The "Integrated Rail Plan" would be better described as the "No Idea, Can't Be Arsed".
I was expecting detailed plans of expected service patterns in 2030, 2040, etc. Instead we're left with "we might do this" "could probably do that" "uuuh this should do"...
To be successful, the IRP should have followed a general cohesive strategy, with certain stated goals. I would have chosen the following:
-To increase capacity to cope with the record passenger demand being seen, with scope for selling more, cheaper seats.
-To modernise the railway to make it more operationally efficient, more accessible and more resilient.
-To enable the railways to better compete with road and air transport.
With these goals in mind, I would then build the perfect service pattern. What level of service do different towns/cities need, how fast should they be and how much capacity will be required?
Once this is completed, you should bring the plans back to reality - figure out the most effective way of delivering as much of this as reasonably possible. You can create different plans based on the funding available.
Rather, government seems to have done it all backwards. No concrete plans for the actual service they want to run - they don't even know how fast this Transpennine "Upgrade" will be? There are so many gaps, so much uncertainty in a document designed to bring certainty.
For a government obsessed with controlling costs, they have unwittingly backed themselves into a tricky corner. It's going to be very difficult for the industry to deliver these plans in a cost-effective manner when government cannot commit to anything. Multiple billion pounds have been wasted on designing HS2 east, now with nothing to show for it. Maybe if government should decide what it wants before it does things - once it has made a commitment, it should stick to it.
I am looking forward to getting my hands on a copy of the IRP, if not because I am in need of some new toilet paper.
Apparently down to the wire last night. Sunak and Treasury still seeking cuts to investment.
Usual UK attitude. Long term pain due to short term thinking.
Levelling up in effect means cutting London investment to low levels elsewhere rather than lift elsewhere to London levels. All suffer.
Can't be like other nations and have various areas see needed investment can we?
Still, many will play the gov game of North v South rather than ensuring all regions see investment.
Playing the North and South off against each other is a genuis ploy on the side of the government. An indifferent Midlands/North when London sees transport finding cut to the bone is very valuable politically.
At the risk of being slaughtered here, a lot of this proposal makes sense. Yes losing the full eastern arm of HS2 is a shame, but for Derby and Nottingham this is much better, the previous Toton HS2 station scheme to me was of no use to either city, when people want direct trains to their City, not somewhere 10 miles away
Of course it was crazy that the whole of the MML hasn't already been electrified, but at least it will happen now.
Most people don't live in the city centre anyway. Toton was always a compromise, but overall journeys were to be considerably shorter - especially going Northwards to Leeds and beyond, which is currently very poorly served.
Lots of planning was done in the region around maximising the benefits of the location in Toton, now it is to all be binned. Services between Nottingham/Derby will likely also suffer, now that they will have to share tracks with more high speed trains.