Why are people opposed to HS2? (And other HS2 discussion)

Discussion in 'UK Railway Discussion' started by ABB125, 24 Jan 2019.

  1. class26

    class26 Member

    Messages:
    694
    Joined:
    4 May 2011
    Agreed but maybe a bigger mistake was announcing it as one BIG project
    If they had the "bug picture" but only announced phase 1, when half way through started on phase 2 a etc so it was just 30 b here, 20 b there it would kep the
    Presumably it is seen as a priority?
    Anyway, the government is only weeks old and who is to say what projects might be brought forward over the next 5 years ? HS2 phase 1 is shovel ready whereas most others will take years of planning.
     
  2. Tetchytyke

    Tetchytyke Established Member

    Messages:
    10,483
    Joined:
    12 Sep 2013
    Location:
    Isle of Man
    HS2 gets a bottomless pit of money but the T&W Metro has to grovel for new trains?

    Because the multinational construction companies will only lobby for HS2. Why? Because they know they'll get to rinse us on the contracts.

    The whole thinks stinks like a rotten corpse.
     
  3. Tetchytyke

    Tetchytyke Established Member

    Messages:
    10,483
    Joined:
    12 Sep 2013
    Location:
    Isle of Man
    Who mentioned supermarkets?

    People don't shop on high streets because they don't work on high streets. They don't work on high streets because out of town business parks are accessible in a way city centres aren't.

    Most people don't need to go to London. They need to go to work.
     
  4. nidave

    nidave Member

    Messages:
    859
    Joined:
    12 Jul 2011
    I totally agree but the impression by some is the money is there and can be used to fund other things. It cant - it's for HS2 only - that does not stop the UK from agreeing for a new loan to be used for other projects. In fact, we should be doing as much as we can while interest rates are so low.
     
  5. nidave

    nidave Member

    Messages:
    859
    Joined:
    12 Jul 2011
    That's a political decision and nothing to do with HS2 - If HS2 didn't happen do you think T&W Metro would still have to grovel - yes. They have been groveling long before HS2 - as has many areas. Your argument is fundamentally flawed


    Citation needed
     
  6. kylemore

    kylemore Member

    Messages:
    848
    Joined:
    28 Aug 2010
    That will change in an instant if they decide that it's politically expedient to use a portion of it to ameliorate the North of England.
     
  7. cosmo

    cosmo Member

    Messages:
    97
    Joined:
    10 Dec 2018
    Location:
    South Shields
    I think what TT was trying to say is that when a project like HS2 is costing upwards of £100bn and rising by the day, then £500m (Nexus' bid for funding) a fleet of new trains is a drop in the ocean and Nexus weren't even given that in the end (only 80% or so of it).
     
  8. Aictos

    Aictos Established Member

    Messages:
    9,168
    Joined:
    28 Apr 2009
    And in reality, those who push this idea will be sorely upset by realising that they were wrong all along.

    It won’t be released for anything else as it’s already been ringfenced for HS2.
     
  9. Grumpy Git

    Grumpy Git Member

    Messages:
    729
    Joined:
    13 Oct 2019
    Location:
    Earth (for now)
    Contrary to what Barclay says, it will not "level up" anything it will simply bring more towns into the London commuter belt.
     
  10. nidave

    nidave Member

    Messages:
    859
    Joined:
    12 Jul 2011
    In your opinion, others (me included) disagree. It will release capacity on the existing network to allow a better, more frequent service to placed passed by the current trains to London
     
  11. nidave

    nidave Member

    Messages:
    859
    Joined:
    12 Jul 2011
    That has nothing to do with HS2 - that's the government being the government - there is no reason for doing so nor should places have to beg for improvements in public transport. But again that is not an issue with HS2 - it's historic and wrong. Scrapping HS2 will not change this.
     
  12. Grumpy Git

    Grumpy Git Member

    Messages:
    729
    Joined:
    13 Oct 2019
    Location:
    Earth (for now)
    Well I posted it so it must be my opinion.

    I get the impression too many on here are treating HS2 like a 6 year old wanting something for Christmas beyond their parents means?

    I'm not opposed to HS2 in general, just the stupid cost and the way construction is being planned
     
  13. FelixtheCat

    FelixtheCat Established Member

    Messages:
    3,407
    Joined:
    23 Jul 2015
    Location:
    Edinburgh, London, or somewhere else
    Do you have evidence to back up your opinion?

    If you have read any part of this thread, you'll see explanations of why people support HS2. If, again, you could point to specific posts that add to your opinion that "many on here are treating HS2 like a 6 year old wanting something for Christmas", I'll be interested.
     
  14. Grumpy Git

    Grumpy Git Member

    Messages:
    729
    Joined:
    13 Oct 2019
    Location:
    Earth (for now)
    You have to look at this project from the perspective of people who never go near a train, either by choice, or because they live 20 miles from the nearest station.

    The projected cost is more than £1,650 for every man, woman and child in the country. That is an astronomical amount of money.
     
  15. CdBrux

    CdBrux Member

    Messages:
    569
    Joined:
    4 Mar 2014
    Location:
    Munich
    One point not so often talked about is human resource capacity. Does the country have enough people skilled in all the different disciplines from designing, planning, building, starting-up railways to keep HS2, which must be using some proportion of these people on a project that will deliver nothing for the next 7 or 8 years (and then only between Brum and London) and increase workload on NPR (another long term project) as well as the many projects that will make a difference much more immediately like Trans-Pennine Route upgrade, Castlefield corridor, Bristol Metro, etc... and many others less well progressed so far or not even started?
     
  16. jfowkes

    jfowkes Member

    Messages:
    324
    Joined:
    20 Jul 2017
    You could raise that argument about almost any public spending. There are people who have never used the NHS or never driven a car. But we recognise that both the NHS and the road network are nonetheless benefiting them by the fact of their existence. It's a public good. The same goes for the rail network.
     
  17. quantinghome

    quantinghome Member

    Messages:
    934
    Joined:
    1 Jun 2013
    You sound very sure of that - what is the basis for your statement?

    HS2 does not provide significant capacity for commuting in and of itself. Its capacity into London is 20000 passengers per hour, a tiny fraction of the London commuter numbers, and even then only Birmingham and possibly East Midlands would be within reasonable commuting times.

    The main benefit for commuter services, as has been repeated ad nauseam for years on this forum, is the capacity freed up on existing lines, so Watford, MK, Rubgy, Stevenage, Peterborough etc. can get a much higher frequency of fast trains to London, as opposed to trains passing through non-stop. In the past couple of decades the only place to have this level of fast service has been Reading. And sure, it's a big commuter town, but also a commuter destination in its own right due to businesses relocating there. And that's the fundamental flaw in your argument, assuming that a town "levelling up" and being commutable to London are somehow incompatible - they're not!
     
  18. Mogster

    Mogster Member

    Messages:
    569
    Joined:
    25 Sep 2018
    That’s 100BN spread over how many years of the HS2 project though? 20? Then it’s complete and we hopefully reap the economic and social benefits for the next century, or however long the line or alignment is in use.

    Rightly or wrongly the foreign Aid budget is £14BN a year, every year, we seem to be able to afford that.
     
  19. nidave

    nidave Member

    Messages:
    859
    Joined:
    12 Jul 2011
    To use an analogy -
    I don't use busses, why should I pay for them
    I don't use schools, why should I pay for them
    I don't use my local library, why should I pay for them
    I don't ... I could go on,.
     
  20. Grumpy Git

    Grumpy Git Member

    Messages:
    729
    Joined:
    13 Oct 2019
    Location:
    Earth (for now)
    Quite, but the public in general don't think this way. Also the government tend to view things from a viewpoint of getting re elected.
     
  21. Mogster

    Mogster Member

    Messages:
    569
    Joined:
    25 Sep 2018
    They’ll be the same people that gaze in amazement an the infrastructure in other countries then complain how ****e it is here when the come home...
     
  22. quantinghome

    quantinghome Member

    Messages:
    934
    Joined:
    1 Jun 2013
    That's a great argument for never building anything. Most infrastructure is only used by a minority of the population.

    It really isn't. Crossrail is costing £2,280 for every man, women and child in London. China is spending $100billion a year on high speed rail. Now that's astronomical!

    Of course the government isn't asking every man, woman and child to shell out £1,650 to pay for this. It will be financed by a very low interest loan, repaid by greater tax revenue due to the economic gains of the project. It's called investment. Big outlay, yes, but big returns.

    You're also conveniently ignoring that the money is being spent over many years. It works out at about 20p a day over the duration of the project. I'm about to go out and buy a sandwich for lunch; I'm not going to spend vast amounts of time agonising over whether to spend £2.50 or £2.70 on it.
     
  23. The Ham

    The Ham Established Member

    Messages:
    6,874
    Joined:
    6 Jul 2012
    Given that 15% of people live outside of settlements with a population of now than 10,000 people the number of people who are beyond 10 miles of a train station is likely to be fairly small, especially given that there's quite a few places which are smaller than 10,000 people with their own station.
     
  24. Bletchleyite

    Bletchleyite Veteran Member

    Messages:
    48,517
    Joined:
    20 Oct 2014
    Location:
    Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
    Though many of those smaller stations don't have a useful service for whatever purpose. A few trains a day often won't work for commuting to a city, for example. Or if you've only got a daytime service as Kirkby-Wigan used to have (a bit better now I think) no use if you have to work late. Or (and this is probably the worst one) no Sunday service means it's not useful for a weekend away.
     
  25. Mogster

    Mogster Member

    Messages:
    569
    Joined:
    25 Sep 2018
    Exactly.

    Other countries seem to be able to progress with similar projects without the wailing and hand wringing that always seems to accompany capital spending in the UK.
     
  26. DynamicSpirit

    DynamicSpirit Established Member

    Messages:
    4,416
    Joined:
    12 Apr 2012
    I hadn't been aware that it is getting a super-low-interest loan. Is it?

    But if it is, one obvious reason why HS2 will find it easier to attract loans than other infrastructure projects is that, once it's open, HS2 is very likely to be extremely profitable - far more so than most railways. In general with railways, the faster the train travels, the higher the profits - because at higher speeds, people are paying more for each minute that they are on the train and therefore using the infrastructure. That's why what was Virgin West Coast was very profitable, but most metro services require subsidy. HS2 will further benefit financially from longer trains carrying more passengers each than most trains - and this will add up to a very, very, profitable operation, and therefore something that is pretty safe to lend to from the point of view of lenders.
     
  27. quantinghome

    quantinghome Member

    Messages:
    934
    Joined:
    1 Jun 2013
    True. Now if only there was a way of freeing of capacity on existing lines so these stations could be better served...
     
  28. quantinghome

    quantinghome Member

    Messages:
    934
    Joined:
    1 Jun 2013
    It's government funded. UK base rates are very low, and government bonds tend to follow the base rate.
     
    Last edited: 27 Jan 2020
  29. ABB125

    ABB125 Member

    Messages:
    576
    Joined:
    23 Jul 2016
    Location:
    Worcestershire/Gloucestershire border
    I think some of the issue that people have with HS2 isn't necessarily the fact that it may cost £2X billion, but that it was previously only going to cost £X billion. They would (quite rightly) want to know the cause of this increase.
    On a side note, how much of the potential £106 billion cost of HS2 is optimism bias? Shouldn't the optimism bias have (mostly) covered the recent cost estimate increases? Or [conspiracy alert!] is optimism bias' only purpose to tell contractors how much they can charge above the "true" cost of a project?
     
  30. jfowkes

    jfowkes Member

    Messages:
    324
    Joined:
    20 Jul 2017
    Well I don't know the details but it's generally quoted as "funding by government borrowing", which I interpret as a very-low-interest loan.
     

Share This Page