HS2 Options

[Andy Capp]

To briefly mention HS2....

I have sympathy for the proponents of HS2. Some people say why can't we have a high speed rail network like they have on the Continent, and then object to us building one.

I remember the row about the M25. When it was finally built, people then complained that there weren't any service stations/rest areas - what, on the same green belt you didn't want built on in the first place?

This deserves another thread.

[Lolly]

I think the point made ( on the other thread) was that people are trying to find out what information the decision to go ahead was based upon.

I'm afraid I can't see the benefits to Joe Public, especially those who live in West Berkshire!

[pbonnay]

The money spent on HS2 would not necessarily be spent elsewhere. There would also be a huge positive knock-on effect for UK plc in jobs and economic activity in building it.

I know that in Spain, building a high speed line from Madrid down to Seville did not have the desired effect, but that had a lot to do with the way it was funded and the general economy. Birmingham and Manchester are already established areas of high population and business.

When I used to fly from Manchester back to London, sometimes half the time in the air was stacking and waiting for a landing slot on a Friday evening. HS2 is as much about capacity as speed.

Electric trains can be powered by much greener energy than any plane, and if more people used the train then it would also alleviate congestion at LHR.

[Lolly]

The money spent on HS2 would not necessarily be spent elsewhere.

In which case wouldn't it reduce our deficit?

There would also be a huge positive knock-on effect for UK plc in jobs and economic activity in building it.

Depends rather on who the contracts are awarded to. I have heard this argument quite a lot, but I'm not sure that I believe it. I think that's what people are trying to find out.

I know that in Spain, building a high speed line from Madrid down to Seville did not have the desired effect, but that had a lot to do with the way it was funded and the general economy. Birmingham and Manchester are already established areas of high population and business.

So wouldn't it be better for the businesses to employ locally?

When I used to fly from Manchester back to London, sometimes half the time in the air was stacking and waiting for a landing slot on a Friday evening. HS2 is as much about capacity as speed.

Don't know too much about UK flight routes, but i would have thought some of the regional airports would be a better bet than HR for people based in and around Newbury?

Electric trains can be powered by much greener energy than any plane, and if more people used the train then it would also alleviate congestion at LHR.

Yes but presumably there will be congestion at the train stations?

[pbonnay]

Depends rather on who the contracts are awarded to. I have heard this argument quite a lot, but I'm not sure that I believe it. I think that's what people are trying to find out.

Well the people who build it would be employed in UK and paying UK tax. They would also need all the support services, again more UK jobs.

So wouldn't it be better for the businesses to employ locally?

They already do in many cases, but as companies grow they have different places of operation and workers need to travel.

Don't know too much about UK flight routes, but i would have thought some of the regional airports would be a better bet than HR for people based in and around Newbury?

In building a new national rail network, I think the argument is bigger than Newbury.

Yes but presumably there will be congestion at the train stations?

It's cheaper to build platforms than runways, if that is your concern. If an electric train does have to wait for a platform, it is not burning tonnes of fuel keeping it airborne?