HS2 - Government proposals, alternative routes and general discussion

[whole diary]

[JayMac]

From RAILNEWS.co.uk:

New pro-HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) group to oppose ^narrow self interest^

A NEW campaigning group supporting the construction of High Speed 2 has been launched only a day or so since the transport secretary dismissed the latest report from the anti-HS2 Taxpayers^ Alliance as ^spurious^.

The new group, called ^Yes to High Speed Rail^ has the backing of many business leaders. Its campaign director is David Begg, who chaired the former Commission for Integrated Transport.

Professor Begg said: ^We are united by a belief that high speed rail will significantly help Britain^s economy, creating jobs and boosting parts of the country that need it, particularly in the Midlands and the North. We also believe that it will make ordinary passengers^ lives easier by freeing up capacity on existing lines, bringing better services to more people.^

The anti-HS2 Taxpayers^ Alliance has already been the subject of criticism from the Department for Transport, after a new TA report claimed that towns and cities away from the future High Speed lines would suffer from deteriorating services and fewer trains because investment would be diverted away from the ^classic^ network.

Matthew Sinclair, the director of the Alliance, said: ^High speed rail isn^t the right way of getting the capacity we need. The project is set to cost taxpayers a fortune and it is increasingly clear it will be a huge white elephant. While politicians are holding out the promise of a faster journey for a fortunate few, huge numbers of people will face slower and less frequent services with more overcrowding. Everyone will still have to pay the hefty bill.^

But a DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) spokesman responded: ^This is complete nonsense, largely based around speculation, guesswork and spurious crystal-ball gazing about our future plans for investment in the existing railways,^ while transport secretary Philip Hammond added: ^It^s perfectly possible to invest in major strategic rail projects and still invest in other rail projects.^

The clash has come following a warning from Chiltern Railways chairman Adrian Shooter that ^super-rich^ people in the Chilterns are pouring money into anti-HS2 campaigning. He told a conference in Birmingham that he deplored their stance, which was based only on ^narrow self interest^.

[anthony215]

good to hear that the yes to HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) campaign are finally getting stuck in gainst some of these nimbies.

I am supporting this new line not only because i think it would bring a lot of benfits to the uk economy and will provide a lot of jobs but that it would mean greater capacity on the west coast mainline especially for freight which could mean more lorries being taken off the motorway network.

I am not too sure about charging people extra to travel on the new high speed line however as i think this may push some people to continue using the classinc routes.

[Timmer]

I am not too sure about charging people extra to travel on the new high speed line however as i think this may push some people to continue using the classinc routes.

That is my concern. If it's only a few pounds more like HS1^▸ (High Speed line 1 - St Pancras to Channel Tunnel) then fair enough as it will be a premium service but if it's too expensive that's not good.

[JayMac]

Here's hoping that the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) responsible for setting fares on HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) don't make a complete hash of the fares structure like southeastern have done with HS1^▸ (High Speed line 1 - St Pancras to Channel Tunnel)!!!

[paul7575]

Here's hoping that the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) responsible for setting fares on HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) don't make a complete hash of the fares structure like southeastern have done with HS1^▸ (High Speed line 1 - St Pancras to Channel Tunnel)!!!

DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) insisted on the premium fares that Southeastern charge on HS1.

The exact percentage increases were defined in the franchise spec - and AFAICS^▸ (As Far As I Can See) no flexibility was allowed, eg Ebbsfleet to St Pancras was defined as normal fare plus 35%.  The north Kent line was defined as plus 30% of the part of the fare from Gravesend, and the other route was defined as plus 20% of the part of the fare from Ashford.  (So in effect the effective percentage rise for longer distances such as Margate was less, around 10% of the normal fare.

I just lifted this from DfT's HS2 FAQs^▸ (Frequently Asked Questions):

What about fares, won't they have to be very high?

Not at all. Our proposals assume a fares structure in line with that of the existing railway - demonstrating that a new high speed line could operate effectively, generating sufficient demand and revenues, without needing to charge premium fares

And this was Villiers in a recent Westminster Hall debate:

As for the allegation made by one or two hon. Members that we are
proposing a rich man's railway, and the concerns expressed about fares
by the hon. Member for Hammersmith (Mr Slaughter) and the shadow
Minister, our research indicates that 70% of passengers would be
travelling for reasons other than business, with leisure trips
particularly important. All our modelling is based on fares that are
in line with existing services. Our assumptions about the expected
fare-box do not factor in or depend on any premium for high-speed
services.

Be interesting to see what pans out if it is ever built...

Paul

[Chris from Nailsea]

From the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page):

High-speed rail campaigners in noise protest

Protesters against the proposed high-speed rail link have been simulating the noise they think the trains would make in a Staffordshire village.

The village of Whittington near Lichfield lies on the planned route of the link between London and Birmingham.

Residents used speakers to play the sound of a French high-speed train, with noise levels reaching 95 decibels.

Transport Secretary Philip Hammond has said the line, known as HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)), would mean a ^44bn boost for the UK^▸ (United Kingdom) economy.

[anthony215]

There is a interesting article in the latest copy of Rail about High speed 1 which shows half the stuff these nimbbies are saying is rubbish.

 I am glad to see that Rail & Modern Railways are keeping up the fight for HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) against some of these people. I do think that governments do need to grow a bit of a backbone  instead of backing down because they are too afraid to upset some voters.

[JayMac]

RAIL magazine do give space for one of HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) fiercest critics, transport journalist Christian Wolmar. His criticisms are however a bit more than just nimbyism.

[Chris from Nailsea]

From the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page):

Will High Speed 2 look like this?

An animation was released today by High Speed 2 Limited showing a high speed train zooming pleasantly through the English countryside.

The video also shows some of the possible tunnels, bridges and viaducts that will need to be built if the scheme gets the go-ahead.

Not much indication though of the thousands of trees that will have to be planted to screen the new line.

The most striking omission though is that there is no sound - one of the issues that campaigners are concerned about.

Unsurprisingly, however, the footage looks quick, slick and hi-tech.

[JayMac]

From the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page):

HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) rail project benefits uncertain, says review

The financial benefits of the HS2 London to Birmingham high-speed rail project are uncertain, an independent review prepared for MPs^▸ (Member of Parliament) has found. The Commons transport committee asked consultants to look into the business case for the government's ^32bn scheme, due to be completed by 2026. Their review said London could benefit "possibly at the expense of less service-orientated cities on the line". It added there was little evidence on the regional and socio-economic impact.

The report was published as the transport committee held the first of five evidence sessions on HS2. It looked at the overall business case rather than the details of the route, which passes through several beauty spots as well as a large swathe of suburbs in north-west London. The first phase of HS2 will link London and Birmingham, with extensions further north later. A Y-shaped section taking branches to Manchester, Leeds and possibly further north could be finished by 2033. HS2 is a central facet of the coalition government's transport policy and was touted as an alternative to the third runway at Heathrow when the government scrapped that last year.

Key dates for evidence at committee

    * 28 June: HS2 supporters
    * 12 July: HS2 opponents
    * 6 September: Aviation and environmental groups
    * 13 September: Transport Secretary Philip Hammond

Giving evidence, Anthony Smith, chief executive of rail customer watchdog, Passenger Focus, told the committee he hoped HS2 would not be seen as a "rich man's railway". He said the way the line was presented and ticket pricing was "very important". West Coast Main Line passengers went through "eight years of pain" while it was upgraded, he said, so a new line had its attractions.

Association of Train Operating Companies chief executive Michael Roberts said he anticipated a gap between the West Coast line being "full by 2024" and HS2 running by 2026.

In written evidence to the committee, the Department for Transport said building the London to Birmingham section would create more than 40,000 jobs. It added that analysis suggested economic benefits of about ^44bn from the proposed Y-shaped network.

The report by Oxera consultancy firm said the estimates were surrounded by a "degree of uncertainty. The overall balance of non-monetised impacts - which include landscape, carbon and changes in land use - is difficult to ascertain." It went on to say there was evidence that service and tourism-orientated cities were "most likely to benefit. London is thus very likely to benefit, possibly at the expense of less service-oriented cities on the line." It added that just over a third (34%) of quantified benefits in the economic case were to long-distance passengers from London, so "the regeneration effects (if they exist) would be large in London". However, it warned that regeneration benefits in one area could be offset by losses in areas not served by the high-speed line. "The precise impacts will depend on the reallocation of conventional services on the West Coast main line and elsewhere," it said.

A total of 190 organisations have submitted evidence to the committee but Transport Secretary Philip Hammond is not expected to answer questions until 13 September.

[paul7575]

Good of the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) to cut a 30 page report down to a couple of sentences for us. 

http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-committees/transport/HSR%20503%20-%20Oxera%20Report%20-%20Review%20of%20the%20government's%20case%20for%20an%20HSR%20programme.pdf

It is worth reading the whole thing - I thought it was fairly balanced, and certainly not as negative as some vested interests are suggesting...

Paul

[ChrisB]

The Latest News

[JayMac]

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeD8hyHbZBQ

[pbc2520]

(I couldn't find any reminders on this forum, apologies to those who are aware.)

http://highspeedrail.dft.gov.uk/

[Andrew1939 from West Oxon]

The responses from the Nimby's are to be expected and should be treated appropriately. What worries me is whether HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) is real value for money as currently proposed. It has been reported that a quarter of the construction costs would relate to the first 4 miles out of Euston. Why not start the line from the proposed West London station? It seems to be assumed that it needs to be at Euston to be close to HS1^▸ (High Speed line 1 - St Pancras to Channel Tunnel) at St. Pancras. Although there would be transfer traffic much would go to and come from all over the London area and most would have no interest in getting to and from Euston The west London terminal would be connected to Crossrail for just as easy access to the City. The benefits are said to be for the Midlands and eventually the North so what benefit would the Midlands get from those 4 miles? At a later date a more viable and less costly route further out to connect the two terminals might be found to be viable.