politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Johnson’s opening gift to Starmer – scrapping HS2?

Second, like HS2

HYUFD said:

The Tories did not win the North promising faster links to London but to deliver Brexit and control immigration

OGH's point though is that Boris might well be portrayed as saying 'thanks for that, now get son with it yourselves.' Or similar.

Anyway, who is going to build the damn thing. The labour force on the canals and the first railways had a significant component of Irish immigrants didn't it?

woody662 said:

Absolute nonsense, HS2 only benefits a tiny percentage of Northern people who are rich commuters. Diverting the money into local schemes which will be used by a significant portion of the population will far more popular. The polling was bad for HS2 before this latest cost rise. HS2 is like the European Union, people are told by the minority who benefit how good it is for them but just don't buy the argument.

I wonder what the economic impact of closing the railways would be?

woody662 said:

Absolute nonsense, HS2 only benefits a tiny percentage of Northern people who are rich commuters. Diverting the money into local schemes which will be used by a significant portion of the population will far more popular. The polling was bad for HS2 before this latest cost rise. HS2 is like the European Union, people are told by the minority who benefit how good it is for them but just don't buy the argument.

As a lot of people have constantly stated on here, the real HS2 benefits have never been explained nor discussed.

It's not a question of faster trains to London, it's really a question of more trains between say Crewe and Wolverhampton with faster trains to London as a slight benefit.

woody662 said:

Absolute nonsense, HS2 only benefits a tiny percentage of Northern people who are rich commuters. Diverting the money into local schemes which will be used by a significant portion of the population will far more popular. The polling was bad for HS2 before this latest cost rise. HS2 is like the European Union, people are told by the minority who benefit how good it is for them but just don't buy the argument.

You are not thinking. This is not about the detail of HS2 but creating an effective "anti North" rhetoric

eek said:

woody662 said:

Absolute nonsense, HS2 only benefits a tiny percentage of Northern people who are rich commuters. Diverting the money into local schemes which will be used by a significant portion of the population will far more popular. The polling was bad for HS2 before this latest cost rise. HS2 is like the European Union, people are told by the minority who benefit how good it is for them but just don't buy the argument.

As a lot of people have constantly stated on here, the real HS2 benefits have never been explained nor discussed.

It's not a question of faster trains to London, it's really a question of more trains between say Crewe and Wolverhampton with faster trains to London as a slight benefit.

What about places like Stoke? Look at the service to Euston at the moment:

https://tinyurl.com/saekrzp

You can get to Euston in 1 hour 30 minutes:

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C72485/2020-01-21/detailed

Will Stoke still receive that level of service - both in terms of frequency and speed - once HS2 is open?

TheScreamingEagles said:

tlg86 said:

I wonder what 2019 Tory gain is closest to an HS2 station?

Rother or Don Valleys?

On the classic-compatible (i.e. not on HS2) services, probably.

Here's a new northern Conservative MP:

https://twitter.com/NigelShortRV/status/1219312156170170368

The other misleading thing about HS2 is that when they say HS2 will cut journey times by 40 minutes etc they are talking only about direct services that don’t stop at intermediate stations.

Most HS2 journeys will stop at a half dozen intermediate stops which knock off 12-15 minutes off the savings.

tlg86 said:

I wonder what 2019 Tory gain is closest to an HS2 station?

Crewe ?

TheScreamingEagles said:

The other misleading thing about HS2 is that when they say HS2 will cut journey times by 40 minutes etc they are talking only about direct services that don’t stop at intermediate stations.

Most HS2 journeys will stop at a half dozen intermediate stops which knock off 12-15 minutes off the savings.

The big issue is that the West Coast mainline is at capacity. It can't take any more services.

The problem with HS2, as the thread header makes clear, is that it has become an existential issue - a political icon rather than a construction project. None of the proponents are prepared to engage in a cost-benefit analysis: it must be built at any price - there can be no upper limit. Last months ceiling is next month's floor, and so it continues.

The 'chronic under-capacity' on WCML could be solved overnight by doubling the fares.

MikeSmithson said:

woody662 said:

Absolute nonsense, HS2 only benefits a tiny percentage of Northern people who are rich commuters. Diverting the money into local schemes which will be used by a significant portion of the population will far more popular. The polling was bad for HS2 before this latest cost rise. HS2 is like the European Union, people are told by the minority who benefit how good it is for them but just don't buy the argument.

You are not thinking. This is not about the detail of HS2 but creating an effective "anti North" rhetoric

Not going to work then - northerners use roads not railways.

MikeSmithson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

The other misleading thing about HS2 is that when they say HS2 will cut journey times by 40 minutes etc they are talking only about direct services that don’t stop at intermediate stations.

Most HS2 journeys will stop at a half dozen intermediate stops which knock off 12-15 minutes off the savings.

The big issue is that the West Coast mainline is at capacity. It can't take any more services.

Please, the WCML carts about air for most of the day.

tlg86 said:

MikeSmithson said:

tlg86 said:

eek said:

woody662 said:

Absolute nonsense, HS2 only benefits a tiny percentage of Northern people who are rich commuters. Diverting the money into local schemes which will be used by a significant portion of the population will far more popular. The polling was bad for HS2 before this latest cost rise. HS2 is like the European Union, people are told by the minority who benefit how good it is for them but just don't buy the argument.

As a lot of people have constantly stated on here, the real HS2 benefits have never been explained nor discussed.

It's not a question of faster trains to London, it's really a question of more trains between say Crewe and Wolverhampton with faster trains to London as a slight benefit.

What about places like Stoke? Look at the service to Euston at the moment:

https://tinyurl.com/saekrzp

You can get to Euston in 1 hour 30 minutes:

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C72485/2020-01-21/detailed

Will Stoke still receive that level of service - both in terms of frequency and speed - once HS2 is open?

It will get better because HS2 frees up capacity.

From your own header:

The new line would free up chronic under-capacity on the existing West Coast Main Line including for all the local and commuter services.

Where are the Stoke/Stafford/Stockport/Macclesfield trains going to go?

Answered your own question there, haven't you?

HYUFD said:

MikeSmithson said:

woody662 said:

Absolute nonsense, HS2 only benefits a tiny percentage of Northern people who are rich commuters. Diverting the money into local schemes which will be used by a significant portion of the population will far more popular. The polling was bad for HS2 before this latest cost rise. HS2 is like the European Union, people are told by the minority who benefit how good it is for them but just don't buy the argument.

You are not thinking. This is not about the detail of HS2 but creating an effective "anti North" rhetoric

Nope, voters in Don Valley, Bishop Auckland, Grimsby and Scunthorpe and Blyth Valley who voted Tory did not vote for quicker routes to London, quicker routes with each other would be more relevant to them.

Voters in Manchester or Liverpool or Newcastle might care about quicker routes to London but they still voted Labour anyway

How do you propose to give Bishop Auckland faster routes between the surrounding towns. I'm just asking because the locals know it's not that possible.

What Bishop Auckland was promised is that their A&E department will be reopened while in reality the NHS are trying to consolidate the Tees Valley A&E departments from 3 down to 2 to ensure expertise has appropriate support and training.

The issue there is that Darlington while it is in Teesside actually covers most of the Yorkshire Dales.

tlg86 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

The other misleading thing about HS2 is that when they say HS2 will cut journey times by 40 minutes etc they are talking only about direct services that don’t stop at intermediate stations.

Most HS2 journeys will stop at a half dozen intermediate stops which knock off 12-15 minutes off the savings.

This is what's happened in France. I was shocked at how often the TGV from Lille to Marseille stopped. I guess all the local politicians want their town to be on the line, even if it adds 30 minutes to the journey time between the big cities.

Why do you think HS2 is so disliked? It's because people got all the inconvenience without the benefit.

I travelled from Birmingham to London on the WCML a couple of Friday's ago at 9am and had the carriage to myself. I'm sure there are more innovative ways of sorting out the capacity issue rather than spaffing billions on another line.

I find it incredibly frustrating that we don't just get on with things in this country. We have been arguing about an additional runway at Heathrow for more than 20 years. It feels like we might end doing the same with HS2. The (non) dualling of the A1 north of Morpeth is absolutely ridiculous and was highlighted in Cummings famous advert as a job needing done quickly. The M8 is still 2 lanes only for most of its distance and frequently resembles a slightly scary car park. It must impact on Livingston which is one of the fastest growing parts of Scotland.

We see the same ineptitude in public sector IT systems, everything the MoD ever touches and in so many public sector building contracts. In Scotland we wince about the Parliament building and the trams.

I accept my attitude is being driven by frustration as much as by a detailed cost benefit analysis and no doubt (if you ignore another 20 years of planning delays) there might be better uses for the money if we look hard enough. But just f****** do it. Now.

TheScreamingEagles said:

The other misleading thing about HS2 is that when they say HS2 will cut journey times by 40 minutes etc they are talking only about direct services that don’t stop at intermediate stations.

Most HS2 journeys will stop at a half dozen intermediate stops which knock off 12-15 minutes off the savings.

And passengers to/from Nottingham will have to get a local train out to Toton to catch the HS2 service. Why bother when there is a perfectly good direct train serving the city centre?

Alphabet_Soup said:

eek said:

Alphabet_Soup said:

The problem with HS2, as the thread header makes clear, is that it has become an existential issue - a political icon rather than a construction project. None of the proponents are prepared to engage in a cost-benefit analysis: it must be built at any price - there can be no upper limit. Last months ceiling is next month's floor, and so it continues.

The 'chronic under-capacity' on WCML could be solved overnight by doubling the fares.

Talking about East Coast mainline but if you look at the fares there is no way you can double them.

The cheapest fare from Darlington to London to get me to Kings Cross by 10am on February 17th is currently £140.50 .

When the flights to Southend arrive I suspect it will be cheaper to fly and catch the train from there.

We need more thinking outside the box. If the cost of HS2 can double every couple of years, why not fares instead? Why is £140.50 considered expensive, rather than a bargain?

Because the cost of driving it is less. Being vindictive a company could ask you to drive it as using HMRC's mileage allowance the cost of driving to a company is £110 before VAT savings.

another_richard said:

tlg86 said:

I wonder what 2019 Tory gain is closest to an HS2 station?

Crewe ?

Yorkshire - Wakefield
East Mids hub - Ashfield (Erewash was technically a CON hold)
Manchester - Leigh
Manchester Airport - Warrington South
Birmingham - West Bromwich East
Birmingham Interchange - Birmingham Northfield
Euston & Old Oak - KENSINGTON Not Carshalton !

Another 1,000 jobs for London: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-51184323

HYUFD said:

eek said:

HYUFD said:

MikeSmithson said:

woody662 said:

Absolute nonsense, HS2 only benefits a tiny percentage of Northern people who are rich commuters. Diverting the money into local schemes which will be used by a significant portion of the population will far more popular. The polling was bad for HS2 before this latest cost rise. HS2 is like the European Union, people are told by the minority who benefit how good it is for them but just don't buy the argument.

You are not thinking. This is not about the detail of HS2 but creating an effective "anti North" rhetoric

Nope, voters in Don Valley, Bishop Auckland, Grimsby and Scunthorpe and Blyth Valley who voted Tory did not vote for quicker routes to London, quicker routes with each other would be more relevant to them.

Voters in Manchester or Liverpool or Newcastle might care about quicker routes to London but they still voted Labour anyway

How do you propose to give Bishop Auckland faster routes between the surrounding towns. I'm just asking because the locals know it's not that possible.

What Bishop Auckland was promised is that their A&E department will be reopened while in reality the NHS are trying to consolidate the Tees Valley A&E departments from 3 down to 2 to ensure expertise has appropriate support and training.

The issue there is that Darlington while it is in Teesside actually covers most of the Yorkshire Dales.

It is not just about trains, voters there would prefer a decent bus service to HS2

You are Lisa Nandy and I claim my £5!

The problem is that large infrastructure projects are really unpopular. The best example is that the U.K. desperately needs a high and medium level nuclear waste store. Almost certainly it should be hundreds of metres below the Lake District. Ministers get advice on this every now and then but do nothing.

This (HS2) is an issue that has occupied the country for years. From the moment the original decision to go ahead was made, there have been those who have resisted. The debate has become increasingly polarized and ill-tempered at the extremes - to the extent that most people now, regardless of whether they were originally in favour or against, are just tired of the impasse, the endless delay, the seeming inability of our politicians to agree a way forward. So I sense that a short and clear message from PM Boris Johnson of "Get HS2 Done" - or perhaps a slightly more breezy "Build That Railway!" - will find favour with most. It certainly would with me.

eek said:

Alphabet_Soup said:

eek said:

Alphabet_Soup said:

The problem with HS2, as the thread header makes clear, is that it has become an existential issue - a political icon rather than a construction project. None of the proponents are prepared to engage in a cost-benefit analysis: it must be built at any price - there can be no upper limit. Last months ceiling is next month's floor, and so it continues.

The 'chronic under-capacity' on WCML could be solved overnight by doubling the fares.

Talking about East Coast mainline but if you look at the fares there is no way you can double them.

The cheapest fare from Darlington to London to get me to Kings Cross by 10am on February 17th is currently £140.50 .

When the flights to Southend arrive I suspect it will be cheaper to fly and catch the train from there.

We need more thinking outside the box. If the cost of HS2 can double every couple of years, why not fares instead? Why is £140.50 considered expensive, rather than a bargain?

Because the cost of driving it is less. Being vindictive a company could ask you to drive it as using HMRC's mileage allowance the cost of driving to a company is £110 before VAT savings.

Darlington-London-Darlington is 500 miles. That's at least £75 fuel cost plus congestion charge plus parking and you'd be shattered long before you get there. £140.50 is a bargain to travel in comfort, arrive fresh and maybe catch up with some work on the way.

Interesting model for the Democratic primaries.

https://projects.jhkforecasts.com/democratic_primary/

I would suggest that HS2 enthusiasts turn up at Manchester Pic Platforms 13 and 14 in the evening peak and explain to the crush of humanity that HS2 is a priority, whereas building Platforms 15 and 16 and associated improvements through Oxford Road and beyond is not.

Meanwhile at Leeds they have taken action to alleviate the overcrowding on Platform 16 in the evening peak. They've demolished the waiting room to create more standing space. Progress!

Alphabet_Soup said:

eek said:

Alphabet_Soup said:

eek said:

Alphabet_Soup said:

The problem with HS2, as the thread header makes clear, is that it has become an existential issue - a political icon rather than a construction project. None of the proponents are prepared to engage in a cost-benefit analysis: it must be built at any price - there can be no upper limit. Last months ceiling is next month's floor, and so it continues.

The 'chronic under-capacity' on WCML could be solved overnight by doubling the fares.

Talking about East Coast mainline but if you look at the fares there is no way you can double them.

The cheapest fare from Darlington to London to get me to Kings Cross by 10am on February 17th is currently £140.50 .

When the flights to Southend arrive I suspect it will be cheaper to fly and catch the train from there.

We need more thinking outside the box. If the cost of HS2 can double every couple of years, why not fares instead? Why is £140.50 considered expensive, rather than a bargain?

Because the cost of driving it is less. Being vindictive a company could ask you to drive it as using HMRC's mileage allowance the cost of driving to a company is £110 before VAT savings.

Darlington-London-Darlington is 500 miles. That's at least £75 fuel cost plus congestion charge plus parking and you'd be shattered long before you get there. £140.50 is a bargain to travel in comfort, arrive fresh and maybe catch up with some work on the way.

You clearly haven't worked with the penny pinching companies I've had to deal with in the past.

Nowadays it's my own firm and the rules are you pay reasonable expenses or it's a video conference call.

Not a single vote in Northern Ireland assembly yesterday for Johnson's NI Brexit "solution". All five major parties are adamantly opposed. Yet Johnson claims Northern Ireland consent.

Remarkable, if you think about it.

https://twitter.com/MatthewOToole2/status/1219386443598041088

£8 billion has been spent already, for absolutely nothing. Although not adjusting for inflation, that's almost as much as the much-maligned WCML upgrade cost.

Going ahead with HS2 would suck the life, and funds, from projects that actually could benefit a much wider section of society.

kinabalu said:

This (HS2) is an issue that has occupied the country for years. From the moment the original decision to go ahead was made, there have been those who have resisted. The debate has become increasingly polarized and ill-tempered at the extremes - to the extent that most people now, regardless of whether they were originally in favour or against, are just tired of the impasse, the endless delay, the seeming inability of our politicians to agree a way forward. So I sense that a short and clear message from PM Boris Johnson of "Get HS2 Done" - or perhaps a slightly more breezy "Build That Railway!" - will find favour with most. It certainly would with me.

Having sabotaged the economy and ruined the public finances that way, what better way to continue the damage by hosing huge amounts of money at a bad value infrastructure project?

eek said:

Alphabet_Soup said:

eek said:

Alphabet_Soup said:

eek said:

Alphabet_Soup said:

The problem with HS2, as the thread header makes clear, is that it has become an existential issue - a political icon rather than a construction project. None of the proponents are prepared to engage in a cost-benefit analysis: it must be built at any price - there can be no upper limit. Last months ceiling is next month's floor, and so it continues.

The 'chronic under-capacity' on WCML could be solved overnight by doubling the fares.

Talking about East Coast mainline but if you look at the fares there is no way you can double them.

The cheapest fare from Darlington to London to get me to Kings Cross by 10am on February 17th is currently £140.50 .

When the flights to Southend arrive I suspect it will be cheaper to fly and catch the train from there.

We need more thinking outside the box. If the cost of HS2 can double every couple of years, why not fares instead? Why is £140.50 considered expensive, rather than a bargain?

Because the cost of driving it is less. Being vindictive a company could ask you to drive it as using HMRC's mileage allowance the cost of driving to a company is £110 before VAT savings.

Darlington-London-Darlington is 500 miles. That's at least £75 fuel cost plus congestion charge plus parking and you'd be shattered long before you get there. £140.50 is a bargain to travel in comfort, arrive fresh and maybe catch up with some work on the way.

You clearly haven't worked with the penny pinching companies I've had to deal with in the past.

Nowadays it's my own firm and the rules are you pay reasonable expenses or it's a video conference call.

I've been self-employed since 1976! Over the years I've made every false economy imaginable and finally, reluctantly come to the conclusion that my sanity is worth a few extra quid. I once drove London-Leeds-Bristol-London with meetings at both 'outposts'. Never again.

tlg86 said:

another_richard said:

Unemployment by parliamentary constituency on the spreadsheet attached here:

https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peoplenotinwork/unemployment/datasets/claimantcountbyparliamentaryconstituencyexperimental

Interesting that the top four seats for the claimant count are all in Birmingham:

Birmingham, Ladywood - 8.4%
Birmingham, Hodge Hill - 8.1%
Birmingham, Erdington - 7.9%
Birmingham, Perry Barr - 7.7%

The entire contiguous North East of Birmingham in fact.

FF43 said:

Not a single vote in Northern Ireland assembly yesterday for Johnson's NI Brexit "solution". All five major parties are adamantly opposed. Yet Johnson claims Northern Ireland consent.

Remarkable, if you think about it.

https://twitter.com/MatthewOToole2/status/1219386443598041088

I'm sure amongst all BJ's bullshit platitudes, 'uniting the country' must have been one of them. Presumably uniting the constituent nations of the UK individually wasn't quite what he meant.

Pulpstar said:

tlg86 said:

another_richard said:

Unemployment by parliamentary constituency on the spreadsheet attached here:

https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peoplenotinwork/unemployment/datasets/claimantcountbyparliamentaryconstituencyexperimental

Interesting that the top four seats for the claimant count are all in Birmingham:

Birmingham, Ladywood - 8.4%
Birmingham, Hodge Hill - 8.1%
Birmingham, Erdington - 7.9%
Birmingham, Perry Barr - 7.7%

The entire contiguous North East of Birmingham in fact.

Alastair's piece the other day giving some of the history of Birmingham's decline was fascinating (if also a bit depressing).

How will Johnson jump on HS2? He is coming under incredible force to scrap it from a range of people, not least some of his MPs, former cabinet ministers and of course his home base, the Daily Telegraph.

But Mike is right, the whole Our Friends in the North strategy will be totally dead if he scraps the project.

Time to write two essays?

What does our own @Tissue_Price make of HS2 ?

eek said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Sky reporting

Jess Phillips about to withdraw from the contest

I guess she will endorse Nandy as it won't be Starmer or Bailey.

I'd have thought Thornberry or Starmer - isn't Nandy a long way from her regarding Brexit ?

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Sky reporting

Jess Phillips about to withdraw from the contest

Not a surprise.

She's an adequate social worker, and clearly cares, but a leader? Never going to happen.

Pulpstar said:

eek said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Sky reporting

Jess Phillips about to withdraw from the contest

I guess she will endorse Nandy as it won't be Starmer or Bailey.

I'd have thought Thornberry or Starmer - isn't Nandy a long way from her regarding Brexit ?

Can't be Starmer as she said he should withdraw earlier this week.
Thornberry has a flag issue which could be a problem.

So it's either Nandy or no one.

Clear its down to a straight choice between RLB and Starmer.

isam said:

‘The average man is not directly interested in politics, and when he reads, he wants the current struggles of the world to be translated into a simple story about individuals…people worship power in the form in which they are able to understand it.’

Rather patrician.
Still, at least an Old Etonian who could construct an argument.

Pulpstar said:

algarkirk said:

The overwhelming majority of people in the north almost never travel by train.

It's because we all live a decent drive from a station with insufficient parking.

Fat chance trying to get Thunberg-fawing eco-loon planners to create adequate parking space.

I suspect the way out for Boris is to let Phase 1 including both Birmingham stations go ahead but terminate for now at Old Oak Common rather than Euston. Meanwhile he will claim to “turbocharge” the northern section, including another vague speech about Manchester to Leeds and beyond.

Further down the road, the much needed Euston upgrade (and safeguarded tunnel to Old Oak) can be green lit under a different budget.

He’s not a very smart political operator if he scraps the whole project in favour of woolly plans that have zero chance of being approved yet alone with spades in ground prior to a 2024 election.

brokenwheel said:

Pulpstar said:

algarkirk said:

The overwhelming majority of people in the north almost never travel by train.

It's because we all live a decent drive from a station with insufficient parking.

Fat chance trying to get Thunberg-fawing eco-loon planners to create more parking spaces.

And you wonder why the young want to live in City Centres.

moonshine said:

I suspect the way out for Boris is to let Phase 1 including both Birmingham stations go ahead but terminate for now at Old Oak Common rather than Euston. Meanwhile he will claim to “turbocharge” the northern section, including another vague speech about Manchester to Leeds and beyond.

Further down the road, the much needed Euston upgrade (and safeguarded tunnel to Old Oak) can be green lit under a different budget.

He’s not a very smart political operator if he scraps the whole project in favour of woolly plans that have zero chance of being approved yet alone with spades in ground prior to a 2024 election.

That is the sane approach. Remove Euston from the project and move that work down the line.

It would also have the advantage of ensuring there is a backup plan when things go pear shaped at Euston.

I hope it comes down to Starmer vs Thornberry. Two authentic working class candidates.

Of which I of course hope that Thornberry will win.

TOPPING said:

I hope it comes down to Starmer vs Thornberry. Two authentic working class candidates.

Of which I of course hope that Thornberry will win.

Speaking as the voice of the North, I can confirm they have impeccable working class credentials.