Confirmed : HS2 West Midlands-Manchester line to be scrapped and replaced with other projects.

[12LDA28C]

Mr Sunak did say all the HS2 money will be spent on transport projects but not on HS2. Hopefully this will include projects to boost rail capacity in areas where the existing tracks are being used to bursting points. Although, I do suspect his motorist friendly policies will get HS2 money and some that invitation to tender for new rolling stock for Northern will be counted, when the government claim the money has been spent.

I notice you say "you aren't getting them". I don't know where I'll be living when any proposed infrastructure projects will actually be completed. I'll only back projects if I can see the value in them, whether they're local to where I currently live or not. After Northern and GWR were made to fight for the scraps that London Midland were throwing out, I feel Mr Sunak's annoucement is going to start a North vs South West fight for funding again. If it does please remember the North is 3 regions and the North West is one of the highest population regions and Yorkshire has a higher population than Scotland. Only the North East has a smaller population than the South West, even though it stretches for a very long distance.

And you believe a work of what Sunak says? His list of alternative projects will never come to fruition, apart from the ones that are already at least some way along the planning stages (but announced as 'new') and are nothing more than a desperate attempt to win over voters in advance of the next election. He can promise whatever he wants, safe in the knowledge that chances are he and his inept and corrupt Government won't be in power to deliver any of it.

 

[yorksrob]

But here's the issue

HS2 would have achieved achieve a return on investment, even if it's not net-positive it mostly washes it's own face. And it would enable much more rail freight, which isn't subsidized, and is an essential element of net-zero.

Local schemes like branch lines (and especially road schemes) wont deliver any additional revenue, they will be loss making, they simply become an ongoing liability to the transport budget, spreading existing funds more thinly.

Rail is most effective where flows are highly concentrated (both on costs and environmental performance) which is exactly why HS2 was conceived and reversing Beeching makes no sense.

All this tosh from Sunak about local benefits is just cheap talk, it will never happen because most of it isn't viable.


Wow, I'm glad our politicos understand so much about how railways work!

Point of order - isn't it the case that freight pays less overall towards the upkeep of the network in track access costs.

Fair point, but I'm sure you knew what I meant is that the FOCs don't receive any direct operating subsidy

And if you want to compare, then look at taxation for trucks and the cost of the damage trucks do to roads. Trains are at least an order of magnitude more efficient in infrastructure terms.

Apologies, I see that @paul1609 has already raised the above point.

To expand, the freight sector might not be being subsidised directly, but it is effectively being subsidised through the passenger business. And what do we passengers receive for this largesse ? Denigration of our services as being a drain on the taxpayer.

There are many excellent reasons for subsidising railfreight, but this should be done directly and transparently.

 

[HSTEd]

HS2 would have achieved achieve a return on investment, even if it's not net-positive it mostly washes it's own face. And it would enable much more rail freight, which isn't subsidized, and is an essential element of net-zero.

Point of order, freight is most certainly subsidised.
Unless you think that all rail freight operations use only ~£55 million a year worth of infrastructure?

The value of the paths through Castlefield is probably more than that alone!

Otherwise I largely agree with your post.
Local transport reopenings would just create more subsidy pits.

 

[Energy]

How could that be? we’re told on here even todays tiny network of Parcels & Supermarket trains can’t be expanded as there’s insufficient profit to incentivise the FOCs to do so.

Essentially Government would need to pass laws that made Road haulage significantly less attractive ie more expensive or subsidise rail.

The UK road haulage market is well developed. The 'golden triangle of logistics' in the east Midlands can reach most of the UK with a lorry in about 4 hours.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

This is the story of a Staffordshire (Whitmore) farmer who sold land to HS2 only last week.
He doesn't expect to get it back.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...ught-edward-cavenagh-mainwaring-land-for-what



Some of the detail of how HS2 went about its job in the area are revealing of a juggernaut out of financial control.

Well, it depends.

If you sell voluntarily ahead of a Compulsory Purchase Order (even with the threat of the CPO hanging over you), that is different than selling through CPO. Somewhere in the cobwebs of my mind is the principle that land/property forcibly bought (CPO having been served) has to be offered back to the original owner first if the scheme fails. But you would better get a current legal opinion on that as this is an Act of Parliament rather than a 'normal' CPO.

From the article, final two paragraphs, my bold:

If HS2 decides to sell the land again, he will be given first option to buy it back but that will be a struggle because he has to pay capital gains tax on the money he has received.

Cavenagh-Mainwaring also fears he will never be given that opportunity. “If we have this conversation in 10 years’ time, I think they will still own the land. This is one government shelving it – another may decide to build it again. I will be amazed if we get offered our land back. My legacy was soil and wildlife. HS2 own it now.”

In the housing/regeneration CPO's I had dealings with most people sold up voluntarily, eventually, after some huffing and puffing for a better compo package, seeing the writing on the wall.

 

[nuneatonmark]

Apologies in advance as I'm sure this has been answered already but I never understood why HS2 was specified for 400kmh. Would rescoping all, or just Birmingham to Manchester for 300kmh, save much money?

 

[Irascible]

Apologies in advance as I'm sure this has been answered already but I never understood why HS2 was specified for 400kmh. Would rescoping all, or just Birmingham to Manchester for 300kmh, save much money?

Not appreciably, I think ( someone who's either paid more attention or is involved can correct ) the difference would be ballasted track vs slab, and I'm not sure that'd even save anything in the long term.

The difference between 400kmh and 200kmh ( 125mph ) is about 9%, iirc. I suspect that might change if it was built through smoewhere like South Devon where you'd basically have to do alll the 400kmh in tunnel vs occasionally surfacing, but it's not.

 

[21C101]

On the Bright side phase 1 is too far constructed to get Canned so we are going to get a line from Euston (probably) to south of Rugely with a high speed branch into Birmingham facing both north and South.

Much as I think not safeguarding the land is a rubbish decision we are where we are.

Its time to look at four tracking Colwich Stafford with a second Shugborough Tunnel and grade separating Colwich.

We hear much about HS2 increasing capacity into Manchester, however doing something like what was done at Bermondsey at Slade Lane would provide extra capacity a lot more cheaply than £36 billion.

We knock ourselves down but Germany have a similar approach to high speed lines as residual HS2 - use them to provide extra capacity where needed, not just where they save time.

In places like France where extensive high speed lines, the lines they replaced are slow goat tracks (and said goat tracks now have appalling residual services).

We have widespread 125mph running and as the next generation is rolled out tbe signalling could provide for 140mph or even 150mph in places.

While I am saddened at the decision clearly something has gone badly wrong with the project. Was it wise to specify a 250mph formation when going above 200mph has disproportionate costs.

At the root of the problem is that the need was for relief of the WCML south of Rugby. The rest was pork barrel, snd was in some cases absurd crayoning (eg Toton for Nott and Derby).

Alas they have run out of pork to fill the barrel.

 

[Arkeeos]

Apologies in advance as I'm sure this has been answered already but I never understood why HS2 was specified for 400kmh. Would rescoping all, or just Birmingham to Manchester for 300kmh, save much money?

no, early on 125mph was considered but it only lead to a 9% cost decrease, with I believe most of that coming from the fact that the rolling stock is cheaper. 400km-300km would likely be negligible as the rolling stock would be the same.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Apologies in advance as I'm sure this has been answered already but I never understood why HS2 was specified for 400kmh. Would rescoping all, or just Birmingham to Manchester for 300kmh, save much money?

"World class" was the tag.
Nothing to be saved once the alignment parameters were fixed, and main structures already being built.
You could probably de-spec the railway works (contracts not yet placed), and the trains (spec not yet finalised), but it would be small fry compared to the total cost.
I'd expect the DfT will still wrestle over every new contract placed by HS2.
No more gold plating, for sure.

I should also think Network Rail will get to operate the truncated HS2.
The notion of an expansive national network replacing the classic one is now dead.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

On the Bright side HS1 is too far constructed to get Canned so we are going to get a line from Euston (probably) to south of Rugely with a high speed branch into Birmingham facing both north and South.

Wasn't HS1 the original line from London that linked with the Channel Tunnel?

 

[yorksrob]

Wasn't HS1 the original line from London that linked with the Channel Tunnel?

Strictly speaking that was the South Eastern mainline via Tonbridge and the London, Chatham and Dover route via Maidstone East, but I see where you're coming from

 

[21C101]

Wasn't HS1 the original line from London that linked with the Channel Tunnel?

Cheers, edited to phase 1

 

[Wolfie]

Something that should have been done a long time ago, a massive waste of taxpayers money for little benefit. 1/4 of the HS2 budget could have been used to nationalise Flybe, so imagine what all that money could have done to local transport across the whole of the UK!

Flybe was an utter basketcase. No one sane would have put a penny into saving it.

 

[The Planner]

Its time to look at four tracking Colwich Stafford with a second Shugborough Tunnel and grade separating Colwich.

Already been done, the solution was the Stafford by pass, ironically used by phase 2A for some of its length.

 

[snowball]

Somewhere in the cobwebs of my mind is the principle that land/property forcibly bought (CPO having been served) has to be offered back to the original owner first if the scheme fails.

The Crichel Down rules.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Already been done, the solution was the Stafford by pass, ironically used by phase 2A for some of its length.

When NR has recovered its composure from the HS2 shocks, it should re-promote the Stafford by-pass.
I seem to remember it was binned at the time of the Norton Bridge work, because HS2 was the obvious solution.
New fast lines Rugeley-Cold Meece, with local and freight traffic on the current route, would really help capacity.
They could even use some of the HS2 alignment and the land already purchased...
Trouble is, solutions like this were not in Rishi's cornucopia of alternative projects, and there would be local opposition to "HS2 by other means"

 

[Arkeeos]

Trouble is, solutions like this were not in Rishi's cornucopia of alternative projects.

Its essentially a dump of all considered transport projects from the past decade in marginals, the issue being that most of those are transport projects devised under the assumption that HS2 will happen. The transport projects that would be suggested if HS2 didn't exist are totally different to the ones thought up in a world with it.

 

[21C101]

When NR has recovered its composure from the HS2 shocks, it should re-promote the Stafford by-pass.
I seem to remember it was binned at the time of the Norton Bridge work, because HS2 was the obvious solution.
New fast lines Rugeley-Cold Meece, with local and freight traffic on the current route, would really help capacity.
They could even use some of the HS2 alignment and the land already purchased...
Trouble is, solutions like this were not in Rishi's cornucopia of alternative projects, and there would be local opposition to "HS2 by other means"

Yes, time for NR to dust off the plans and circulate them.

As to Rishis list, all that is is a cobbling together of possible projects proposed for the next 10 - 15 years. Its about as far from set in stone as you can get.

 

[Adrian1980uk]

Its essentially a dump of all considered transport projects from the past decade in marginals, the issue being that most of those are transport projects devised under the assumption that HS2 will happen. The transport projects that would be suggested if HS2 didn't exist are totally different to the ones thought up in a world with it.

Let's not read more into the speech then what it is,

R: I'm announcing HS2 is not going to Manchester because I want to save money, what can I offer to draw attention away from that.

Advisor: let's get a list of transport project that have been talked about.

R: but won't they cost money too

A: yes but here's the trick, you announce them as if they're new funding and we'll have about 5 years consultation so minimal money will need to be spent in the first 5 years and the consultation will stop most of them for environmental concerns so you won't have to build them anyway.

 

[The Planner]

When NR has recovered its composure from the HS2 shocks, it should re-promote the Stafford by-pass.
I seem to remember it was binned at the time of the Norton Bridge work, because HS2 was the obvious solution.
New fast lines Rugeley-Cold Meece, with local and freight traffic on the current route, would really help capacity.
They could even use some of the HS2 alignment and the land already purchased...
Trouble is, solutions like this were not in Rishi's cornucopia of alternative projects, and there would be local opposition to "HS2 by other means"

This is between Rugeley North and Colwich, wonder what would fit well in that cage above the Down Fast signal that could point to the right?

 

[Chris 76]

When NR has recovered its composure from the HS2 shocks, it should re-promote the Stafford by-pass.
I seem to remember it was binned at the time of the Norton Bridge work, because HS2 was the obvious solution.
New fast lines Rugeley-Cold Meece, with local and freight traffic on the current route, would really help capacity.
They could even use some of the HS2 alignment and the land already purchased...
Trouble is, solutions like this were not in Rishi's cornucopia of alternative projects, and there would be local opposition to "HS2 by other means"

Yes, some sort of Stafford by-pass is obviously needed, and not four-tracking through Shugborough which would be very environmentally destructive (National Trust estate, edge of Cannock Chase, local villages). Anti-HS2 campaigners have always said they're not opposed to rail improvements in principal, just HS2 as the 'wrong scheme'. So, in a few years Network Rail (or Great British Railways if that absurdly named body is ever created) should propose a scheme to provide the capacity and speed improvements needed between the Midlands and North West. They should ensure broad cross-party support from MPs and Mayors. Then face down the inevitable objectors.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

On the Bright side phase 1 is too far constructed to get Canned so we are going to get a line from Euston (probably) to south of Rugely with a high speed branch into Birmingham facing both north and South.

Much as I think not safeguarding the land is a rubbish decision we are where we are.

Its time to look at four tracking Colwich Stafford with a second Shugborough Tunnel and grade separating Colwich.

We hear much about HS2 increasing capacity into Manchester, however doing something like what was done at Bermondsey at Slade Lane would provide extra capacity a lot more cheaply than £36 billion.

We knock ourselves down but Germany have a similar approach to high speed lines as residual HS2 - use them to provide extra capacity where needed, not just where they save time.

In places like France where extensive high speed lines, the lines they replaced are slow goat tracks (and said goat tracks now have appalling residual services).

We have widespread 125mph running and as the next generation is rolled out tbe signalling could provide for 140mph or even 150mph in places.

While I am saddened at the decision clearly something has gone badly wrong with the project. Was it wise to specify a 250mph formation when going above 200mph has disproportionate costs.

At the root of the problem is that the need was for relief of the WCML south of Rugby. The rest was pork barrel, snd was in some cases absurd crayoning (eg Toton for Nott and Derby).

Alas they have run out of pork to fill the barrel.

Excellent points well made and what we need from Labour now is a broader vision of what public transport needs to look like across the whole country. They also need to confront the underlying issues that frustrate the speed at which these projects can be built.

 

[Solweytracker]

Yes, time for NR to dust off the plans and circulate them.

As to Rishis list, all that is is a cobbling together of possible projects proposed for the next 10 - 15 years. Its about as far from set in stone as you can get.

I accept it is a big consolation that the Handsacre Link is not being scrapped. However the flows feeding in/out of it to the WCML, together with the expected expansion of freight Felixstowe -Nuneaton (partially augmented by the Ely Junction Upgrade), will surely make Handsacre Jcn -Colwich -2track Shugborough -Stafford North a mother of bottlenecks on an international scale, taking account the interweaving from line to line and the linespeed differentials involved? Apologies for the cliche.

Hopefully various industry stakeholders will support the case for funded enhancement at Colwich/Shugborough to offset the consequential longterm loss of future capacity and inherent delays, if not the most of HS2 2a. The Greengauge 'HS2 Curtailed' article is a start.

 

[21C101]

I accept it is a big consolation that the Handsacre Link is not being scrapped. However the flows feeding in/out of it to the WCML, together with the expected expansion of freight Felixstowe -Nuneaton (partially augmented by the Ely Junction Upgrade), will surely make Handsacre Jcn -Colwich -2track Shugborough -Stafford North a mother of bottlenecks on an international scale, taking account the interweaving from line to line and the linespeed differentials involved? Apologies for the cliche.

Hopefully various industry stakeholders will support the case for funded enhancement at Colwich/Shugborough to offset the consequential longterm loss of future capacity and inherent delays, if not the most of HS2 2a. The Greengauge 'HS2 Curtailed' article is a start.

If the likes of Greengauge had been listened to a lot of pain and wasted money might have been avoided.

Yes Colwich to Stafford is going to be a monumental bottleneck once HS2 feeds into the Trent Valley.

The daft thing is that 2a is probably the cheapest bit of HS2 to build with the least opposition.

 

[northwichcat]

And you believe a work of what Sunak says? His list of alternative projects will never come to fruition, apart from the ones that are already at least some way along the planning stages (but announced as 'new') and are nothing more than a desperate attempt to win over voters in advance of the next election. He can promise whatever he wants, safe in the knowledge that chances are he and his inept and corrupt Government won't be in power to deliver any of it.

I believe Sunak will quote a figure of what he hoped the second part of HS2 will cost and then the projects will include things that were already announced and were supposed to occur alongside HS2.

I don't think he's going as far as announcing anything to please voters knowing they won't have to deliver it. If that was the case why pull the Midland Mainline upgrade that was already a cheaper alternative to taking HS2 to Leeds?

 

[Greybeard33]

When NR has recovered its composure from the HS2 shocks, it should re-promote the Stafford by-pass.
I seem to remember it was binned at the time of the Norton Bridge work, because HS2 was the obvious solution.
New fast lines Rugeley-Cold Meece, with local and freight traffic on the current route, would really help capacity.
They could even use some of the HS2 alignment and the land already purchased...
Trouble is, solutions like this were not in Rishi's cornucopia of alternative projects, and there would be local opposition to "HS2 by other means"

I think it is no accident that the Network North list did not include any proposals for capacity improvement between Colwich and Crewe. That would have invited embarrassing value for money comparisons with Phase 2a.
"Don't confuse me with facts, my mind is made up."
"Yes, Prime Minister."

 

[Energy]

The daft thing is that 2a is probably the cheapest bit of HS2 to build with the least opposition.

Indeed, if Rishi's £36bn plan was more than a lowly PDF then spending £5bn on 2a and subsequently unclogging the Trent Valley would be a good spend. That would be assuming that Rishi intends to follow through with his plan to spend money and ignoring his obvious dislike of HS2.

Rishi has a remarkable ability to somehow annoy everyone on both sides. Moving 2b to NPR and leaving it to a future government would be a reasonable compromise, but then he couldn't pretend to magic up £36bn for other projects (well 'ideas' at best) and acknowledge that increased inflation from his predecessor and Britain's dependence on gas has increased the cost of the Treasury's index-linked loans. Or acknowledge that the Treasury should have sorted out HS2 financing back when interest was low... like when Rishi was chancellor...

Realistically Rishi would only ride HS2 once on a press trip, he'd rather take a helicopter.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Excellent points well made and what we need from Labour now is a broader vision of what public transport needs to look like across the whole country. They also need to confront the underlying issues that frustrate the speed at which these projects can be built.

What you need from Labour and what you will actually receive, having listened to Starmer's recent media statements, are two totally different entities.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

I accept it is a big consolation that the Handsacre Link is not being scrapped. However the flows feeding in/out of it to the WCML, together with the expected expansion of freight Felixstowe -Nuneaton (partially augmented by the Ely Junction Upgrade), will surely make Handsacre Jcn -Colwich -2track Shugborough -Stafford North a mother of bottlenecks on an international scale, taking account the interweaving from line to line and the linespeed differentials involved? Apologies for the cliche.

Hopefully various industry stakeholders will support the case for funded enhancement at Colwich/Shugborough to offset the consequential longterm loss of future capacity and inherent delays, if not the most of HS2 2a. The Greengauge 'HS2 Curtailed' article is a start.

How many extra trains will be imposed on this section vs what already travel that way?

We had years of Digswell viaduct not being suitable for anymore traffic yet more traffic was added. Conversely its a relatively short section to quadruple so would seem an appropriate recipient of the phase 2 "windfall".