HLOS for CP6 (2019-24)

[The Planner]

Can they let us know asap then as we are blocking Euston over the bank holiday for HS2

 

[swt_passenger]

Given public spending in CP6 will be something on order of £3500 billion, buying votes by approving rail spending is hardly expensive.

Really? I think you may have overestimated...

 

[MarkRedon]

Really? I think you may have overestimated...

It's an underestimate - something nearer £4000 bn. CP6 runs five years. Aggregate government spending in 2013/4 was £722.9 bn. HS2 will run at under 1% of GDP at all or most points during its construction. We aren't quite yet at Victorian levels of capital investment...

 

[HowardGWR]

It's an underestimate - something nearer £4000 bn. CP6 runs five years. Aggregate government spending in 2013/4 was £722.9 bn. HS2 will run at under 1% of GDP at all or most points during its construction. We aren't quite yet at Victorian levels of capital investment...

Look again. The millions and billions were mixed up.

 

[najaB]

Look again. The millions and billions were mixed up.

Not seeing the problem - c £700B x 5 = £3500B.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

HS2 isn't in the NR CPx settlements (except the bits which impact on the classic network).
I doubt the Treasury thinks rail spending is a priority a the moment, beyond finishing existing projects.
There are far greater spending issues, and they will want payback within a parliament.

 

[HowardGWR]

Not seeing the problem - c £700B x 5 = £3500B.

Neither am I now; misread what was being put forward.

 

[swt_passenger]

Neither am I now; misread what was being put forward.

Yes, I confused spending on CP6 with total spending on all activities as well as CP6. It was an odd way for HSTEd to describe it IMHO, after all it is only the railway that is on CP6...

 

[HSTEd]

Yes, I confused spending on CP6 with total spending on all activities as well as CP6. It was an odd way for HSTEd to describe it IMHO, after all it is only the railway that is on CP6...

I couldn't remember the years that CP6 actually covers, otherwise I would have used those.

However it does demonstrate just how small spending on infrastructure is in Britain these days.
Ideally we should be spending something like 5% of GDP.... which would be something like £560bn in CP6, although that would be spread over roads, energy infrastructure, railways and all sorts of other things.

 

[Olaf]

T
...
Given that Rail upgrade projects are a negligible component of public spending, I very much doubt that any will be seriously curtailed as a result of the election.
It is also worth noting that funding infrastructure is a major labour policy, so support for CR2 et al will likely be forthcoming from the opposition benches



Given public spending in CP6 will be something on order of £3500 billion, buying votes by approving rail spending is hardly expensive.

CR2, HS2 (later phases) are very expensive, and unfunded as of yet, but I am assuming you mean upgrades under NR's remit.

I am sure there will be some that authorised, but from CP6's funding commitments, there is already the GBP 2.6 Billion (and in need of an upward revision) that has not yet been recovered from asset sales, the potential shift of emphasis to roads, and further cuts to the transport budget to provide extra funding for security, defence, heath and welfare. Investment will continue, probably at reduced levels compared to CP4 and CP5, with the cuts principally targeting operation costs. At present there is only a commitment to fund operations (OMR) at a reduced level with every upgrade to be handled separately.

As I said early; from previous parliaments with narrow majorities, Governing Party dissenters only need to threaten to transfer their objections to votes on more critical topics to block legislation - this was illustrated by the actions of the LibDems in the Cameron coalition Government.

 

[Olaf]

In the current febrile atmosphere, even starting up HS2 might be problematic.
Tory MPs in the Chilterns and (eg) Lichfield are still very hostile.
Labour might support HS2 in principle but they are not going to let any opportunity pass to stall the government.

Spot-on. Their position has been strengthened by the narrow majority, they only need to agree tactics between themselves to become very effective.

Anything passed by Government that depends on the opposition support will be damaging.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Spot-on. Their position has been strengthened by the narrow majority, they only need to agree tactics between themselves to become very effective.

Anything passed by Government that depends on the opposition support will be damaging.

Turkeys don't vote for Christmas

 

[Olaf]

Turkeys don't vote for Christmas

They are representing their constituents opinions so it to be fully expected - the fact that others have fallen for the alleged economic benefits to Northern cities arising from HS2 (was CR2 - typo) is not their concern.

 

[The Ham]

They are representing their constituents opinions so it to be fully expected - the fact that others have fallen for the alleged economic benefits to Northern cities arising from CR2 is not their concern.

Crossrail 2 benefits northern cities?!?!?

I would argue that the Southern Approach to Heathrow (assuming services run through to Paddington and call at OCC) combined with HS2 would bring them more in the way of benefits, but then what do I know as some of my assumptions (although I don't get told what by certain posters when I ask them) are wrong.

 

[Camden]

Turkeys don't vote for Christmas

Turkeys don't vote

 

[Olaf]

Crossrail 2 benefits northern cities?!?!?
.

Sorry, typo - HS2.

 

[Camden]

HS2 benefits northern cities?!?!?

 

[moggie]

All this talk about a few puffed up self important Tory guerrilla's ambushing May makes the less than convincing assumption that the whole of the opposition would vote to block whatever rail investment proposal was on the table.

What would be the logic. Labour is known to be behind all significant rail projects even if there are, like the Tories a few dissenters in the ranks. Other than environmental issues I can't see transport figuring too highly in the forthcoming battles for supremacy. They'll have plenty of opportunity in areas of real disagreement to rub Teresa's nose in it. Every picture of Teresa shows she's already smelling the fear.

 

[The Ham]

HS2 benefits northern cities?!?!?

It depends on how the extra paths on the existing network are going to be used.

A lot of people assist to assume that they would be used by more long distance services. Which could be true, however it is more likely that most new paths are used by local services.

If it is the case that it asks more local services then even an extra 3tph could be quite a significant improvement to rail services. However it could be that the void be more.

If you have a long distance service that serves a series of towns and cities and it is removed (i.e. moved to HS2) then you could see a number of local services each centered around a different city replace it.

Not knowing which services will be released by HS2 I can't give an example nor the exact numbers for each place, but I am sure that many on here wood be able to give examples of how useful a few extra paths would be for their city.

Even London would benefit, in that there could be up to 10 local services an hour over the southern WCML and the potential for a few extra over the Southern​ ECML.

 

[Olaf]

All this talk about a few puffed up self important Tory guerrilla's ambushing May makes the less than convincing assumption that the whole of the opposition would vote to block whatever rail investment proposal was on the table.
...

Not self-appointed; - elected by and representing their constituencies.

As already stated - they only need to transfer their opposition to a key issues such as annual budget bill to assert their opposition.

 

[Olaf]

HS2 benefits northern cities?!?!?

Yes, hmm. The points raised have been ignored by the weight of opinion, rather than evidence-based analysis. HS2 is a double-edged sword, but most of those voting it through are likely to have left Parliament by the time the impact on provincial economies is realised.

 

[snowball]

Scottish Parliament:

Gail Ross (Caithness and Sutherland and Ross) (Scottish National Party): To ask the Scottish Government when it will publish the High Level Output Specification and Statement of Funds Available for Control Period 6 (CP6), spanning the period from April 2019 to March 2024.
(S5W-9983)

Humza Yousaf: Under notice from the Office of Rail and Road (ORR) I have a statutory duty to produce a High Level Output Specification, and Statement of Funds Available, or likely to be made available by 20 July 2017. This will be subject to timely confirmation from HM Treasury of both adequate funds and governance arrangements which do not compromise the Scottish Government’s discretion with current constitutional arrangements for rail.

 

[cle]

It depends on how the extra paths on the existing network are going to be used.

A lot of people assist to assume that they would be used by more long distance services. Which could be true, however it is more likely that most new paths are used by local services.

If it is the case that it asks more local services then even an extra 3tph could be quite a significant improvement to rail services. However it could be that the void be more.

If you have a long distance service that serves a series of towns and cities and it is removed (i.e. moved to HS2) then you could see a number of local services each centered around a different city replace it.

Not knowing which services will be released by HS2 I can't give an example nor the exact numbers for each place, but I am sure that many on here wood be able to give examples of how useful a few extra paths would be for their city.

Even London would benefit, in that there could be up to 10 local services an hour over the southern WCML and the potential for a few extra over the Southern​ ECML.

Liverpool perhaps not, as the approach is the same and probably same paths.

Manchester - the current Virgin paths will be available to repurpose. Possibly similar services, but maybe more scope for stops at Congleton, Macclesfield etc to make it more semi-fast and useful within the NW.

Leeds not sure, again I'd expect the same services but to call at all the ECML usuals, and possibly bringing in Huntingdon or Hitchin. Ditto for Bletchley if E/W happens - plus the renaissance of Watford Junction!

 

[squizzler]

I understand that the so-called "austerity" programme is under sustained attack and may cease to be government policy.

There is also the policy of Labour to nationalise the railways. Announcing further enhancements to the network might be the best way of heading off the public's desire to see nationalisation happen.

With deferred electrification schemes being "shovel ready" and a lot of jobs being created by the work itself and the equipment suppliers, would I be the only one thinking that more wiring could be back with a bang shortly?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I understand that the so-called "austerity" programme is under sustained attack and may cease to be government policy.

There is also the policy of Labour to nationalise the railways. Announcing further enhancements to the network might be the best way of heading off the public's desire to see nationalisation happen.

With deferred electrification schemes being "shovel ready" and a lot of jobs being created by the work itself and the equipment suppliers, would I be the only one thinking that more wiring could be back with a bang shortly?

It's one of the paradoxes of the age that austerity (in terms of government revenue spending) was matched by an unprecedented explosion of capital projects, which gave us the electrification programme.
The reversal of that policy would actually mean less for rail.
Anyway, no government in its right mind would commit more electrification projects with an organisation that has so spectacularly failed to deliver its current projects.
GW, EGIP and NW projects have to complete before any more will be started.
And no electrification scheme is ever "shovel ready", as they take years to design and cost, by which time somebody will have changed the requirement and specification.

Nationalisation won't change anything on the infrastructure front, as Network Rail is already totally under government control.

 

[snowball]

Lots of people in other threads talking about the dropping of electrification west of Cardiff, north of Kettering/Corby, and Oxenholme-Windermere.

Here's what the DfT has to say on the HLOS and SoFA:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/high-level-output-specification-2017

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/rail-infrastructure-funding-2019-to-2024

Also this press release is out and has been linked in other threads:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/...assengers-in-wales-the-midlands-and-the-north

Also guidance to the ORR:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/railways-guidance-to-the-office-of-rail-and-road

and a statement about bi-modes:

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/rail-update-bi-mode-train-technology

Plus several documents about franchising and the closure of Norton Bridge, which I'll leave to others.

 

[absolutelymilk]

Lots of people in other threads talking about the dropping of electrification west of Cardiff, north of Kettering/Corby, and Oxenholme-Windermere.

Here's what the DfT has to say on the HLOS and SoFA:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/high-level-output-specification-2017

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/rail-infrastructure-funding-2019-to-2024

So will possible enhancements be published in October?

 

[coppercapped]

So will possible enhancements be published in October?

No. Any enhancements will be made public if, and only if, the Routes have some projects completely prepared and fully costed.

This approach has been explained in other posts.

 

[WatcherZero]

On the plus side at least with this way of working with enhancements being paid and supported by 3rd parties through the sponsorship system rather than applications for funding from Dft/Network Rail central pots it should make it a lot harder for the transport secretary to cancel projects though the 3rd parties would have to pick up the bulk of cost escalation.

 

[snowball]

Are any 3rd parties going to come forward with money?