some of it is planned future spending

https://www.scotsman.com/news/trans...ing-schemes-debate-transport-scotland-1406218

Compare with Wales with about half the population of Scotland and a First Minister who decided not to spend £1bn on a new section of M4 .

 

[47271]

Sorry, the £6bn I stayed for the A9 dualling includes the A96 and some of it is planned future spending

https://www.scotsman.com/news/trans...ing-schemes-debate-transport-scotland-1406218.

That's more like it, and I'd argue that at least £4.5bn of it is future spending. Within the scope of the current scheme, only Kincraig to Dalraddy has been completed on the A9, with Luncarty to Pass of Birnam due for completion this time next year. Everything else is at the survey, planning or Public Enquiry stage. The A96 is years, if not decades, off completion. Any part of either project could fall by the wayside.

And I can't remember if they paid some of the Aberdeen bypass.

Whoever paid, it pretty much cost £1bn and was delivered late and acrimoniously, like so many Scottish transport projects. I'm not defending what's happened in any way.

But however much is spent on new roads by Scottish Government, I'm still not convinced that it's proportionally more than for the UK as a whole?

 

[Bald Rick]

No mention of the millions wasted on the so-called "smart" motorway scheme. The person who thought this up should be prosecuted for manslaughter . was it under Grayling-cant remember?

Alistair Darling was the Secretary of State when the first one was authorised.

 

[47271]

Alistair Darling.

That's right. I always think of him when I drive on the M42.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Cottam Parkway station being confirmed is pretty big for the local area - and much needed, given the poor performance of buses in the area

Do you have a link for that confirmation? Also, Wikipedia seems to suggest that the station is being proposed as part of plans to build a new road to link the M55 and A563. If that's the case, isn't that potentially likely to increase, rather than reduce, road traffic?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

No mention of the millions wasted on the so-called "smart" motorway scheme. The person who thought this up should be prosecuted for manslaughter . was it under Grayling-cant remember?

Ah yes of course. Because prosecution and jail is always the appropriate penalty for making honest policy decisions that, with hindsight, turn out to look like probably mistakes.

 

[ashkeba]

So, freezing a tax paid by the vast majority of households and investing in the transport network used by the majority of passenger and freight traffic is “populist”?

Yes, because long term government policy is claimed to be to move people off fossil oil and to electric preferably renewables. Increasing the cost of fossil oil to make us move sooner and get a competitive and environmental advantage is a key part of that and delaying it is crude populism and writing cheques that future governments will have to cash.