More Delay for HS2, and how should we proceed?

[Chester1]

While I'm happy to invest moderate amounts of time to not allow a disgraceful issue to be swept under the carpet, I'm not going to invest the sorts of time and energy wasting engagement that I saw sapping others a number of years ago. As I said earlier, Liverpool has been gaslit for years.

Indeed, by yourself extolling such effort to seemingly only come up with reasons why the current situation is Liverpool's own fault (when those 14 years have been filled with proactive multi-party effort) some may start to doubt the statements you make.

Its reasonable to ask about the four sites you have mentioned. I am personally curious as to where they are. The only obvious ones to me are expanding Lime Street and looping around to a station next to Moorfields.

 

[The Planner]

Its reasonable to ask about the four sites you have mentioned. I am personally curious as to where they are. The only obvious ones to me are expanding Lime Street and looping around to a station next to Moorfields.

Lime St is one of them, and probably the most logical anyway.

 

[SynthD]

Lime St is one of them, and probably the most logical anyway.

What are the other three? What part of Lime St would it take over?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

What part of Lime St would it take over?

The longest current platform at Lime St is 270m (P6 and 9, 10 is 267m).
A 400m length would stretch to the east end of Russell St tunnel.
You'd presumably need two 400m platforms, or one with two 400m faces.
It would probably take up the space of both fast lines unless the cutting/tunnel is widened.
But it would give you an HS2/NPR terminal (NPR trains won't need 400m length).
The rest of the station, presumably the north side, would need to be rationalised for the non-HS traffic.
Something would need to be done about the slow route out to Speke.

 

[Chester1]

The longest current platform at Lime St is 270m (P6 and 9, 10 is 267m).
A 400m length would stretch to the east end of Russell St tunnel.
You'd presumably need two 400m platforms, or one with two 400m faces.
It would probably take up the space of both fast lines unless the cutting/tunnel is widened.
But it would give you an HS2/NPR terminal (NPR trains won't need 400m length).
The rest of the station, presumably the north side, would need to be rationalised for the non-HS traffic.
Something would need to be done about the slow route out to Speke.

400m platforms would require substantial demolition work at Lime Street. My view is that 200m long trains to London at 2tph would be sufficient and the priority should be 4tph to Piccadilly and Leeds via NPR. The alternative to expanding footprint of Lime Street would be resurrecting half a century old plans to divert local Lime Street services onto what is now Merseyrail. Both options have positives and negatives.

 

[The Ham]

While I'm happy to invest moderate amounts of time to not allow a disgraceful issue to be swept under the carpet, I'm not going to invest the sorts of time and energy wasting engagement that I saw sapping others a number of years ago. As I said earlier, Liverpool has been gaslit for years.

Indeed, by yourself extolling such effort to seemingly only come up with reasons why the current situation is Liverpool's own fault (when those 14 years have been filled with proactive multi-party effort) some may start to doubt the statements you make.

I'm not asking for war and peace, I'm asking for details of those 4 station sites. Presumably, from what you said, from the outcome of the commission - unless there's some other body which had looked at this.

I was only highlighting that there could be a perception that by not appearing to be proactive that it's possible for a city to create a situation where it ends up not achieving what it could have done by being more proactive.

For example, pushing for the next steps of infrastructure, highlighting the journey time savings for travel to London with HS2 and not comparing itself to other cities but rather highlighting what's good about itself.

Where have I tried to gas light you (or Liverpool), given that's the second post in which you've mentioned it?

Are you going to answer my question about if the situation was related to Exeter and Bristol, which city is likely to see the higher train frequency?

I've clearly said that I'm sympathetic to Liverpool, I've mostly used information from an article (which appears to be by someone from Liverpool) which is also sympathetic (actually probably very pro Liverpool) to the situation regarding HS2, I've shown an interest in that you think - but want more details.

I've not tried to make it about how Liverpool compares to other cities, I've accepted that there's the data which says Liverpool could (how likely that is we may disagree on) see negative GDP.

In short I don't think I'm the person you should be fighting with.

 

[Snow1964]

The Independent is reporting PrimeMinister and Chancellor had discussions on cancelling Manchester section

Rishi Sunak and Jeremy Hunt are in discussions about scrapping the second stage of the HS2 rail project as costs spiral amid severe delays.

A cost estimate, seen by The Independent, reveals that the government has already spent £2.3bn on stage two of the high-speed railway from Birmingham to Manchester but shelving the northern phase would save up to £34bn.

The documents, discussed at a meeting at No 10 on Tuesday headlined “chancellor and prime minister bilat”, suggest the £2.3bn is now not recoverable even if it is cancelled. The Independent understands talks are ongoing.

It comes as the chancellor tries to find more economic headroom as he faces growing pressure from Tory MPs to offer tax cuts before the next election.

Rishi Sunak and Jeremy Hunt in talks to scrap phase two of HS2 as costs spiral

Exclusive: PM and chancellor discuss halting ‘unachieveable’ leg of rail line from Birmingham to Manchester

www.independent.co.uk

 

[josh-j]

"Save" up to £34bn, as if it's all expenditure and no gain. These people have spent years messing up the project seemingly in order to manufacture excuses to cancel as much of it as possible.

It says a lot about this style of government that it sees building a bit of railway as impossible to achieve. The ideological belief that public investment is bad, meanwhile other countries seem to do just fine with it.

 

[James Finch]

The only benefit from this that I can see is if it actually scrapped by Sunak, Labour and Starmer (who are highly likely to be in office within the next 18 months) have committed to HS2/NPR (HS3) in full, and so any Phase 2B infrastructure that is built will be more than "the bare minimum for HS2" (particularly around the design of Manchester Piccadilly), and should give some scope for good quality infrastructure for anywhere north of Crewe. This (I assume) would also apply to Leeds/The Midlands via a possible Phase 2C/Phase 3.

(Yes, I accept any delay/modification to the plans at this point will cost serious money)

 

[NotATrainspott]

Unfortunately for everyone involved, the same construction inflation that is obliterating infrastructure schemes up and down the country will also make maintenance or any alternative improvements unviable as well. I'd hate to see the cost of any HS2 alternative scheme now.

The fundamental reality here is that the country is in a dire economic state worse than it was 15 years ago. Back then, we had an excess of unemployed workers that we could commit towards infrastructure schemes. Now, we don't.

If this isn't fixed then the roads and railways won't expand at all, and the only way that we'll be able to manage capacity constraints is by increasing ticket fares until people aren't travelling any more when it's too busy. That won't help the economy either.

HS2 and other schemes are victims of political myopia. Sometimes we have to upset voters in the short term in order to deliver things for the long term. For HS2, that would have meant rejecting all of the technically unnecessary tunnelling that still failed to satisfy the NIMBYs. Issues that fade away after 10-15 years once trees grow back aren't really issues worth caring about for national infrastructure projects.

 

[snowball]

There is to be an item, or maybe just a mention, later during tonight's Newsnight on BBC2.

Edit: has now happened, it was very short, just after 22:45, not very illuminating.

 

[josh-j]

The worst way to deal with the economic situation is to cut back public investment. It is deliberate economic harm at this point, and of course by no means exclusive to HS2 and the railway.

It's maddening to be honest. We deserve so much better than all this penny pinching. It isn't even that much money in the grand scheme of things.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

It doesn't look like curtains for Phase 2, just that spend and timing of big projects is under review for the autumn budget round.
And the media don't really understand the phasing anyway.
Where has £2.3 billion been spent on Phase 2?
Possibly on land purchase Lichfield-Crewe and all the planning and parliamentary work on to Manchester, and all the aborted/suspended work on the Phase 2b eastern and western legs.
Hardly anything has been spent on work on the ground.

 

[WatcherZero]

There is to be an item, or maybe just a mention, later during tonight's Newsnight on BBC2.

Edit: has now happened, it was very short, just after 22:45, not very illuminating.

Summary being that the government is strongly pushing back against the suggestion its cancelling it and saying its just one of several large capital projects that get re-evaluated by the Treasury ahead of every budget.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

It doesn't look like curtains for Phase 2, just that spend and timing of big projects is under review for the autumn budget round.
And the media don't really understand the phasing anyway.
Where has £2.3 billion been spent on Phase 2?
Possibly on land purchase Lichfield-Crewe and all the planning and parliamentary work - not much in terms of shovels in the ground.

When you've got a school estate that has been neglected by all parties for over two decades 2.3B would have gone some way to sorting that out had the money not been wasted though but granted just one of many examples of govt waste as it ever was.

 

[The Ham]

Unfortunately for everyone involved, the same construction inflation that is obliterating infrastructure schemes up and down the country will also make maintenance or any alternative improvements unviable as well. I'd hate to see the cost of any HS2 alternative scheme now.

The fundamental reality here is that the country is in a dire economic state worse than it was 15 years ago. Back then, we had an excess of unemployed workers that we could commit towards infrastructure schemes. Now, we don't.

If this isn't fixed then the roads and railways won't expand at all, and the only way that we'll be able to manage capacity constraints is by increasing ticket fares until people aren't travelling any more when it's too busy. That won't help the economy either.

HS2 and other schemes are victims of political myopia. Sometimes we have to upset voters in the short term in order to deliver things for the long term. For HS2, that would have meant rejecting all of the technically unnecessary tunnelling that still failed to satisfy the NIMBYs. Issues that fade away after 10-15 years once trees grow back aren't really issues worth caring about for national infrastructure projects.

Construction inflation trends to be higher than general inflation, so delaying infrastructure projects only makes them more expensive.

Arguably, the reason we're in the situation we're in is down to lack of investment some of that is down to low taxes (encouraging removal of funds from business rather than investment - in that if you have a choice between spending money or paying taxes most would prefer to spend) or down to the "understanding" that all spending is bad rather than investment is needed by government.

When you've got a school estate that has been neglected by all parties for over two decades 2.3B would have gone some way to sorting that out had the money not been wasted though but granted just one of many examples of govt waste as it ever was.

Arguably it shouldn't be waste, unlike some of the other losses (PPE).

 

[Bald Rick]

What a pity that £2.3bn on Phase 2 couldn't have found £100M(?, £200m?) for speeding up the 25 (?)mph at Stone on the Birmingham - Manchesters. Must be worth 2 mins of journey time.. which per minute saved would surely trump HS2 by a hell of a margin. Little improvements delivered sooner.. short term always trumps an uncertain long term

To raise the linespeed there (it’s been looked at) means wholesale realignment, which means relocating and rebuilding the station, significant land take and property demolition. And it saves 1 minute at most.

It would be easier and cheaper to close Stone station and build a cut off, a bit like the Norton Bridge job. That was £250m a decade ago.

But then if you’re building a new line in that part of Staffordshire, you can get much more benefit than 1 minute to a few trains an hour (that probably couldn’t be fully taken into the timetable because of other constraints) by making it a bit longer to bypass a bit more of the existing line to provide extra capacity….

 

[Mag_seven]

Another reminder that this thread is about delays to HS2.

If you think the scheme should be scrapped then please use this thread:

Should HS2 be scrapped?

mod note - split from: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/more-delay-for-hs2.242566/ Think it might be time to put it out its misery and invest elsewhere. Scrap the whole thing.

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[brad465]

Now got reported on the BBC:

HS2: Government refuses to guarantee Manchester branch

The prime minister and chancellor are said to have concerns over spiralling costs and delays.

www.bbc.co.uk

The government has refused to guarantee the future of the HS2 rail line between Birmingham and Manchester.
A Downing Street spokesperson instead suggested that ministers would need to balance the interests of "passengers and taxpayers".
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and Chancellor Jeremy Hunt met on Wednesday and discussed the HS2 project.
Their primary concerns are said to be over spiralling costs and delays to the project.
"Spades are already in the ground on our HS2 programme and we're focused on delivering it," the prime minister's official spokesman said, but would not promise that the line would go to Manchester.
Asked whether the prime minister was committed to the line going to Manchester, the spokesman said: "We are committed to HS2, to the project."
However, Number Ten did confirm that ministers were looking at "rephasing" the project, hinting at a possible delay.
Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham said: "Why should it be the North of England that pays the price?
"What we are going to end up with here is in the southern half of the country, a modern, high-speed rail network, and the northern half of the country left with crumbling Victorian infrastructure. That won't level us up it will do the exact opposite."
In March, Transport Secretary Mark Harper announced that work on a new station at London Euston would be pushed back by two years because of rising costs.
At the same time, the government said the section between Birmingham and Crewe would be delayed by two years, to spread out spending.
Costs around HS2 have increased significantly and are now well above its original budget of £33bn, which was set a decade ago when work on the line began.
It was originally planned for HS2 to run between London to Birmingham before splitting into two sections to Manchester and Leeds.
But two years ago, plans for the Eastern leg from Birmingham to Leeds were cut back so the new line would stop at the East Midlands.
A spokesperson for the High Speed Rail Group said scrapping phase two would be a "disaster" for the North of England and the Midlands and the "ultimate U-turn".
He added: "The government needs to kill the speculation and make its intentions clear, and it ought to commit clearly and unambiguously to delivering the project as planned. The 30,000 people delivering HS2 deserve this. Our future generations deserve this. The North and Midlands deserve this."

 

[Wynd]

I was recently corrected for saying this would only go to Birmingham. Now Manchester is in serious doubt....but worst of all, Euston?!

Without a central London connection, from my very northerly perspective, this is a pointless exercise. OOC is miles away!

The most depressing part of all this, the effective scaling back, is that we now wont see a proper infrastructure project for decades, if not our lifetimes including for those of us under 40.

This is in no way something to celebrate and only further represents the decline of the State.

Whitehall couldn't grow a sunflower, let alone an economy.

I take absolutely zero pleasure in having foreseen that this will only ever be London to Birmingham.


What can you say at this point.

I will be entirely unsurprised to never see a HS2 machine north of Birmingham, and look forwards to sanity prevailing for anyone still peddling the myth that any HS2 services will get to Scotland.

As I have already said, you cannot cut your way to growth. It seems the Treasury are keen to cut the UK in to penury.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I can understand the concern about cost explosion and the belief that the project in its present form is "undeliverable".
I could also understand a freeze on awarding contracts for Phase 2a until overall HS2 costs stabilise and are seen to be under control.
But it would be really tough if the Crewe-Manchester bill now going through parliament was scrapped.
That would put the skids under NPR (beyond the present TRU project), and really damage the levelling up agenda, as Andy Burnham fears.
Whatever decision is taken, Labour will have to accept it, as there will be no financial scope for them to reverse it in the short term.

 

[HSTEd]

As I have already said, you cannot cut your way to growth. It seems the Treasury are keen to cut the UK in to penury.

No, the Treasury, who are Thatcherite at the best of times, need to find £11bn more a year to pour into state pensions to maintain the precious triple lock.

And even more next year and the year after that and the year after that.

All capital budgets will be axed to fund it, because the pensioner (and near pensioner) bloc vote is irresistable.
Natural consequence of an electorate with a median age of ~50.


Unfortunately the catastrophically bad management of the project and its dodgy political origins have provided them the perfect excuse.


(Labour have a damacene conversion to High speed rail at almost exactly the same time as they realise they are definitely going to lose the 2010 election, and propose a sprawling scheme that involves as many constituencies as possible? It screams poison pill)

 

[Citybreak1]

I’ve done Manchester to London before. I assume Birmingham is an hour away? If they scrap this what benefit is it? 20 mins off the journey at most? Seems such a tiny project. When do they expect the Birmingham stretch to open?

 

[Brooke]

I take absolutely zero pleasure in having foreseen that this will only ever be London to Birmingham.


What can you say at this point.

I will be entirely unsurprised to never see a HS2 machine north of Birmingham, and look forwards to sanity prevailing for anyone still peddling the myth that any HS2 services will get to Scotland.

As I have already said, you cannot cut your way to growth. It seems the Treasury are keen to cut the UK in to penury.

Sadly, I have to agree.

Some time ago I was told off for speculating that this would be the result, given the BCR was below zero, and that this was the only part fully committed part.

Now, I may get told off for speculating again (since it is not confirmed as such), but unfortunately if the government want to hold down taxes, spend more on certain populist topics, and take a view based on the BCR, then this is where they should logically end up based on their viewpoint.

 

[Wynd]

No, the Treasury, who are Thatcherite at the best of times, need to find £11bn more a year to pour into state pensions to maintain the precious triple lock.

And even more next year and the year after that and the year after that.

All capital budgets will be axed to fund it, because the pensioner (and near pensioner) bloc vote is irresistable.
Natural consequence of an electorate with a median age of ~50.


Unfortunately the catastrophically bad management of the project and its dodgy political origins have provided them the perfect excuse. (Labour have a damacene conversion to High speed rail at almost exactly the same time as they realise they are definitely going to lose the 2010 election, and propose a sprawling scheme that involves as many constituencies as possible? It screams poison pill)

The same treasury whose budget has swollen from £800B to £1.1T in 3 short years, that treasury? Pull the other one.

Have you ever asked yourself, where its all going?

 

[Mag_seven]

I've moved the discussion on pensions to this thread:

Expenditure on Pensions

mod note - split from : https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/more-delay-for-hs2.242566/ Funding for pensions and infrastructure projects is not interchangeable (though the interest on the latter is).

www.railforums.co.uk

Once again can I ask that discussion in this thread is confined to Delays to HS2.

 

[Tezza1978]

Whatever decision is taken, Labour will have to accept it, as there will be no financial scope for them to reverse it in the short term.

100% disagree. It will be a manifesto commitment of Labour to build it out complete to 2B in full. Its a political open goal for them that they will not miss and too much internal pressure from the Northern MPs and Burnham. The only thing they are likely to do is kick the Eastern leg into the future.

 

[Taunton]

I take absolutely zero pleasure in having foreseen that this will only ever be London to Birmingham.

Well, the government rather nicely provided the future funds to get it right through from Euston (yes) to Manchester and Yorkshire.

What happened is the project went and spent it all on the first bit, just from London to Birmingham, by the combination we have all seen of gold plating just about every element of it imaginable.

Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham said: "Why should it be the North of England that pays the price?
"What we are going to end up with here is in the southern half of the country, a modern, high-speed rail network,

... and Mr Burnham needs to look at a map. What part of the route across southern England, from London to Bristol, Taunton and Cornwall does HS2 provide any benefit for? He gets improved speed and congestion relief for a good bit of the journey. Others get nothing.

 

[fishwomp]

100% disagree. It will be a manifesto commitment of Labour to build it out complete to 2B in full. Its a political open goal for them that they will not miss and too much internal pressure from the Northern MPs and Burnham. The only thing they are likely to do is kick the Eastern leg into the future.

Support for High Speed Rail HS2

Do you support or oppose plans to build a new High Speed rail line linking London, Birmingham and Manchester?

yougov.co.uk

Looks unlikely to be a major factor - and more people oppose than support.

Watch out for non-commital words in the manifesto..

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

100% disagree. It will be a manifesto commitment of Labour to build it out complete to 2B in full. Its a political open goal for them that they will not miss and too much internal pressure from the Northern MPs and Burnham. The only thing they are likely to do is kick the Eastern leg into the future.

As the Labour Treasury said on leaving office in 2010, "there is no money".
They might make a commitment in principle and restart the planning, but I doubt they will find the construction money in the short term (the next parliament) if the Tories cut the funds before the election.