HS2 Birmingham to Manchester scrapped.

GoFish · October 2023

He wasn't even calling her a bigot - just when asked about it shortly after - he disissed her concerns by calling her "some sort of bigot" iirc. Was actually quite funny, in a Thick of It sort of way.

equalsql · October 2023

Good!

TTony · October 2023

rsvmark said:

I do wonder how the post Covid working from home culture we now have had influenced the underlying business case but it’s probably way too early for any empirical data.

darthed1981 said:

We therefore need more fucking trains.

TBH, I think most of us would be happy with running trains, rather than ones that came with extra functionality, but then I'm easily pleased.

That aside. this is a sample size of one, so not statistically significant.

Pre-Covid, I travelled into London on a fairly well-worn commuter route on a more-or-less daily basis. I paid the extra to travel in slightly more comfort, but my carriages would still - regularly - be 80% full. Every train of the morning and every train of the evening. 80% full. I'm given to understand that the slightly less expensive seats were 100% full.

Post-Covid, I still travel into London on the same route, in the same slightly more comfortable carriages at the same time of day. I travel maybe once a fortnight, once a week max. The same carriages on the same (time of day) services are now ~10% full. From what I see on the in-train display boards, the rest of the train is certainly not 100% full.

OK, it's one commuter line, but I've never known it so quiet.

That doesn't say to me that we need more trains. However, I'd be quite happy to agree that we need more train routes. If I want to go anywhere other than London, it's quicker, easier, more reliable and cheaper to drive. The cross-country routes that do run are slow, uncomfortable (small old carriages) and infrequent.

HS2 to/from London is, and always was, perpetuating the London-centricity of the UK. More and better trains on routes that don't involve London would, IMHO, be a lot better use of what would have been a lot less money.

darthed1981 · October 2023

TTony said:
HS2 to/from London is, and always was, perpetuating the London-centricity of the UK. More and better trains on routes that don't involve London would, IMHO, be a lot better use of what would have been a lot less money.

It isn't so much London, and definitely not Euston - I think running it in there was one of the worst mistakes, it's mirroring the West Coast Main Line.

Ironically, the outcome of all this is that rebuilding the Great Central to Rugby, as has been suggested over and over, would probably have made a much cheaper alternative. Even then, as they never kept the integrity of the old trackbed, there would have been issues, like the absent Brackley Viaduct.

But certainly rebuilding other lines must be a priority. East-West Rail is essential, and they need to look at over-subscribed main roads and where old rail routes nearby could mirror them and take some of the load.

Near me, the A45 is a prime example, it runs alongside the Northampton to Peterborough railway trackbed across half of Northants.

Sporky · October 2023

Tannin said:

How much tax do the rich actually pay? (As opposed to dodge, avoid, hide in an offshore trust, etc.)

Certainly no inheritance tax for the super-rich, even if you're a complete Charlie.

ICBM · October 2023

darthed1981 said:

Ironically, the outcome of all this is that rebuilding the Great Central to Rugby, as has been suggested over and over, would probably have made a much cheaper alternative. Even then, as they never kept the integrity of the old trackbed, there would have been issues, like the absent Brackley Viaduct.

Fairly small compared to the cost of civil engineering works to build a completely new line, even if you add the cost of purchasing all the property that's been allowed to build on the old trackbed.

stickyfiddle · October 2023

Tannin said:

How much tax do the rich actually pay? (As opposed to dodge, avoid, hide in an offshore trust, etc.)

I'll bet you London to a brick it's sweet f-all.

That is what has happened to many countries over the last few decades: the wealthy have carved themselves out a massive tax exemption (via a hundred sneaky routes) and no longer pay their way. Gigantic (mostly American) companies like Google, Amazon and Uber laugh their way around local laws and national sovereignty, extracting the profits that used to be generated on-shore and taxed. Result: the shrinking middle classes are expected to pay for every damn thing and there is not enough money to go round.

In fact there is plenty of money. There are just too many loopholes in the tax system.

Bingo.

I'm not anywhere near that bracket but have a financial adviser mate who deals with serious high net worth people. Between holding companies, trusts, bonds, insurance wrappers, genuine insurance products, etc etc etc. Noone with serious income (nor their estate or their kids) pays a penny more than they have to, and that ain't very much in percentage terms.

And its by design - these products exist specifically for the benefit of these people, because governments the world over are terrified that these people will leave. Which used to be relatively sensible logic, except in 2023 we live in a global society and folks who want to spend their time in London and New York and Paris will do so because they want to. And since they're contributing so little value anyway, what kind of loss is it if a few of them get up and don't come back?

darthed1981 · October 2023

ICBM said:

darthed1981 said:

Ironically, the outcome of all this is that rebuilding the Great Central to Rugby, as has been suggested over and over, would probably have made a much cheaper alternative. Even then, as they never kept the integrity of the old trackbed, there would have been issues, like the absent Brackley Viaduct.

Fairly small compared to the cost of civil engineering works to build a completely new line, even if you add the cost of purchasing all the property that's been allowed to build on the old trackbed.

Indeed, and the engineering that survived (most of it) remains in excellent condition.

Catesby tunnel has recently been converted to a test track for cars, and the repairs required were minimal.

Adey · October 2023

These aren't "loop holes'. They are just the tax code. It's just that some are easier to use than others.

exocet · October 2023

darthed1981 said:

ICBM said:

darthed1981 said:

Ironically, the outcome of all this is that rebuilding the Great Central to Rugby, as has been suggested over and over, would probably have made a much cheaper alternative. Even then, as they never kept the integrity of the old trackbed, there would have been issues, like the absent Brackley Viaduct.

Fairly small compared to the cost of civil engineering works to build a completely new line, even if you add the cost of purchasing all the property that's been allowed to build on the old trackbed.

Indeed, and the engineering that survived (most of it) remains in excellent condition.

Catesby tunnel has recently been converted to a test track for cars, and the repairs required were minimal.

That tunnel must have been over engineered to have lasted so long - judging by the recent comments on escalating costs - part of it was "over engineering".....they should've specified RAAC viaducts and tunnel linings instead- would've saved a fortune...

Sporky · October 2023

Adey said:

These aren't "loop holes'. They are just the tax code. It's just that some are easier to use than others.

And all are easier to use when you're really fucking loaded already. On purpose.

rsvmark · October 2023

TTony said:

rsvmark said:

I do wonder how the post Covid working from home culture we now have had influenced the underlying business case but it’s probably way too early for any empirical data.

Pre-Covid, I travelled into London on a fairly well-worn commuter route on a more-or-less daily basis. I paid the extra to travel in slightly more comfort, but my carriages would still - regularly - be 80% full. Every train of the morning and every train of the evening. 80% full. I'm given to understand that the slightly less expensive seats were 100% full.

Post-Covid, I still travel into London on the same route, in the same slightly more comfortable carriages at the same time of day. I travel maybe once a fortnight, once a week max. The same carriages on the same (time of day) services are now ~10% full. From what I see on the in-train display boards, the rest of the train is certainly not 100% full.

OK, it's one commuter line, but I've never known it so quiet

You say you are a sample of 1 but I bet it’s more representative. whether you like it or not, London is one of the great financial capitals of the world and places like Canary Wharf have never been so empty. In fact meta/fb pulled out of a lease with a £140m ish payment after they realised their people wouldn’t travel and fill the place. I think the post covid working from home culture will have a serious ripple through to commercial property which in turn affect city centre footfall, sandwich shops, landlords, pension schemes, construction….. the list will be long and deep.

Adey · October 2023

Sporky said:

Adey said:

These aren't "loop holes'. They are just the tax code. It's just that some are easier to use than others.

And all are easier to use when you're really fucking loaded already. On purpose.

But no-one has much appetite to simplify it. I'd be surprised if the Labour party does anything about it other than effectively tinkering with it, rather than making it "fairer" (whatever that really is), come the next government.

darthed1981 · October 2023

exocet said:

darthed1981 said:

ICBM said:

darthed1981 said:

Ironically, the outcome of all this is that rebuilding the Great Central to Rugby, as has been suggested over and over, would probably have made a much cheaper alternative. Even then, as they never kept the integrity of the old trackbed, there would have been issues, like the absent Brackley Viaduct.

Fairly small compared to the cost of civil engineering works to build a completely new line, even if you add the cost of purchasing all the property that's been allowed to build on the old trackbed.

Indeed, and the engineering that survived (most of it) remains in excellent condition.

Catesby tunnel has recently been converted to a test track for cars, and the repairs required were minimal.

That tunnel must have been over engineered to have lasted so long - judging by the recent comments on escalating costs - part of it was "over engineering".....they should've specified RAAC viaducts and tunnel linings instead- would've saved a fortune...

The chap who built the "London extension" to the Great Central was a bit of a kook. Contrary to popular belief it wasn't built as a channel tunnel rail link, or to continental loading gauge.

However, as it was built after all the others, turn of the century, it was the best engineered, best built and the only main line built in the UK prior to HS1 with machines and not just navvies!

Added to that, as it was built after anything else, it was essentially sent in a straight line through, so from road level you could sometimes mistake it for a small branch line, but when you get down onto the track bed, you can often see a couple of miles in any direction.

When closed, controversial at the time as it had just stopped being used as a diversion while the WCML was closed for electrification, rather than just being mothballed, huge damage was done blasting and destroying every depot and ripping up every piece of track.

Simply mothballing it, and waiting a decade or two, would have almost certainly seen the line kept. Sadly, the road lobby was just too powerful, you can't just close them, you must destroy them.

A bit like with the TSR2 aircraft, don't cancel the project, destroy the jigs and designs, make sure nobody can bring the project back!

ewal · October 2023

TTony said:

rsvmark said:

I do wonder how the post Covid working from home culture we now have had influenced the underlying business case but it’s probably way too early for any empirical data.

darthed1981 said:

We therefore need more fucking trains.

TBH, I think most of us would be happy with running trains, rather than ones that came with extra functionality, but then I'm easily pleased.

That aside. this is a sample size of one, so not statistically significant.

Pre-Covid, I travelled into London on a fairly well-worn commuter route on a more-or-less daily basis. I paid the extra to travel in slightly more comfort, but my carriages would still - regularly - be 80% full. Every train of the morning and every train of the evening. 80% full. I'm given to understand that the slightly less expensive seats were 100% full.

Post-Covid, I still travel into London on the same route, in the same slightly more comfortable carriages at the same time of day. I travel maybe once a fortnight, once a week max. The same carriages on the same (time of day) services are now ~10% full. From what I see on the in-train display boards, the rest of the train is certainly not 100% full.

OK, it's one commuter line, but I've never known it so quiet.

That doesn't say to me that we need more trains. However, I'd be quite happy to agree that we need more train routes. If I want to go anywhere other than London, it's quicker, easier, more reliable and cheaper to drive. The cross-country routes that do run are slow, uncomfortable (small old carriages) and infrequent.

HS2 to/from London is, and always was, perpetuating the London-centricity of the UK. More and better trains on routes that don't involve London would, IMHO, be a lot better use of what would have been a lot less money.

You can't look at train use pre/post COVID in isolation. Yes, less people are commuting, but the roads are still heaving with all sorts of traffic and road journeys being made.

Surely a reliable AND affordable rail network is part of the solution to reducing our dependency on an unsustainable form of transport?

Again my recent holiday in Europe - Lucerne, Verona, Innsbruck, Graz - yes, there's cars, but they don't appear to dominate the urban landscape in the way that they do here. I appreciate it's not just trains that are the answer, but surely they play a significant part.

crunchman · October 2023

Part of the reason the trains are not full is how ridiculously expensive they are. If a family emergency came up and I had to travel down to Devon at 8am tomorrow morning, it would cost me about £150 - plus a bit more for a taxi or bus from the train station.

If I drive down, I can do it on about £25 of fuel.

The government needs to spend some of the billions spent on roads on subsidising railways instead - like every civilised European nation does. It also needs to do away with the ridiculous fragmented structure that the railways currently have.

ewal · October 2023

^ Exactly that. It is utterly bonkers that single occupancy car journeys remain the most cost effective option in most scenarios. Trains, buses, trams should be genuinely attractive from a cost perspective. And we might be at the point where walking and cycling should be financially incentivised.

I live about 200 metres from Tesco. Some of my neighbours drive there for a loaf of bread. That's what we're up against.

TheBigDipper · October 2023

And it's being rumoured that the scorched earth policy of unwinding botched planning (at our expense) is being continued. Having purchased land the owners did not want to sell, it's being said the Conservatives are now going to sell the unwanted land (north of Birmingham) off (allegedly so Labour could not reinstate the project at some point). Not back to the original owners, I suspect. We'll see.

Nitefly · October 2023

TheBigDipper said:

And it's being rumoured that the scorched earth policy of unwinding botched planning (at our expense) is being continued. Having purchased land the owners did not want to sell, it's being said the Conservatives are now going to sell the unwanted land (north of Birmingham) off (allegedly so Labour could not reinstate the project at some point). Not back to the original owners, I suspect. We'll see.

And probably not at the price paid...

Hurling_Fruitmig · October 2023

euan said:

The whole point of HS2 was to remove faster passenger trains off the lines so the slower commuter and freight trains could work better and increase capacity.

The new talking about about how HS2 was just for the London elite is just absolute bull

This is absolutely true, but branding it with he 'high speed' name killed any chance of convincing the public that was what it was for. All argument has been about shaving five minutes of a journey from X to London from day one.

ICBM · October 2023

Even Indonesia has built a high-speed rail line with much less pissing about than we have. (OK, with some help from the Chinese.)

It only overran by four years and $1.2 billion.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-66979810

exocet · October 2023

Hurling_Fruitmig said:

euan said:

The whole point of HS2 was to remove faster passenger trains off the lines so the slower commuter and freight trains could work better and increase capacity.

The new talking about about how HS2 was just for the London elite is just absolute bull

This is absolutely true, but branding it with he 'high speed' name killed any chance of convincing the public that was what it was for. All argument has been about shaving five minutes of a journey from X to London from day one.

They definitely cocked up with the messaging. The name HS2 in itself need not have been a problem - it continued with the convention started with HS1.
However, all of the initial public facing messaging did incorrectly focus on speed. I can only recall the more rational (it's actually about capacity) entering public debate in the past 5 years or so.

They further compounded the issue by ordering simplex rolling stock i.e not double deckers. The line was designed for double deckers so why order lower capacity trains if capacity is the target (yes, I know that you can measure capacity in other ways) but I don't think that decision helped to reinforce the message that existing capacity has "maxed out".

So back to cars it is...

thecolourbox · October 2023

I went to the office yesterday for the first time since before last christmas. The main difference was that I got on a train first time, whereas when I was going in daily in the autumn and winter when they reduced the timetable because of leaves, I'd often have to wait for 2 or 3 trains before I fancied getting on one because of how busy they were. But it was still very crowded once on it, having to surf in the middle of the door area bit with my face in somebody's armpit and a rucksack boshing me in the back. I could have driven it in more or less the same time and parked at the office, without having to get all hot and sweaty power walking to the station and sharing it with other hot sweaty smelly people.

Our train system is just ridiculous in every possible way. I wish HS2 could have worked, but it's probably just as well it hasn't because they'd only fuck it up even more once it was built

ICBM · October 2023

Oh, what a surprise - the announcements about what alternative projects the government was going to fund with the savings from cancelling HS2 were all bullshit.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/oct/08/hs2-announced-transport-project-were-just-examples-says-minister

Meanwhile, all is not rosy with the trains in Germany either...

https://www.theguardian.com/world/commentisfree/2023/oct/08/german-train-travel-deutsche-bahn-kafka

Which makes me feel slightly better about having to stay overnight before a family funeral I'm going to, because I can't risk taking a train which gets in an hour before it starts.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

In this Discussion

Become a Subscriber!

HS2 Birmingham to Manchester scrapped.

Comments