|
HS2
Jan 13, 2012 15:13:25 GMT
Post by moobs on Jan 13, 2012 15:13:25 GMT
Are you for or against High Speed Rail?
I think it's a great idea and about time we dragged our rail network into the 21st century.
The sooner the better
|
|
|
HS2
Jan 13, 2012 15:16:43 GMT
Post by stfconyourpitch (banned) on Jan 13, 2012 15:16:43 GMT
It depends on who is paying for it. If it is the taxpayer then definitely not.
|
|
|
Post by Simon Lill on Jan 13, 2012 15:57:22 GMT
Are you for or against High Speed Rail? I think it's a great idea and about time we dragged our rail network into the 21st century. The sooner the better I think thats the point though. It doesn't drag our rail network in to the 21st Century, just one very small bit of it. What could be acheived nationwide if the money was spent on the existing network. Yes we must progress, but not at the cost of leaving the rest of the network behind.
|
|
|
HS2
Jan 13, 2012 16:47:29 GMT
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2012 16:47:29 GMT
Broadly in favour although agree with Simon this seems too much focus on one line when the whole network needs modernising. Also the problem is that under private ownership rail prices are such that only the wealthy few would benefit from this, when the rail system should be for everyone and a realistic alternative to travelling by car. The rail services should be renationalised and the money raised from taxes on the motorist used to subsidise rail fares to the levels they are in other countries.
|
|
|
HS2
Jan 13, 2012 17:35:37 GMT
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2012 17:35:37 GMT
The rail network has been underfunded for years and is broadly overpriced for so many these days. Amarillo are you suggesting taxing drivers more to cover the cost of the rail network? We already are taxed more on fuel and road taxes than anywhere else in Europe, and there is already legislation under foot in the EU to add to the motorists costs by making MOTs more expensive. The new MOT will insist on all warning lights to be working on the ECU and all sorts of other rules and regulations to be brought in, some good and some bad. Cars may well be forced off the road before they should be...possibly to protect the car industry in France and Germany
|
|
|
HS2
Jan 13, 2012 19:58:40 GMT
Post by gottagetbetta on Jan 13, 2012 19:58:40 GMT
agree that HS2 is a good thing and long overdue investment in the rail network. Anyone who has gone from St Pancras on the run to Paris will recall what a great experience that is! I write as someone who will be able to see and hear the route and have to live with all the construction chaos!
|
|
|
HS2
Jan 13, 2012 20:32:38 GMT
Post by Belgian Yellow on Jan 13, 2012 20:32:38 GMT
One of the reasons I moved to Belgium. I just give up on the backwards mentality in relation to things like infrastructure, health service, education, etc. A small country like Belgium can develop more miles of highspeed track in a matter of months whereas the the UK takes this time to decide on a short stretch of track which will then take 20 odd years to build and be outdated by the time it is finished.
|
|
|
HS2
Jan 13, 2012 21:45:20 GMT
Post by Lone Gunman on Jan 13, 2012 21:45:20 GMT
I'm in favour. Anything that reduces the number of commuters on the regular network has to be a good thing (HS2 has to be reasonably priced to make this work of course.) The existing network has been neglected for years and one of the main reasons is privatisation. BR never made any money and probably needed to be put out of its misery but the botched way the railways were sold has resulted in a situation whereby the TOCs can f#ck the public in the ar#e while getting paid to do so by the government.
Ultimately however our rail network is largely a product of the mid to late 19th century and is never going to be brought into the 21st save for a masive spend the likes of which is simply never going to happen. Ironically a lot of the more modern lines which would more easily have been brought up to scratch were axed by Beeching in the 60s.
|
|
|
Post by Long John Silver on Jan 13, 2012 22:25:33 GMT
Against. Can't see the return for the average train user for the billions that will be spent on it. It's fine I guess if you live close to the end point terminals, but not a lot of use for the majority who don't. The money could be far better utilized on the existing network.
|
|
|
HS2
Jan 13, 2012 23:53:41 GMT
Post by stfconyourpitch (banned) on Jan 13, 2012 23:53:41 GMT
Against. Can't see the return for the average train user for the billions that will be spent on it. It's fine I guess if you live close to the end point terminals, but not a lot of use for the majority who don't. The money could be far better utilized on the existing network. Or not taken from you and I with the force of law in the first place.
|
|
|
HS2
Jan 14, 2012 11:06:39 GMT
Post by yelloexile on Jan 14, 2012 11:06:39 GMT
HS2.
It has to happen.
It's like those who protested that the Newbury bypass was not needed. That the the M40 wasn't, etc etc.
There are a lot of reasons why improvements to our transport infrastructure need to happen. It's not a case of saying no HS2 = improving other parts of the rail network. This is the first stage of developing the network as a whole. Further links to Manchester and Leeds will widen the benefit. The initial capital expenditure will also provide a welcome boost to the economy and jobs.
Plan for the future.
|
|
|
HS2
Jan 14, 2012 11:08:51 GMT
Post by yellowhoods on Jan 14, 2012 11:08:51 GMT
I hate NIMBYs. Anyway, in an hour's time I'm off door-to-dooring against a proposed housing development alongside our estate.
|
|
|
HS2
Jan 14, 2012 11:34:06 GMT
Post by Belgian Yellow on Jan 14, 2012 11:34:06 GMT
I hate NIMBYs. Anyway, in an hour's time I'm off door-to-dooring against a proposed housing development alongside our estate. Estate in MK? Thought you said MK was made up of 7 fine villages?
|
|
|
HS2
Jan 14, 2012 11:36:52 GMT
Post by manorboy on Jan 14, 2012 11:36:52 GMT
It runs just 5 miles from me. It upsets me to see peaceful countryside savagely knifed by 200mph trains every 3 minutes but I cannot bring myself to object as we need the facility. I remember the hooha re the M40 but cannot imagine life without it today. HS2 will not serve the people of Oxfordshire/Bucks in the same way as the M40 but it will serve us as a nation.
|
|
|
HS2
Jan 14, 2012 11:37:58 GMT
Post by yellowhoods on Jan 14, 2012 11:37:58 GMT
I hate NIMBYs. Anyway, in an hour's time I'm off door-to-dooring against a proposed housing development alongside our estate. Estate in MK? Thought you said MK was made up of 7 fine villages? 13 fine villages and about 20 country estates, one of which is ours, although the servants do live in the grounds (well away from our sight lines).
|
|
|
HS2
Jan 14, 2012 14:08:37 GMT
Post by moobs on Jan 14, 2012 14:08:37 GMT
We should be glad our money is a least invested in a project with tangible benefits and boost the economy in the future.
Labour wasted money trying to improve public services, but improvements were only minor and all we have to show for it is a huge defecit
|
|
|
HS2
Jan 14, 2012 14:13:55 GMT
Post by dannyc on Jan 14, 2012 14:13:55 GMT
One of the reasons I moved to Belgium. I just give up on the backwards mentality in relation to things like infrastructure, health service, education, etc. A small country like Belgium can develop more miles of highspeed track in a matter of months whereas the the UK takes this time to decide on a short stretch of track which will then take 20 odd years to build and be outdated by the time it is finished. why is this thought to much red tape and safety checks
|
|
|
HS2
Jan 16, 2012 11:22:02 GMT
Post by stfconyourpitch (banned) on Jan 16, 2012 11:22:02 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Long John Silver on Jan 16, 2012 11:34:35 GMT
Interesting article that. Can any of those in favour of HS2 tell me if anyone living more than 5 miles outside of London or Birmingham will ever use it? The small saving in the time of the actual train journey will be more than lost in the extra time taken to get to the station... and that's before the added cost of the extra travel to the terminals and the likely higher fare than current services. What a enormous waste of money it will turn out to be.
|
|
|
HS2
Jan 16, 2012 11:47:06 GMT
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2012 11:47:06 GMT
Amarillo are you suggesting taxing drivers more to cover the cost of the rail network? No not more, but the high taxes that already exist should be used to make public transport better. Ultimately, its surely in the interests of this country to reduce the amount of traffic on the roads and make trains and buses better and cheaper. The problem in this country seems to be that the motorist is taxed more and more but the alternatives are not made any more attractive or affordable because they aren't run by the government. While I agree with investment in railways the more I read about HS2 it doesn't seem to be the right kind of investment.
|
|
|
HS2
Jan 16, 2012 12:29:18 GMT
Post by moobs on Jan 16, 2012 12:29:18 GMT
Interesting article that. Can any of those in favour of HS2 tell me if anyone living more than 5 miles outside of London or Birmingham will ever use it? The small saving in the time of the actual train journey will be more than lost in the extra time taken to get to the station... and that's before the added cost of the extra travel to the terminals and the likely higher fare than current services. What a enormous waste of money it will turn out to be. Our rail network is a joke and we're decades behind other countries like France and Germany. It's a no brainer. Giving money to benefits scroungers - that's a waste of money - not this....
|
|
|
HS2
Jan 16, 2012 12:35:18 GMT
Post by winchesterox on Jan 16, 2012 12:35:18 GMT
I may well benefit from being involved in the construction project, so I think it is a good thing.
|
|
|
HS2
Jan 16, 2012 12:42:09 GMT
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2012 12:42:09 GMT
Our rail network is a joke and we're decades behind other countries like France and Germany. It's a no brainer. .. True, but theres a big difference - the French and German rail systems are run by their governments to provide an affordable means of transport for the people. Ours are run by private companies for profit.
|
|
|
HS2
Jan 16, 2012 14:00:22 GMT
Post by foghornleghorn on Jan 16, 2012 14:00:22 GMT
Personally I get fed up of people moaning about our infrastructure and then moaning when somebody tries to improve it saying it’s the wrong type of investment. Of course any type of investment would be the wrong type for most of them. I think this is great news, it’s embarrassing having the worst everything in Europe. I would much rather spend money on projects like this than quantitative easing. The last decent thing to happen on our train lines was the flying Scotsman. Even better news is the east-west link; I can’t wait for that to open.
|
|
|
HS2
Jan 16, 2012 14:01:44 GMT
Post by foghornleghorn on Jan 16, 2012 14:01:44 GMT
Interesting article that. Can any of those in favour of HS2 tell me if anyone living more than 5 miles outside of London or Birmingham will ever use it? Because they will be able to get a seat on their existing service?
|
|
|
HS2
Jan 16, 2012 14:07:25 GMT
Post by foghornleghorn on Jan 16, 2012 14:07:25 GMT
The rail services should be renationalised and the money raised from taxes on the motorist used to subsidise rail fares to the levels they are in other countries. Noooooo!!! Public ownership is the best way to p1ss away money in any sector. I’d rather see a big pot of money that the different operators could pitch for specifically for the purpose of infrastructures projects. Obviously it would need to be protected against project overruns, etc.
|
|
|
HS2
Jan 16, 2012 14:33:35 GMT
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2012 14:33:35 GMT
Noooooo!!! Public ownership is the best way to p1ss away money in any sector. I’d rather see a big pot of money that the different operators could pitch for specifically for the purpose of infrastructures projects. Obviously it would need to be protected against project overruns, etc. but how do you protect against the current situation where the public are ripped off with ever increasing prices? Of those countries that you say have better trains than us, are any of them privately run?
|
|
|
HS2
Jan 16, 2012 14:59:29 GMT
Post by foghornleghorn on Jan 16, 2012 14:59:29 GMT
Noooooo!!! Public ownership is the best way to p1ss away money in any sector. I’d rather see a big pot of money that the different operators could pitch for specifically for the purpose of infrastructures projects. Obviously it would need to be protected against project overruns, etc. but how do you protect against the current situation where the public are ripped off with ever increasing prices? Of those countries that you say have better trains than us, are any of them privately run? re 'are any of them privately run': No, and I do take your general point, I just think we as a nation are incapable of running a public sector efficiently. If you could convince the Germans (or even the French) to take over our public sector i'd have a lot more confidence in nationalising. From a practical point of view nationwide infrastructure projects must be easier with a single owner but .... re 'public are ripped off': yes, commuting is a privilege of the middle class although I would say there are some very good deals on long distance excursions if you plan ahead so I don't entirely agree the public are ripped off. I guess the supply/demand curve lets the operators get away with this and by opening new tracks with alternative operators you are alleviating the problem (theoretically at least, lets wait and see).
|
|
|
HS2
Jan 16, 2012 15:03:46 GMT
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2012 15:03:46 GMT
Well we should learn how to run our public sector like they do in France and Germany then. I'd rather take our chances with renationalisation than the current situation of trains being a priveledge of the middle class. There might be some good deals, but why make it so difficult for people? It just puts people off using the trains and adds more cars to our congested roads.
|
|
|
HS2
Jan 16, 2012 16:08:21 GMT
Post by moobs on Jan 16, 2012 16:08:21 GMT
Let's be fair here. Although fares have gone up since privitisation the service, whilst not perfect by any means, is a darn sight better. Under British rail we still had slam door trains and appalling service.
There's also the argument that the private companies don't get long enough leases to be able to invest in the long term. Why would they plough millions into more / better trains if we only give them 7 year contracts?
|
|