Comments on: High-speed rail is a rich man’s plaything

By: Anne

Anne — Thu, 26 Jul 2012 09:30:02 +0000

Even if it takes 3 hours to get to London it’s still faster than taking the plane what with having to arrive 2 hours before take off for security checks. Plus you can’t use your phone on the plane whereas you have more room to use laptops and phones on trains.
Why are we letting ourselves be “railroaded” (forgive the pun) into spending billions in taxpayers money for little reward or improvement. It is a simple argument – few ordinary working people would benefit and this government is spending our hard earned money for the benefit of big business ie their mates.

By: Michael Kenny

Michael Kenny — Sun, 08 Jul 2012 12:56:02 +0000

A sad example of how the far “left” is ever more a conservative, if not downright reactionary, force in politics!The alternatives to high-speed rail are motorways and regional aviation, both much more damaging in ecological terms. Equally, claims that HSR is unsuccessful and projects are being abandoned in other parts of Europe are untrue. Projects are being delayed by the economic crisis, not because of any dissatisfaction with HSR, and a return to a jobs and growth agenda will probably get them going again. Moreover, there is no serious opposition to HSR anywhere in Europe (not even in Britain). The dispute in Stuttgart is about the replacement of the present dead-end station with an underground through station and the destruction of a park that that involves. The HSR line there has been in service for years. Other than that, opposition is just the usual local obscurantists to object to every change that’s ever proposed. That the far left finds itself in that camp shows just how irrelevant it has become.

By: Shirley J

Shirley J — Sat, 07 Jul 2012 16:33:17 +0000

Half truths as usual with HS2 Alex – yes the WCML has been improved and gets high satisfaction ratings from passengers. The average occupation of long-distance trains leaving Euston at peak times, according to a survey published in the Financial Times, is 57%. Where there is over-crowding is on the commuter services. Grade separation at Ledburn junction could double commuter capacity on the WCML in 5 years at a cost of £500 million, but we can’t do that because it would undermine even more the fragments of the case for HS2.

If the government really cared about rail travellers it would be investing in the services that the majority of passengers use, which are commuter services. And if it really cared about over-crowding it would start with the lines into Paddington, which is where all 10 of the top ten most over-crowded trains terminate.

And as for job creation – over £400,000 per job for every job created by HS2 would buy an awful lot of jobs if it was directly invested in growth rather than squandered on HS2, a lot more quickly.

But HS2 isn’t really about capacity or growth – its main beneficiaties will be the shareholders and directors of the construction companies that are lobbying so hard for it. Yes HS2 is a rich man’s toy.

By: Alex McKenna

Alex McKenna — Fri, 06 Jul 2012 15:36:17 +0000

Complete tosh as usual. Rich men don’t need to travel here and there by train – the rest of us do. I can’t “video-conference” myself to anywhere I need to visit, either for my work, shopping or my social life.
“Improving” other lines has been done already on most lines, especially the West-Coast and is never as cost-effective as making a new pathway for trains, and that’s what we need, as a bypass to stop the whole thing having a heart-attack.
Some anti-HS2 people have never been on typical over-crowded trains these days. Standing-room only for hours.
We need more paths for all the trains..

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 06 Jul 2012 15:27:53 +0000

all jobs create further economic growth and income and sales tax revenue to the taxpayer and any job created is one less person on benefits.

someone who lives somewhere north of london but takes a job in london contributes to the national economy through taxes so the whole country benefits. and they will spend money locally wherever they happen to live.
mike gedes may have the luxury of believing that ohn ony 4000 jobs aren’t worth it. it is also clear that currently run down areas of birmingham would benefit greatly from the hs2 terminals location and businesses would locate there and take advantage of excellent transport connections.

this must have been a quiet news day. Firstly we have had the nao audit report rehashed which we knew about back in march and which in fact concluded that hs1 benefits would outweigh the costs in the long run. now we have the tired boring worn out reitteration of the rich mans toy !!! so predictable.

By: Ash

Ash — Fri, 06 Jul 2012 15:14:22 +0000

It’s misleading to state that Hammond said HS2 would be a rich man’s toy. He said that rail travel in general was a rich man’s toy, before rather hastily adding that there were also some great bargains out there – and that HS2 would probably follow the same kind of fares structure.

By: Richard

Richard — Fri, 06 Jul 2012 12:35:10 +0000

40,000 is quite a large number of jobs. I would rather see investment in local transport than an intercity rail link, but this project could help reduce air travel – it improves the connections between Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds and France and Belgium.

The issue you hint at is how much the tickets would be for HS2. If they are £300 from London-Birmingham or something ludicrous like that, only the rich can afford them. There is no point in spending large sums of public money on a route that will only benefit 1% of those who live near a station. The only good thing is that it might get more cars off the road.