Brexit: Let's call the whole thing off..

fenix

Why is it that other countries have double decker trains ? Why can't we ? Surely that would be a cheaper option to HS2 ?

rick_chasey

Victorian tunnels and bridges.

tangled_metal

I think the aim is to develop the Northern end by making it easier to reach not make Manchester a dormer city for London workers.

As to destroy countryside? More motorways as the alternative? Hmmm! A dilemma. Of course being North of HS2 pork not really affect me much. Think I prefer cross pennine and better local train services as some things more likely to benefit me. Still prefer it to another London development that costs more and takes possibly longer to get done.

rolf_f

john80 wrote:

Just think for 56 billion we could buy 560000 Teslas assuming we pay over market value at 100000 each. We could probably get a steep discount on this sort of order or re-purpose the Jaguar factory on the odd day of the week to help them out. We could then get up to the point that they self drive. I could then call one to my house in Cumbria and it would take me and my family the length of the country in big automated taxi service kind of way. No need to bulldoze peoples houses.

Best argument in favour of HS2 I've seen yet.....

bobmcstuff

Tangled Metal wrote:

I think the aim is to develop the Northern end by making it easier to reach not make Manchester a dormer city for London workers.

As to destroy countryside? More motorways as the alternative? Hmmm! A dilemma. Of course being North of HS2 pork not really affect me much. Think I prefer cross pennine and better local train services as some things more likely to benefit me. Still prefer it to another London development that costs more and takes possibly longer to get done.

Improving the transpennine routes would be a very good thing IMO, but the government won't pay for anything that's not London related.

As an example: currently there's only 2 through platforms at Manchester Piccadilly, the rest are terminus platforms. Through trains are quite important (trains from the airport through to Liverpool or Middlesbrough etc.), but the volume trying to get through the 2 platforms means there are pretty much continual delays, and cancellations are frequent.

There was a proposal to put in two new platforms, cost around £60 million (not much in the grand scheme of things). This was rejected and then a couple of weeks later they approved another billion or so for Crossrail.

They've also given up on electrifying the transpennine line.

This is actually one of the reasons I'm not fussed about "sovereignty" etc with regards the EU: the government in Westminster seems to have no interest in the rest of the country. It matters very little to me if decisions are made in London or Brussels, except actually the EU does make a lot of investments into regional development - whereas the Westminster government doesn't seem to care at all.

fenix

Rick Chasey wrote:

Victorian tunnels and bridges.

Curse those hardworking Victorians for not futureproofing the railways !

rjsterry

Fenix wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Victorian tunnels and bridges.

Curse those hardworking Victorians for not futureproofing the railways !

Part of the reason HS2 is so expensive is the work to hide the line in new tunnels and cuttings to save the countryside. The other reason is the costs of compulsory purchase of all that land.

robert88

New year's resolutions:

Exit BREXIT
Dump Trump

Mr_Cellophane

Fenix wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Victorian tunnels and bridges.

Curse those hardworking Victorians for not futureproofing the railways !

That was Stevenson's fault. If he hadn't persuaded the government to use his gauge instead of Brunel's broadgauge the railways would have to have been built straighter which would have meant trains could run faster. It would have also prevented all the local lines serving villages (the ones Beeching closed) being constructed. That would have resulted in a more comprehensive bus network required to service them which would still be used today.

Pross

Fenix wrote:

Why is it that other countries have double decker trains ? Why can't we ? Surely that would be a cheaper option to HS2 ?

The amount of bridge work required just to electrify the line from South Wales to London has been huge (not to mention the closure that was needed to do the Severn Tunnel. It wouldn't be possible to raise them sufficiently to clear a double deck train as the gradients of the roads would be way too steep. I suppose they could, in theory, drop the rail line levels instead but that would be a massive engineering task at every single structure.

Pross

bobmcstuff wrote:

Tangled Metal wrote:

I think the aim is to develop the Northern end by making it easier to reach not make Manchester a dormer city for London workers.

As to destroy countryside? More motorways as the alternative? Hmmm! A dilemma. Of course being North of HS2 pork not really affect me much. Think I prefer cross pennine and better local train services as some things more likely to benefit me. Still prefer it to another London development that costs more and takes possibly longer to get done.

Improving the transpennine routes would be a very good thing IMO, but the government won't pay for anything that's not London related.

As an example: currently there's only 2 through platforms at Manchester Piccadilly, the rest are terminus platforms. Through trains are quite important (trains from the airport through to Liverpool or Middlesbrough etc.), but the volume trying to get through the 2 platforms means there are pretty much continual delays, and cancellations are frequent.

There was a proposal to put in two new platforms, cost around £60 million (not much in the grand scheme of things). This was rejected and then a couple of weeks later they approved another billion or so for Crossrail.

They've also given up on electrifying the transpennine line.

This is actually one of the reasons I'm not fussed about "sovereignty" etc with regards the EU: the government in Westminster seems to have no interest in the rest of the country. It matters very little to me if decisions are made in London or Brussels, except actually the EU does make a lot of investments into regional development - whereas the Westminster government doesn't seem to care at all.

Another example is that on the same day it was announced by Chris Grayling that they were dropping the electrification between Cardiff and Swansea he also announced his support for Crossrail 2. I appreciate the importance of a world class public transport system in London but investment in transport infrastructure is critical in ensuring the financial growth outside the capital as is constantly being cut or cancelled.

rick_chasey

The under investment in the North is an absolute scandal.

robert88

A university study has just been published that claims the referendum result has knocked 16% off the value of British companies. As of now. If on March 29 there is no deal the fall will increase.

http://www.bristol.ac.uk/news/2019/january/brexit-impact.html

Naturally the cheaper British companies become the more attractive they will be to foreign buyers who will want those with valuable intellectual property and other rights or simply their order books.

It is a similar situation to that before we joined the Union when a large number of companies found investment drying up and their markets disappear as the Commonwealth countries traded with countries whose industrial infrastructure was not crippled by lack of investment.

thegreatdivide

rjsterry wrote:

The other reason is the costs of compulsory purchase of all that land.

Which they've spectacularly c0cked up.

cooldad

Don't forget who won the war.

Brexit means Brexit.

Etc.......

Pross

Robert88 wrote:

A university study has just been published that claims the referendum result has knocked 16% off the value of British companies. As of now. If on March 29 there is no deal the fall will increase.

http://www.bristol.ac.uk/news/2019/january/brexit-impact.html

Naturally the cheaper British companies become the more attractive they will be to foreign buyers who will want those with valuable intellectual property and other rights or simply their order books.

It is a similar situation to that before we joined the Union when a large number of companies found investment drying up and their markets disappear as the Commonwealth countries traded with countries whose industrial infrastructure was not crippled by lack of investment.

Nah, that's just Project Fear - the country has voted to leave and leave we must etc. etc. fingers in ears, head in sand....

imposter2.0

cooldad wrote:

Don't forget who won the war.

Inadvertently, I think you might just have put your finger on the root of the problem. The UK has never really moved on from being on the winning side in WW2 (and to a lesser extent WW1) - and 'British Exceptionalism', 'bulldog spirit', etc, call it what you will, and this post-war sense of nationalism, entitlement, arrogance and misplaced-superiority is now front and centre again...

DeVlaeminck

Imposter wrote:

cooldad wrote:

Don't forget who won the war.

Inadvertently, I think you might just have put your finger on the root of the problem. The UK has never really moved on from being on the winning side in WW2 (and to a lesser extent WW1) - and 'British Exceptionalism', 'bulldog spirit', etc, call it what you will, and this post-war sense of nationalism, entitlement, arrogance and misplaced-superiority is now front and centre again...

I'm never sure that's really true. If you look at other countries are they really any different - maybe some are less nationalistic and maybe some more so.

In general I've found Germans (to pick the dominant country in Western Europe) to be far more like that - the German way of doing things is the right one - than Brits are. OK you might argue they have more cause to think that but I just think if anything we are fairly self deprecating about our country. I'd argue the USA is also more nationalistic though I've never actually been there so I may be being unfair.

I mean even now many people wouldn't fly our flag - either that of Britain or England - because they'd feel it marked them out as some kind of xenophobic nationalist.

cooldad

You obviously haven't read the comments in the Daily Mail....

bobmcstuff

cooldad wrote:

You obviously haven't read the comments in the Daily Mail....

I like having a normal blood pressure thanks.

Pross

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Imposter wrote:

cooldad wrote:

Don't forget who won the war.

Inadvertently, I think you might just have put your finger on the root of the problem. The UK has never really moved on from being on the winning side in WW2 (and to a lesser extent WW1) - and 'British Exceptionalism', 'bulldog spirit', etc, call it what you will, and this post-war sense of nationalism, entitlement, arrogance and misplaced-superiority is now front and centre again...

I'm never sure that's really true. If you look at other countries are they really any different - maybe some are less nationalistic and maybe some more so.

In general I've found Germans (to pick the dominant country in Western Europe) to be far more like that - the German way of doing things is the right one - than Brits are. OK you might argue they have more cause to think that but I just think if anything we are fairly self deprecating about our country. I'd argue the USA is also more nationalistic though I've never actually been there so I may be being unfair.

I mean even now many people wouldn't fly our flag - either that of Britain or England - because they'd feel it marked them out as some kind of xenophobic nationalist.

It's less the Nationalist side of things but you regularly hear people saying 'we got through the Blitz' or 'we fought wars to allow this'. I heard it the other day when the implications of a no deal Brexit were being discussed and someone said 'we got through far worse in the war' even if it wasn't for the fact they would have been born 30-40 years after the war had finished and had no experience of how that standard or living would have been do they really think this is something that would be worth living through rationing to achieve (before anyone chips in to suggest I'm saying Brexit will lead to rationing I'm not, it's just an example of what the 'living through worse' entailed)?

pinno

Pross wrote:

...before anyone chips in to suggest I'm saying Brexit will lead to rationing I'm not, it's just an example of what the 'living through worse' entailed)?

I don't know - perhaps it could cure the national obesity problem.

robert88

Robert88 wrote:

Apparently the cost of HS2 has been massively underestimated. Apart from other factors, the number of people's home to be demolished is far greater than planned for.

It is the largest infrastructure project in Europe*. My recommendation is that we cancel it and spend the money we save on our subscription to the EU.


* and least useful

HS2 DELAYS: HIGH SPEED RAIL NEEDS MAJOR RETHINK AS COSTS SPIRAL 'OUT OF CONTROL', LORDS REPORT WARNS

Clearly calling off HS2 and Brexit will have a dramatic effect on the well-being of the nation. Even better if we could aspire to a competent, honest and altruistic government but that ain't gonna happen (either).