Sadly I agree with you. It might be creaking now and some of the branch lines served their purpose but the original rail system gave more than a century of service because we were capable of delivering infrastructure. We don't seem able to think a year in advance let alone a century anymore.
Very few of the original railways were thinking a century in advance - they were private enterprises looking to pay back their shareholders (directly or indirectly) with profit before they died.
True but by luck or design most of them have given very good service and were extraordinary feats of engineering. Ironically probably the most forward thinking line, the Grand Central, didn't survive Beeching. Some might argue HS2 is it's spiritual successor.
A look at the list of major contractors working on HS2 will show that while there is some of that sentiment in the more rabid corners of the current government, the people awarding the contracts don't agree
This is quite a bizarre statement - any company involved in HS2 will be big enough that they will have a workforce from around the world including the UK, and the concept of companies having nationalities is quickly becoming outdated. A person's nationality has very little bearing on their ability to manage a project or build a tunnel. And government contracts are awarded according to the published criteria, and the government does not tend to specify 'no foreigners' in it's invitations to tender, as that would lead to very few expressions of interest and quite possibly several legal challenges.
In a couple of years time, Rachel Reeves (probably) will be asking the questions: (1) What is the cost if we build the paused HS2 Euston? (2) What happens if it doesn't get built?
Or hand off the project to TFL with a set budget to get it done. Unlikely I know, but TFL would be much more committed, IMO.
In my own (nuclear) industry I have seen many a project start without plans on how to complete the project or even a real understanding on whether it is even possible to achieve the objective.
That'll be quite a jump from OOC to the WLL, not to mention rather a surprise to SWR Windsor line drivers as they see HS2 trains called into the platform on top of them.
It would take a proportionately silly amount of time to get from OOC to Waterloo, a place where very few travellers from the north are likely to want to go. Not to mention the fact that "Waterloo Eurostar terminal" long ceased to exist and the platforms are in active use by SWR.
That's the trouble with silly points here, once their arguments against an established programme start sliding, the daft (joke?) suggestions come in to escape the losing argument. Joe Rukin would be propud of them.
Surely there must be at least some possibility that it won't. The cost savings seem very tempting to those holding the pursestrings.
There won't be any cost saving if passengers don't reach predicted levels because they are dumped in the middle of OOC railwaylands with an inadequate mean of getting to their destination. The whole business case is predicated on volume of passengers, so making it less attractive creates a loss. That may please some here who don't want London to get something that they won't use every week, but as the growth on the WCML has already reached the level predicted for the original opening date, i.e. 2026-9, the success of the services on the line is almost guaranteed.
Any change will cost more, especially if it also causes a delay.
Have you tried telling the Government that? Never underestimate their ability to break 'promises'.
If you look back, generally when government has tried to intervene or threatened to cancel projects because of spiralling costs all that's happened is they ended up having to go along with the plans anyway because that's the cheapest way to do it.
Sure, but often the projects get cut back in scope and don't deliver what was originally promised.
Electrification to Bristol TM (similar to Oxford) needed to wait for the remodelling anyway, and electrification to Cardiff is still a useful thing, HS2 to Leeds was stopping a phase that hadn't really started, 24tph to Thameslink has delivered all the required infrastructure and trains, it's only the services were never introduced. Ordsall Chord infrastructure was delivered, although I will give you the Castlefield saga and lack of 15/16 at Piccadilly.
As long as the second phase actually happens, yes. Unfortunately having worked for HMG for years half-assed interim solutions suddenly becoming the final one are more common than is ideal.
Given that the railway needs no help from HMG in making temporary solutions permanent (Pacers and Lewisham flyover, looking at you), I too would share this fear