HS2 - For or against?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by localzuk

Making it more reliable - how?
Making it cheaper - how?
Convenient - how?

---

more reliable how - if companies don’t achieve reliability targets the get no subsidy’s till they do. Proper maintenance not quick fixes invest the cash to do a proper job in getting the network up to standard and keep investing enough to keep it there/upgrade as appropriate. Where room allows have more parallel lines and id there are say 4 lines in parallel only trains capable (and with room etc.) to do say 100mph can use them keep fast trains away from slow trains and should improve timekeeping. Remove various bottlenecks by whatever means necessary
If they really wanted people on public transport they could not charge the companies that run them fuel tax/road tax on their vehicles (obviously with strings attached)
public transport in general think about where stops are and routes go there are some mightily stupidly placed bus stops/stations out there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by localzuk

Making it cheaper - how?
Making it more reliable - how?
Convenient - how?

---

You're the one who was asking how to get people to use public transport! I'm just giving you the main reasons why people don't. None of which would seem to be likely to be improved by the HS2.

I can't help having the same first thought I had with Trident. How many new social houses can we build with that money? I can't think of anything that would be better for the country overall than serious investment in housing stock, which no government since has been willing to do since Thatcher solid it off with everything else.

I'm also not 100% sure I understand what this new rail line is supposed to achieve? I'm sure if getting from Manchester to London quickly was that important the air fair would be cheaper?

If the money has to be spent on the railways then I'd vote for renationalising them first.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeMarchand

You're the one who was asking how to get people to use public transport! I'm just giving you the main reasons why people don't. None of which would seem to be likely to be improved by the HS2.

---

now i dont have the facts to prove this but i would suspect that most people who commute are going say doncaster-leeds,sheffield-leeds etc relatively short distances so hs2 will only Peripherally improve the situation for the majority of commuters anyway

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tmcd35

I can't help having the same first thought I had with Trident. How many new social houses can we build with that money? I can't think of anything that would be better for the country overall than serious investment in housing stock, which no government since has been willing to do since Thatcher solid it off with everything else.

I'm also not 100% sure I understand what this new rail line is supposed to achieve? I'm sure if getting from Manchester to London quickly was that important the air fair would be cheaper?

If the money has to be spent on the railways then I'd vote for renationalising them first.

---

i dont get why when councils sold off housing stock they werent made to reinvest that cash in new houses from the start that should of kept house prices at reasonable levels and of averted the problems we have with lack og affordable houseing from occuring in the first place

Some people are forgetting their history. We already had this line, the Victorians had the foresight to build it. However in 1963 Mr Beeching decided it wasn't needed any more. So here we are, repeating ourselves.

Having visited many other countries such as Germany, France and China who have this kind of infrastructure and used their services, its a complete no brainer to me. Just get on an build it.

People who moan and complain simply have no ambition. Its a sad trait in the British Psyche.

And as for "ruining the landscapes of Britain" well has anyone seen the so called "devastation" existing railways cause? No...? In reality they actually cause minimal visual impact on the surrounding area.

Creating 100,000 jobs also seems like a good idea to me, cant really argue with that one.

Complaints about aditional pollution also cause me a little bother, wouldn't this mean far less car journeys?

There was a great documentary on the BBC recently about some of the villages who opposed the building of the M25 some 40 years ago. They interviewed all the protesters (who were now much older) about it and they seemed thoroughly embarrassed about the whole thing. These were the people who chained themselves to fences, and marched on downing street in their thousands. In-fact most of them had changed their minds and realized that the new motorway had brought prosperity to their villages and easy access. Every single one said in restrospect the motorway had been a good thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geoff

Some people are forgetting their history. We already had this line, the Victorians had the foresight to build it. However in 1963 Mr Beeching decided it wasn't needed any more. So here we are, repeating ourselves.

---

Correct and with the great lack of foresight most of the old route has been developed over so now we are faced with situation we have now at a great cost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sted

i dont get why when councils sold off housing stock they werent made to reinvest that cash in new houses from the start that should of kept house prices at reasonable levels and of averted the problems we have with lack og affordable houseing from occuring in the first place

---

I seem to have had this conversation a lot recently. Was talking to my brother about the same a couple of days ago. And the last Question Time followed a similar theme. Seems the IMF think Osbourne is now wrong to continue he's OTT austerity measures and what Britain really needs right now is some infrastructure spending. When this came up on QT someone in the audience mentioned money being wasted on a nuclear defense we'd never use.

When I was talking with my brother we were discussing the policy of charging council tenants for each extra room they don't use. A policy my brother was defending. But people like my mum, a single person on JSA in a 2 bed, get's hit quiet hard by.

HS2 is just another example on money being funneled in to expensive projects that will make little or no long term gain in my view. Investing heavily in replenishing housing stock would:

bring down unemployment, especially youth unemployment (someones got to build them)
Less unemployment means more taxes revenue and less benefit expenditure
More people working is good for the high street, money burns holes in pockets
The 1.8m waiting list for social housing can be reduced
private rents and house prices drop because of the influx of new homes on the market
more people can then afford to buy their own homes
This silly policy of forcing people into smaller homes or charging for "rooms they don't use" can be dropped.

On the other hand we can get from London to Manchaster in about an hour which might be good if Oasis reform...

Looking at other countries such as France - building a high speed line has done nothing for their economy; especially now when it's needed most. France's problems are just as problematic as ours if not worse.

The Government will tell you it's easier to do business across the country. I think it will make it easier to drive more business into London. If anyone can explain to me otherwise then I'm all ears :)

I'm also struggling to understand why having a new speedy train line or lines is going to suddenly created thousands of jobs out of thin air. Are these jobs specifically to create/design/maintain the line itself or are these jobs going to be created in the surrounding areas where the train lines pass, mostly in the middle of the countryside...

If HS2 is such a great idea and businesses/investors think it's a good idea why isn't the Government encouraging businesses to invest instead of it all being created/designed using public money?

The last I checked, it's cheaper to drive down to London from Birmingham rather than buying a train ticket. Unless the Government get the pricing right it just isn't going to work as intended.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tmcd35

private rents and house prices drop because of the influx of new homes on the market

---

Could this be why there isn't that investment?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tmcd35

On the other hand we can get from London to Manchaster in about an hour which might be good if Oasis reform...

---

Oasis reform? I'm definitely against it if those whiney prats get back together.

Quote:

---

private rents and house prices drop because of the influx of new homes on the market

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeMarchand

Could this be why there isn't that investment?

---

And yet everyone agrees that house prices are too high and nobody can afford to get on the housing ladder...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Michael

Looking at other countries such as France - building a high speed line has done nothing for their economy; especially now when it's needed most.

---

Actually having used France's Rail system extensively a couple of years back, this is not really true. Its made it very easy to do business and encourages tourism all over the country.

Germany is very similar as well, its incredibly easy to get from city to city quickly using the fast trains. Their financial centre is Frankfurt not the capital Berlin.

Their train systems are excellent in both countries.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Michael

The last I checked, it's cheaper to drive down to London from Birmingham rather than buying a train ticket. Unless the Government get the pricing right it just isn't going to work as intended.

---

If you factor in the cost of fuel then I guess that would be true, but the purchase of the car or rental of the car, then running costs associatied i.e. insurance, wear and tear, tax, mot etc.. it then looks quite competitive and is a fixed not variable cost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tmcd35

And yet everyone agrees that house prices are too high and nobody can afford to get on the housing ladder...

---

Apart from the landlords...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zag

Their train systems are excellent in both countries.

---

Aren't both of them nationalised?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zag

Actually having used France's Rail system extensively a couple of years back, this is not really true. Its made it very easy to do business and encourages tourism all over the country.

Germany is very similar as well, its incredibly easy to get from city to city quickly using the fast trains. Their financial centre is Frankfurt not the capital Berlin.

Their train systems are excellent in both countries.

---

I agree their train systems are excellent, speedy and affordable. Why didn't the British Government run such a project when the economy was growing every quarter and not declining every quarter (i.e a triple dip on the horizon)?

For example is spending money on fixing the M6 in the midlands going to be more constructive pound for pound spent in the local economy?

I refuse to use the M6 Toll. I pay my road tax which is why the M6 Toll always looks empty. Clearly many drivers also agree.