Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[albitz]

If it got freight off the roads and back on the railways I would be all for it.

[Terbs]

And remember....you have got to get to London first to be able to get on the thing anyway.
After wasting time doing that, I would be almost in Birmingham from here!!!!

[Terbs]

I thought it was for passengers, not freight Albs........cannot see freight trains running at 200mph......could not use the passenger lines, they would slow down that traffic.

[JesterRT]

I work in an IT based industry, and commute daily a fair old way.  HS2 may actually affect my company, because they're going to plough their track through some of our grounds.  The thing that gets me is that in the old days (and not really that long ago) people used to work near their office/factory/business.  It seems that more and more people want to live in one place and work in another (as I do - although I would move closer if I could a) convince the other half to move further from her mother, and b) afford to buy a house in the area).  I spend most my days working with other people, but reckon that 90% of the time I could be just as productive working from home, using video conf, email & phones.  Some businesses in my sector are already embracing this as a working culture - with a small office in the capital but barely any employees actually work there - the main workforce are at home or in small pockets around the world.
I'd like to see money invested more in trying to just cut down the journeys people 'need' to make - how many of those people commuting to London could work at home or more locally, if businesses went for the idea?  I can't see my company doing it - not just yet - but think of the costs for lighting, heating, securing, renting, furnishing, maintaining, powering, watering etc and the cost per seat at a business is extortion.  Shift those to smaller sites, or home offices, run your business at a lower overhead (or pay your staff more), watch all your staff save on their transport costs so they end up with more cash on the hip at the end of every month - then watch them spend it (hey we could even put something into the economy )

</ramble>

...and I saw the clip of Cameron bleating on about 'but they've got one, so we need one too' - and as a reason to push it through that just wound me right up.

[cleggy]

Should have been done 25 years ago. The station at Toton sidings is a perfect place midway between Nottingham and Derby, just off the A52 close to the M1 and a soon to be completed tram line direct into Nottingham for transfer to local trains, a link to East Midlands airport at Parkway would be good.
Lot of money but stop foreign aid to pay for it or the daily £55m to the bloody EU. UK FIRST

I hope British companies get the contracts and use British labour for the work, why restrict it to 220MPH when trains now run at 300.

A pity I won't travel on it

[jimac]

London and the home counties has a population of approx. 18 million people.The whole of thenorth of England has a population of approx. 14.5 million people.Thats why everything tends to centre around London and the surrounding area.Its the capital city and  also arguably the worlds biggest finance centre,so that will always be where the money (and therefore people) tends to be concentrated.
In many ways people in the north are better off as its a much less crowded & hectic place to be.

So, that's 42 million (70%) that don't live in London and the home counties.  And just because London is the capital is no reason for eveything to be based there (the population of Washington DC is around 650,000, New York City is around 8,000,000).

People tend to be concentrated there because businesses and Government is concentrated there, and it becomes self perpetuating resulting in overcrowding and increased costs.  If businesses were incentivised to move away and spread out (and they could be highly incentivised with £50bn) we could all enjoy this green and pleasant land a little more.

[Terbs]

London and the home counties has a population of approx. 18 million people.The whole of thenorth of England has a population of approx. 14.5 million people.Thats why everything tends to centre around London and the surrounding area.Its the capital city and  also arguably the worlds biggest finance centre,so that will always be where the money (and therefore people) tends to be concentrated.
In many ways people in the north are better off as its a much less crowded & hectic place to be.

So, that's 42 million (70%) that don't live in London and the home counties.  And just because London is the capital is no reason for eveything to be based there (the population of Washington DC is around 650,000, New York City is around 8,000,000).

People tend to be concentrated there because businesses and Government is concentrated there, and it becomes self perpetuating resulting in overcrowding and increased costs.  If businesses were incentivised to move away and spread out (and they could be highly incentivised with £50bn) we could all enjoy this green and pleasant land a little more.

There will not be much left at this rate

[jimac]

London and the home counties has a population of approx. 18 million people.The whole of thenorth of England has a population of approx. 14.5 million people.Thats why everything tends to centre around London and the surrounding area.Its the capital city and  also arguably the worlds biggest finance centre,so that will always be where the money (and therefore people) tends to be concentrated.
In many ways people in the north are better off as its a much less crowded & hectic place to be.

So, that's 42 million (70%) that don't live in London and the home counties.  And just because London is the capital is no reason for eveything to be based there (the population of Washington DC is around 650,000, New York City is around 8,000,000).

People tend to be concentrated there because businesses and Government is concentrated there, and it becomes self perpetuating resulting in overcrowding and increased costs.  If businesses were incentivised to move away and spread out (and they could be highly incentivised with £50bn) we could all enjoy this green and pleasant land a little more.

There will not be much left at this rate

Except in the North, where they build bugger all these days!

[Rog]

Reading all the posts, with many so anti this step into the  future, I am so glad you were not around in Victorian England!  If you had been there, Britain would never have become Great!

I really don't consider myself Luddite or non-forward thinking. During Victorian times and the Industrial Revolution, the innovators were doing things because they simply didn't exist.

The railway network didn't exist so they made it. The London Underground didn't exist so they made it, Our sewerage system didn't exist, so they made it etc etc. We already have quite an extensive railway system to Birmingham, Sheffield, Leeds etc.

If HS2 was something really different, maybe carriages in underground vacuum tubes that sucked you to Birmingham in 20 minutes LOL  , I'd be for it. But It isn't, it's another railway.

[Terbs]

Also, Rog, remember that during Victorian times, our towns were smaller, villages were hamlets, there were no big housing estates, no massive airports...so hell of a lot of green land, so building a railway or stuff in those times did not cause disruption to peoples lives and livelyhoods. I wouldn't mind so much if they upgraded the existing tracks instead of ploughing out for more.
How many of these trains are going to leave London each day, filled to the gunwhales with passengers, on a journey that is going to take an hour. Struth, most of the population is going north daily and most of the northern population are heading south !!!!!! But if its not continuous all day, why do we need it
I don't think the figures add up at all

[Lizzie_Zoom]

Reading all the posts, with many so anti this step into the  future, I am so glad you were not around in Victorian England!  If you had been there, Britain would never have become Great!

Great Britain either moves on and modernises, or dies.  Then everyone will be complaining about a lack of job opportunities far greater than now.

Let progress wagons roll on!

But progress does not need to be centred on London and the South East.  The vast majority of people in this country do not live or work in the South East corner of Britain and seldom need to get there.  Rather than making the funnel wider, to pour more people into an already crowded and expensive part of the country, I'd rather see real incentives for businesses (and other organisations) to relocate or expand into the less densely populated (and often more attractive) regions.

So ... how does the business that "relocates" to your "less populated area" actually DO business ?? if its major client base is in a populated area ??

That is the whole purpose of better infrastructure links .. it actually ALLOWS what you desire !! Without the decent links the business must remain in the populated area .. with them, it can move and still service its clients.  It is fine being able to view/order/pay for your items on the internet .. but you actually do want them delivered don't you ?? and that takes infrastructure.

Lots of hypocrisy (again) over these issues ... "Government must do more"   "Government must invest" "Government encourages north/south divide as they all live in London" ......  but when they actually do something that answers all 3 points  "Government wastes money" "Government blights lives" etc etc etc ..

It is, I believe, simply that many folk don't think, they simply repeat the headlines of the politically motivated press... who never let the truth get in the way of a headline ..

Good news sells no papers ... slating the government does ...  regardless of the truth.

#

Well said Entwood!

[Lizzie_Zoom]

Reading all the posts, with many so anti this step into the  future, I am so glad you were not around in Victorian England!  If you had been there, Britain would never have become Great!

I really don't consider myself Luddite or non-forward thinking. During Victorian times and the Industrial Revolution, the innovators were doing things because they simply didn't exist.

The railway network didn't exist so they made it. The London Underground didn't exist so they made it, Our sewerage system didn't exist, so they made it etc etc. We already have quite an extensive railway system to Birmingham, Sheffield, Leeds etc.

If HS2 was something really different, maybe carriages in underground vacuum tubes that sucked you to Birmingham in 20 minutes LOL  , I'd be for it. But It isn't, it's another railway.

Following your logic, the motorways should never have been built because standard roads already existed.  With airports they already exist so there is no need to expand them or add to the number.

Sorry, but we must drive forward, and we are talking here about a transport system to cater for 25, 50 and 100 years time, not for us around now particularly.  When those years arrive will we still go around in our automobile bubbles, burning fossil fuels, or even electric bubbles that ultimately burn fossil fuels in some form (well certainly for the next 50 years the way it is going!)?

The answer our children's children will face will need to be radical, and hopefully that is a high speed, super capacity, railway driven system that those who live at the end of the 21st century will say "thank God somene had the foresight and commitment to build it for us!"

[Rog]

Reading all the posts, with many so anti this step into the  future, I am so glad you were not around in Victorian England!  If you had been there, Britain would never have become Great!

I really don't consider myself Luddite or non-forward thinking. During Victorian times and the Industrial Revolution, the innovators were doing things because they simply didn't exist.

The railway network didn't exist so they made it. The London Underground didn't exist so they made it, Our sewerage system didn't exist, so they made it etc etc. We already have quite an extensive railway system to Birmingham, Sheffield, Leeds etc.

If HS2 was something really different, maybe carriages in underground vacuum tubes that sucked you to Birmingham in 20 minutes LOL  , I'd be for it. But It isn't, it's another railway.

The answer our children's children will face will need to be radical, and hopefully  . . . .

Lizzy, that is my exact point. It isn't radical or certainly not radical enough.

[Lizzie_Zoom]

Reading all the posts, with many so anti this step into the  future, I am so glad you were not around in Victorian England!  If you had been there, Britain would never have become Great!

I really don't consider myself Luddite or non-forward thinking. During Victorian times and the Industrial Revolution, the innovators were doing things because they simply didn't exist.

The railway network didn't exist so they made it. The London Underground didn't exist so they made it, Our sewerage system didn't exist, so they made it etc etc. We already have quite an extensive railway system to Birmingham, Sheffield, Leeds etc.

If HS2 was something really different, maybe carriages in underground vacuum tubes that sucked you to Birmingham in 20 minutes LOL  , I'd be for it. But It isn't, it's another railway.

The answer our children's children will face will need to be radical, and hopefully  . . . .

Lizzy, that is my exact point. It isn't radical or certainly not radical enough.

Oh it is for the UK, and will bring us up to the standards our railways should have reached decades ago!

[Lizzie_Zoom]

Also, Rog, remember that during Victorian times, our towns were smaller, villages were hamlets, there were no big housing estates, no massive airports...so hell of a lot of green land, so building a railway or stuff in those times did not cause disruption to peoples lives and livelyhoods. I wouldn't mind so much if they upgraded the existing tracks instead of ploughing out for more.
How many of these trains are going to leave London each day, filled to the gunwhales with passengers, on a journey that is going to take an hour. Struth, most of the population is going north daily and most of the northern population are heading south !!!!!! But if its not continuous all day, why do we need it
I don't think the figures add up at all

But those very railway lines created new towns, with large working populations to grow up and give a secondary boost to the Industrial Revolution.  The railways opened up new areas of industrial growth, with the supply of working people, taken away from very poorly paid jobs on the land, greatly increased with the economy greatly enhanced.

The Coalitions plan is to recreate that progress, using a small amount of land from the millions of acres hardly populated, and give the population what they are screaming out for, with complaints galour aimed at the Government.  As Entwood states, the Government cannot win whatever they do!!

As a matter of interest when the railways entered London, and developed their systems, in the 1840's and later, they carried out a major land clearance with many homes, albeit often slums, being demolished without compensation.  In fact the railway companies ended up owning 10% of the land in London.  The Victorians were determined to create a railway system, yes for profit, but also to drive commerce forward.