HS2 northern leg to Manchester cancelled

[Elwood P Dowd]

I wonder what would have happened if they had started to build HS2 from Manchester to London instead of the other way around

Would they have cancelled it before it reached London ???

[sage]

12 minutes ago, Elwood P Dowd said:

I wonder what would have happened if they had started to build HS2 from Manchester to London instead of the other way around

Would they have cancelled it before it reached London ???

It's not a great advertisement for UK PLC.

If we can't finish our most important infrastructure projects, why should multinational companies invest here.

 

[Rev]

 

 

[AndyinLiverpool]

34 minutes ago, Elwood P Dowd said:

I wonder what would have happened if they had started to build HS2 from Manchester to London instead of the other way around

Would they have cancelled it before it reached London ???

If it really was to benefit the country rather than just London, why didn't they start with the Manchester to Birmingham leg?

Just as an aside, Japan has had its Bullet Trains since 1964.

[PistoldPete]

39 minutes ago, Elwood P Dowd said:

I wonder what would have happened if they had started to build HS2 from Manchester to London instead of the other way around

Would they have cancelled it before it reached London ???

Never mind we will have the Midlands Hub instead. Which won’t help Derby, Nottingham, Leicester, Peterborough, Northampton or anywhere in the East Midlands at all. So not much of a hub or the Midlands is it? 

[Gaspode]

I caught a report last night which looked into the reasons for the vast overspend. There were various reasons such as inflation, need to build additional tunnels under the Chilterns, etc, but by far the most damning reason was relating to the original planning - they came up with the costs by using paper maps to plan the route - at no point did they send people out to actually survey where the track was supposed to go before the plan was put before parliament and the costs signed off - consequently, as the diggers moved in they realised that large parts needed additional works (at huge cost) to make the ground suitable to support the track. They also apparently didn't include any contignecy in the budget (which even a trainee Project Manager knows is needed - even for a simple project).

Gross incompetence (almost criminal negligence) from those tasked with planning/costing the project and also from those people giving it the green light.

Edited October 4, 2023 by Gaspode

[ariotofmyown]

41 minutes ago, Elwood P Dowd said:

I wonder what would have happened if they had started to build HS2 from Manchester to London instead of the other way around

Would they have cancelled it before it reached London ???

I'm not sure this is even a real North vs South/London battle really.

The area north of Euston has been turned into a wasteland to get the station ready for HS2.

But this will probably never happen as HS2 will end/begin at some random West London station with poor links to most of London.

If you drive through the towns and countryside of the likes of Buckinghamshire, there is just continual building sites, mess and disruption. We so wanted to knock 20 minutes off the journey time between London and Bham, that the landscape had to be obilerated to get the tracks straight for high speed trains.

The high level strategy of a fast link from Scotland to London sounds appealing. The planning from then on has been tragic.

So many other rail networks could have been improved instead.

[ariotofmyown]

5 minutes ago, Gaspode said:

I caught a report last night which looked into the reasons for the vast overspend. There were various reasons such as inflation, need to build additional tunnels under the Chilterns, etc, but by far the most damning reason was relating to the original planning - they came up with the costs by using paper maps to plan the route - at no point did they send people out to actually survey where the track was supposed to go before the plan was put before parliament and the costs signed off - consequently, as the diggers moved in they realised that large parts needed additional works (at huge cost) to make the ground suitable to support the track. They also apparently didn't include any contignecy in the budget (which even a trainee Project Manager knows is needed - even for a simple project).

Gross incompetence (almost criminal negligence) from those tasked with planning/costing the project and also from those people giving it the green light.

We should build a rail link to New York. It's a long way, but should be doable. Let's get it signed off, then we can work out how to build it. 

What, there is an ocean inbetween! 

[BaaLocks]

I agree with the point Frankie Boyle made years ago. For £100bn it would be easier to just move Birmingham 20 mins nearer to London.

The sad part of it is the 'bait and switch' element of cancelling the northern leg. The suggestion is that the money that will not be spent in HS2 will now be reinvested in infrastructure for the north in other areas. Not sure how money from 2034 is now going to be made available today - for everything else from nurses to school meals we are being told it is not available.

Meanwhile 15 minute cities, meat taxes, banning mobile phones in schools, immigrants as criminals, reduce benefits, Kier flip flopping. In what is likely to be the penultimate conference before the next election these were the key messages to get across? I'm not taking a political side, I'm just observing these are the pillars they chose to build the political agenda on. Not sure it would fill me with confidence if I was a Tory MP that my job was safe.

Edited October 4, 2023 by BaaLocks

[BaaLocks]

11 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said:

I'm not sure this is even a real North vs South/London battle really.

The area north of Euston has been turned into a wasteland to get the station ready for HS2.

But this will probably never happen as HS2 will end/begin at some random West London station with poor links to most of London.

If you drive through the towns and countryside of the likes of Buckinghamshire, there is just continual building sites, mess and disruption. We so wanted to knock 20 minutes off the journey time between London and Bham, that the landscape had to be obilerated to get the tracks straight for high speed trains.

The high level strategy of a fast link from Scotland to London sounds appealing. The planning from then on has been tragic.

So many other rail networks could have been improved instead.

Last week I was in France and travelled on the TGV from Bordeaux to Paris - honestly, it was excellent. Two and a half hours for a journey that used to take five or six and at less than €100 for a ticket. Built in five years for less than €8bn.

As for the final project please also, let's not forget the one amendment besides the cancellation of the northern leg is that the terminus will be Euston and not Old Oak Common. There was some money in there after all.

[Anag Ram]

16 minutes ago, Gaspode said:

I caught a report last night which looked into the reasons for the vast overspend. There were various reasons such as inflation, need to build additional tunnels under the Chilterns, etc, but by far the most damning reason was relating to the original planning - they came up with the costs by using paper maps to plan the route - at no point did they send people out to actually survey where the track was supposed to go before the plan was put before parliament and the costs signed off - consequently, as the diggers moved in they realised that large parts needed additional works (at huge cost) to make the ground suitable to support the track. They also apparently didn't include any contignecy in the budget (which even a trainee Project Manager knows is needed - even for a simple project).

Gross incompetence (almost criminal negligence) from those tasked with planning/costing the project and also from those people giving it the green light.

No trouble 

 

[BaaLocks]

21 minutes ago, Gaspode said:

I caught a report last night which looked into the reasons for the vast overspend. There were various reasons such as inflation, need to build additional tunnels under the Chilterns, etc, but by far the most damning reason was relating to the original planning - they came up with the costs by using paper maps to plan the route - at no point did they send people out to actually survey where the track was supposed to go before the plan was put before parliament and the costs signed off - consequently, as the diggers moved in they realised that large parts needed additional works (at huge cost) to make the ground suitable to support the track. They also apparently didn't include any contignecy in the budget (which even a trainee Project Manager knows is needed - even for a simple project).

Gross incompetence (almost criminal negligence) from those tasked with planning/costing the project and also from those people giving it the green light.

I understand all of that but the question I don't understand is how they can build a similar length project in France for €8bn in five years and ours cost five, six, seven, eight times that and will not be ready for another ten years. I just don't understand the reason for the huge differential.

[Mostyn6]

all a scam to skim tax payer's money into the pockets of shareholders. This was always a distraction fraud, similar to the wars and space-race "projects" in USA.

[ariotofmyown]

8 minutes ago, BaaLocks said:

I understand all of that but the question I don't understand is how they can build a similar length project in France for €8bn in five years and ours cost five, six, seven, eight times that and will not be ready for another ten years. I just don't understand the reason for the huge differential.

Perhaps the idea of British exceptionalism wasn't just vastly exaggerated, and perhaps now it was the reverse of the truth.

[ariotofmyown]

13 minutes ago, BaaLocks said:

Last week I was in France and travelled on the TGV from Bordeaux to Paris - honestly, it was excellent. Two and a half hours for a journey that used to take five or six and at less than €100 for a ticket. Built in five years for less than €8bn.

As for the final project please also, let's not forget the one amendment besides the cancellation of the northern leg is that the terminus will be Euston and not Old Oak Common. There was some money in there after all.

Is it back to Euston again? I thought they had scrapped that.

[Gaspode]

11 minutes ago, BaaLocks said:

I agree with the point Frankie Boyle made years ago. For £100bn it would be easier to just move Birmingham 20 mins nearer to London.

The sad part of it is the 'bait and switch' element of cancelling the northern leg. The suggestion is that the money that will not be spent in HS2 will now be reinvested in infrastructure for the north in other areas. Not sure how money from 2034 is now going to be made available today - for everything else from nurses to school meals we are being told it is not available.

Meanwhile 15 minute cities, meat taxes, banning mobile phones in schools, immigrants as criminals, reduce benefits, Kier flip flopping. In what is likely to be the penultimate conference before the next election these were the key messages to get across? I'm not taking a political side, I'm just observing these are the pillars they chose to build the political agenda on. Not sure it would fill me with confidence if I was a Tory MP that my job was safe.

Trying not to stray into politics, but don't discount the fact that this decision appears to have been made purely in order to cause problems for the opposition - Labout have supported HS2 so far, but they now (before the next election) have to commit to finish it (to Manchester) though they will probably then need to pay for it with that same money that has now conveniently been promised to other Northern areas (a lot of whom couldn't give a toss about whether HS2 gets to Manchester) - and that's a lot of voters they might upset.

Sunak is more than aware that the money he's promising to the North is just that  - a politician's promise (i.e. meaningless) - made by a politician that knows he won't be around long enough to actually deliver - even if his ruse helps him fluke a win at the next election....

[Ram-Alf]

48 minutes ago, Gaspode said:

I caught a report last night which looked into the reasons for the vast overspend. There were various reasons such as inflation, need to build additional tunnels under the Chilterns, etc, but by far the most damning reason was relating to the original planning - they came up with the costs by using paper maps to plan the route - at no point did they send people out to actually survey where the track was supposed to go before the plan was put before parliament and the costs signed off - consequently, as the diggers moved in they realised that large parts needed additional works (at huge cost) to make the ground suitable to support the track. They also apparently didn't include any contignecy in the budget (which even a trainee Project Manager knows is needed - even for a simple project).

Gross incompetence (almost criminal negligence) from those tasked with planning/costing the project and also from those people giving it the green light.

*Breaking News*

UK Governments for decades piss the taxpayers money away for no other reason than it's a vote winner, How many families have had their lives ruined after compulsory purchases, House devaluations with the line not to far away but not far away enough to be compulsory purchased, Swathes of our Countryside gauged out...oh and has this affected those who have their noses in the trough...I doubt it...Come the revolution Brother.  Politicians...I've sh!t em 😡  

[SSD]

Without getting political about it, and risking this thread being closed, there are so many questions I have about this whole project from the higher ups involved. I was listening to the Rest is Money with Robert Peston and Steph McGovern (fantastic podcast) and they spoke in clear detail about why HS2 is just ridiculously expensive vs what France did with their high speed rail.

Firstly, our culture of NIMBYs makes all our construction projects very complicated. We as a country cannot build anything without endless red tape and going through so many planning departments and lawyers but mainly the big barrier is people flat out refusing to allow anything to be built near their property. The French get around this by essentially paying people compensation for the inconvenience which in turn is far cheaper than trying to manoeuvre around the problem and cause more delay and creating a huge bill for little benefit. I'm not say let's go full China and demolish buildings to make way for rail, there needs to be a more open approach to developing our infrastructure from the public, otherwise we'll be going nowhere and not be able to develop anything in the future.

Secondly our contracting costs to public projects is a joke. They completely rinse the tax payer when it comes to building anything for public use, whether that's hospitals, rail or roads. Having seen what builders charge to fix a toilet block at Royal Derby then it's no wonder everything costs so much. They add at least for a few more digits to the invoice and yet we've been paying them the bill. Now it's becoming a point of this is becoming so expensive that we have to start scrapping these big projects and cherry pick what we can and can't build.

They should have started on building a new line from Manchester to Leeds, but of course we have to make sure London is involved because that is the centre of the universe....

Edited October 4, 2023 by SSD

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

I had to go to a place called Newton Le Willows once by train .  It really isn't far.  3 trains that should have been scrapped 25 years ago including one that was such a state I had visions of it being used to highlight Britain's disenfranchised youth on the front of a punk album.  Two delays -one that was 50 minutes in the pissing rain with no cover and about 7 hrs round trip including going in the wrong direction to Sheffield for an hour as a starter.  Horrific antiquated service.

I can get a train from Birmingham to London in about an hour and a half ?  It was about that from Lichfield .  

I would add however, that I once had the misfortune of a tube stop in London being out of commission and it turned into Armageddon.  It's alright if it works 

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

5 minutes ago, SSD said:

Without getting political about it, and risking this thread being closed, there are so many questions I have about this whole project from the higher ups involved. I was listening to the Rest is Money with Robert Peston and Steph McGovern (fantastic podcast) and they spoke in clear detail about why HS2 is just ridiculously expensive vs what France did with their high speed rail.

Firstly, our culture of NIMBYs makes all our construction projects very complicated. We as a country cannot build anything without endless red tape and going through so many planning departments and lawyers but mainly the big barrier is people flat out refusing to allow anything to be built near their property. The French get around this by essentially paying people compensation for the inconvenience which in turn is far cheaper than trying to manoeuvre around the problem and cause more delay and creating a huge bill for little benefit. I'm not say let's go full China and demolish buildings to make way for rail, there needs to be a more open approach to developing our infrastructure from the public, otherwise we'll be going nowhere and not be able to develop anything in the future.

Secondly our contracting costs to public projects is a joke. They completely rinse the tax payer when it comes to building anything for public use, whether that's hospitals, rail or roads. Having seen what builders charge to fix a toilet block at Royal Derby then it's no wonder everything costs so much. They add at least for a few more digits to the invoice and yet we've been paying them the bill. Now it's becoming a point of this is becoming so expensive that we have to start scrapping these big projects and cherry pick what we can and can't build.

They should have started on building a new line from Manchester to Leeds, but of course we have to make sure London is involved because that is the centre of the universe....

PFI !!!!!