Supreme Court rejects appeal against HS2

Bucks Free Press: Supreme Court rejects appeal against HS2 Supreme Court rejects appeal against HS2

THE Supreme Court has dismissed the latest appeal against the controversial HS2 rail project.

Judges unanimously voted in favour of the government after campaigners tried to force further scrutiny of the plans.

The appeal centred over the question of whether a Strategic Environmental Assessment should have been carried out.

It concerned phase one of the scheme, which would see a high speed rail line run from London to Birmingham, cleaving through the Chilterns AONB in the process.

The Court found that the decision to press ahead with the HS2 project had not contravened European law Responding to the ruling Transport Minister, Baroness Kramer, said: "We welcome that the Supreme Court has unanimously rejected the appeal, which addressed technical issues that had no bearing on the need for a new north-south railway.

"The government’s handling of the project has been fully vindicated by the highest court in the land. We will now continue to press ahead with the delivery of HS2."

The case was brought to the court by the 51M group as well as the HS2 Action Alliance and the Heathrow Hub, and was heard in October last year.

A statement from Chiltern District Council today said the authority had no regrets in being part of the legal challenge, and pledged to continue the fight along with other members of the 51M group.

It said: “We do not believe that this decision today endorses a fair and open process for decision making. It merely reflects the Court's lack of desire to interfere with Parliament's business on the understanding that a democratically elected body will respect the wishes and needs of the people.”

Cllr Nick Rose, leader of CDC, said: "We will continue in our resolute opposition to HS2 and will do everything possible to protect our residents against this flawed and discredited project. The way HS2 Ltd and the Government have approached this project smacks of incompetence. They are rushing it through with absolutely no regard for what communities really want."

Campaign groups have also been quick to voice their dissatisfaction with the decision today.

Hilary Wharf, director of HS2 Action Alliance, said: “We always knew this would be a long fight. A number of the judges, led by Lady Hale, thought long and hard about whether the issues HS2AA raised should be referred to the European Court of Justice. This and the fact that we were given right to appeal to the highest court in the land shows how seriously the need for an SEA (Strategic Environmental Assessment) should be taken.”

“We will continue to press the Government to meet its environmental obligations. The Government should be safeguarding our environment for future generations and the simple fact is HS2 is an unnecessary and hugely damaging project environmentally.”

Penny Gaines, chair of Stop HS2 said: "We are disappointed with this decision. It’s clear from the judgement that the judges are expecting Members of Parliament to look carefully at the HS2 Hybrid Bill, and not simply follow the party whip. But the Government has shown that it is eager to rush this legislation through, in the hope that no-one spots the problems with it.”

Joe Rukin, Campaign Manager for Stop HS2 added: “This leaves the Strategic Environmental Assessment legislation in tatters. This ruling gives a green light for government to side step legislation intended to preserve heritage, culture and the environment.”

Comments (41)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:56am Wed 22 Jan 14

Darren Hayday says...

Well there’s a surprise then!!.... - next stop = Making Gerrards Cross into a City.. You voted for them folks.
Well there’s a surprise then!!.... - next stop = Making Gerrards Cross into a City.. You voted for them folks. Darren Hayday
  • Score: 6

1:13pm Wed 22 Jan 14

4-minute warning says...

Yep ..... was always going to come no matter what.

Let me think, whom would not implement HS2 ......... UKIP
Yep ..... was always going to come no matter what. Let me think, whom would not implement HS2 ......... UKIP 4-minute warning
  • Score: 5

1:44pm Wed 22 Jan 14

miccles says...

4-minute warning wrote:
Yep ..... was always going to come no matter what.

Let me think, whom would not implement HS2 ......... UKIP
I fail to see why people are so thick and naïve, that they think Nigel Farage and UKIP, can run this country. The bloke has not got a clue, what day of the week it is, never mind running a country, etc.

I'm sure if Nigel Farage said he could grow money trees, people would vote for him.
And I don't care how many neg responses I get.
[quote][p][bold]4-minute warning[/bold] wrote: Yep ..... was always going to come no matter what. Let me think, whom would not implement HS2 ......... UKIP[/p][/quote]I fail to see why people are so thick and naïve, that they think Nigel Farage and UKIP, can run this country. The bloke has not got a clue, what day of the week it is, never mind running a country, etc. I'm sure if Nigel Farage said he could grow money trees, people would vote for him. And I don't care how many neg responses I get. miccles
  • Score: -9

2:08pm Wed 22 Jan 14

Darren Hayday says...

miccles wrote:
4-minute warning wrote:
Yep ..... was always going to come no matter what.

Let me think, whom would not implement HS2 ......... UKIP
I fail to see why people are so thick and naïve, that they think Nigel Farage and UKIP, can run this country. The bloke has not got a clue, what day of the week it is, never mind running a country, etc.

I'm sure if Nigel Farage said he could grow money trees, people would vote for him.
And I don't care how many neg responses I get.
You have the right to make your opinion on this. I've never voted for UKIP and I always look at each candidate at all levels of government as individuals rather than 'what party they represent'. I've voted for people from different parties and persuasions. However I must ask you this question though 'who do you see as a leader that can run this Country?’
[quote][p][bold]miccles[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]4-minute warning[/bold] wrote: Yep ..... was always going to come no matter what. Let me think, whom would not implement HS2 ......... UKIP[/p][/quote]I fail to see why people are so thick and naïve, that they think Nigel Farage and UKIP, can run this country. The bloke has not got a clue, what day of the week it is, never mind running a country, etc. I'm sure if Nigel Farage said he could grow money trees, people would vote for him. And I don't care how many neg responses I get.[/p][/quote]You have the right to make your opinion on this. I've never voted for UKIP and I always look at each candidate at all levels of government as individuals rather than 'what party they represent'. I've voted for people from different parties and persuasions. However I must ask you this question though 'who do you see as a leader that can run this Country?’ Darren Hayday
  • Score: 4

2:28pm Wed 22 Jan 14

miccles says...

Darren Hayday wrote:
miccles wrote:
4-minute warning wrote:
Yep ..... was always going to come no matter what.

Let me think, whom would not implement HS2 ......... UKIP
I fail to see why people are so thick and naïve, that they think Nigel Farage and UKIP, can run this country. The bloke has not got a clue, what day of the week it is, never mind running a country, etc.

I'm sure if Nigel Farage said he could grow money trees, people would vote for him.
And I don't care how many neg responses I get.
You have the right to make your opinion on this. I've never voted for UKIP and I always look at each candidate at all levels of government as individuals rather than 'what party they represent'. I've voted for people from different parties and persuasions. However I must ask you this question though 'who do you see as a leader that can run this Country?’
However I must ask you this question though 'who do you see as a leader that can run this Country?’
Certainly not Nigel Farage for sure.

In this session of parliament the only sain person for which im going to get a lot of thumbs down is David Cameron, although I must admit even he has a lot to learn, he has made mistakes, and u turns, who hasn't?
Ed Milliband, well, you would get more sense out of a wet fish.
Nick Clegg, well he is in the same league as Nigel Farage, clueless.
[quote][p][bold]Darren Hayday[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miccles[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]4-minute warning[/bold] wrote: Yep ..... was always going to come no matter what. Let me think, whom would not implement HS2 ......... UKIP[/p][/quote]I fail to see why people are so thick and naïve, that they think Nigel Farage and UKIP, can run this country. The bloke has not got a clue, what day of the week it is, never mind running a country, etc. I'm sure if Nigel Farage said he could grow money trees, people would vote for him. And I don't care how many neg responses I get.[/p][/quote]You have the right to make your opinion on this. I've never voted for UKIP and I always look at each candidate at all levels of government as individuals rather than 'what party they represent'. I've voted for people from different parties and persuasions. However I must ask you this question though 'who do you see as a leader that can run this Country?’[/p][/quote]However I must ask you this question though 'who do you see as a leader that can run this Country?’ Certainly not Nigel Farage for sure. In this session of parliament the only sain person for which im going to get a lot of thumbs down is David Cameron, although I must admit even he has a lot to learn, he has made mistakes, and u turns, who hasn't? Ed Milliband, well, you would get more sense out of a wet fish. Nick Clegg, well he is in the same league as Nigel Farage, clueless. miccles
  • Score: -5

2:55pm Wed 22 Jan 14

Darren Hayday says...

The honest answer = none of them. and this is where the problem is. They are all as bad as each-other and only looking out for their own careers, etc

It's about time that the whole system was changed.

= the power should go to the people and not political parties.
The honest answer = none of them. and this is where the problem is. They are all as bad as each-other and only looking out for their own careers, etc It's about time that the whole system was changed. = the power should go to the people and not political parties. Darren Hayday
  • Score: 6

3:18pm Wed 22 Jan 14

miccles says...

Darren Hayday wrote:
The honest answer = none of them. and this is where the problem is. They are all as bad as each-other and only looking out for their own careers, etc

It's about time that the whole system was changed.

= the power should go to the people and not political parties.
They are all as bad as each-other and only looking out for their own careers, etc
But aren't you looking out for your career??
[quote][p][bold]Darren Hayday[/bold] wrote: The honest answer = none of them. and this is where the problem is. They are all as bad as each-other and only looking out for their own careers, etc It's about time that the whole system was changed. = the power should go to the people and not political parties.[/p][/quote]They are all as bad as each-other and only looking out for their own careers, etc But aren't you looking out for your career?? miccles
  • Score: -3

3:35pm Wed 22 Jan 14

Darren Hayday says...

miccles wrote:
Darren Hayday wrote:
The honest answer = none of them. and this is where the problem is. They are all as bad as each-other and only looking out for their own careers, etc

It's about time that the whole system was changed.

= the power should go to the people and not political parties.
They are all as bad as each-other and only looking out for their own careers, etc
But aren't you looking out for your career??
Short answer = no. I have a career in marketing, politics is my hobby, I enjoy it and I enjoy helping people. I would rather give talks in colleges and schools on politics or help the Independent Network rather than looking to become an MP (for example). You can achieve whatever you want in life but you must be prepared to pay for it. I could join a political party and climb the greasy pole but I choose not to. I've seen the other side of the curtain and it’s not nice. There are those that go and seek power, and good luck to them. But I would rather start a revolution to make the system fairer for normal people, rather than look to further my own political career and sell out my principles.
[quote][p][bold]miccles[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Darren Hayday[/bold] wrote: The honest answer = none of them. and this is where the problem is. They are all as bad as each-other and only looking out for their own careers, etc It's about time that the whole system was changed. = the power should go to the people and not political parties.[/p][/quote]They are all as bad as each-other and only looking out for their own careers, etc But aren't you looking out for your career??[/p][/quote]Short answer = no. I have a career in marketing, politics is my hobby, I enjoy it and I enjoy helping people. I would rather give talks in colleges and schools on politics or help the Independent Network rather than looking to become an MP (for example). You can achieve whatever you want in life but you must be prepared to pay for it. I could join a political party and climb the greasy pole but I choose not to. I've seen the other side of the curtain and it’s not nice. There are those that go and seek power, and good luck to them. But I would rather start a revolution to make the system fairer for normal people, rather than look to further my own political career and sell out my principles. Darren Hayday
  • Score: 3

3:39pm Wed 22 Jan 14

miccles says...

Darren Hayday wrote:
miccles wrote:
Darren Hayday wrote:
The honest answer = none of them. and this is where the problem is. They are all as bad as each-other and only looking out for their own careers, etc

It's about time that the whole system was changed.

= the power should go to the people and not political parties.
They are all as bad as each-other and only looking out for their own careers, etc
But aren't you looking out for your career??
Short answer = no. I have a career in marketing, politics is my hobby, I enjoy it and I enjoy helping people. I would rather give talks in colleges and schools on politics or help the Independent Network rather than looking to become an MP (for example). You can achieve whatever you want in life but you must be prepared to pay for it. I could join a political party and climb the greasy pole but I choose not to. I've seen the other side of the curtain and it’s not nice. There are those that go and seek power, and good luck to them. But I would rather start a revolution to make the system fairer for normal people, rather than look to further my own political career and sell out my principles.
Ok fair enough, you answer me this question, as I answered yours

Can you see Nigel Farage and UKIP running the country?
[quote][p][bold]Darren Hayday[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miccles[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Darren Hayday[/bold] wrote: The honest answer = none of them. and this is where the problem is. They are all as bad as each-other and only looking out for their own careers, etc It's about time that the whole system was changed. = the power should go to the people and not political parties.[/p][/quote]They are all as bad as each-other and only looking out for their own careers, etc But aren't you looking out for your career??[/p][/quote]Short answer = no. I have a career in marketing, politics is my hobby, I enjoy it and I enjoy helping people. I would rather give talks in colleges and schools on politics or help the Independent Network rather than looking to become an MP (for example). You can achieve whatever you want in life but you must be prepared to pay for it. I could join a political party and climb the greasy pole but I choose not to. I've seen the other side of the curtain and it’s not nice. There are those that go and seek power, and good luck to them. But I would rather start a revolution to make the system fairer for normal people, rather than look to further my own political career and sell out my principles.[/p][/quote]Ok fair enough, you answer me this question, as I answered yours Can you see Nigel Farage and UKIP running the country? miccles
  • Score: -2

3:53pm Wed 22 Jan 14

Darren Hayday says...

miccles wrote:
Darren Hayday wrote:
miccles wrote:
Darren Hayday wrote:
The honest answer = none of them. and this is where the problem is. They are all as bad as each-other and only looking out for their own careers, etc

It's about time that the whole system was changed.

= the power should go to the people and not political parties.
They are all as bad as each-other and only looking out for their own careers, etc
But aren't you looking out for your career??
Short answer = no. I have a career in marketing, politics is my hobby, I enjoy it and I enjoy helping people. I would rather give talks in colleges and schools on politics or help the Independent Network rather than looking to become an MP (for example). You can achieve whatever you want in life but you must be prepared to pay for it. I could join a political party and climb the greasy pole but I choose not to. I've seen the other side of the curtain and it’s not nice. There are those that go and seek power, and good luck to them. But I would rather start a revolution to make the system fairer for normal people, rather than look to further my own political career and sell out my principles.
Ok fair enough, you answer me this question, as I answered yours

Can you see Nigel Farage and UKIP running the country?
No. They are the new kids on the block and are much different to the other main parties. They seem to appeal more to the right. I do know a few of their members and they are a decent bunch - however there are also decent people in the other parties as well. I think that UKIP will reach a high watermark level and either merge into the Conservative Party or become the 4th political party in the UK. They will properly replace the Libdems and become the 3rd main party, I remember not too long ago that everyone wanted to 'vote for Nick' as they then seemed to be the best of a bad bunch.

The Conservatives are still the nasty party, Labour lost all credibility when they went to war in Iraq and sent us all nearly bankrupt, the Libdems sold out with the issue of student fees and no-one knows or cares what they stand for these days - so I can see the appeal of a party that is making the right noises (i.e. no to HS2 and the EU) but what would happen to them if and when we do come out of the EU? The Referendum Party comes to mind..
[quote][p][bold]miccles[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Darren Hayday[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miccles[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Darren Hayday[/bold] wrote: The honest answer = none of them. and this is where the problem is. They are all as bad as each-other and only looking out for their own careers, etc It's about time that the whole system was changed. = the power should go to the people and not political parties.[/p][/quote]They are all as bad as each-other and only looking out for their own careers, etc But aren't you looking out for your career??[/p][/quote]Short answer = no. I have a career in marketing, politics is my hobby, I enjoy it and I enjoy helping people. I would rather give talks in colleges and schools on politics or help the Independent Network rather than looking to become an MP (for example). You can achieve whatever you want in life but you must be prepared to pay for it. I could join a political party and climb the greasy pole but I choose not to. I've seen the other side of the curtain and it’s not nice. There are those that go and seek power, and good luck to them. But I would rather start a revolution to make the system fairer for normal people, rather than look to further my own political career and sell out my principles.[/p][/quote]Ok fair enough, you answer me this question, as I answered yours Can you see Nigel Farage and UKIP running the country?[/p][/quote]No. They are the new kids on the block and are much different to the other main parties. They seem to appeal more to the right. I do know a few of their members and they are a decent bunch - however there are also decent people in the other parties as well. I think that UKIP will reach a high watermark level and either merge into the Conservative Party or become the 4th political party in the UK. They will properly replace the Libdems and become the 3rd main party, I remember not too long ago that everyone wanted to 'vote for Nick' as they then seemed to be the best of a bad bunch. The Conservatives are still the nasty party, Labour lost all credibility when they went to war in Iraq and sent us all nearly bankrupt, the Libdems sold out with the issue of student fees and no-one knows or cares what they stand for these days - so I can see the appeal of a party that is making the right noises (i.e. no to HS2 and the EU) but what would happen to them if and when we do come out of the EU? The Referendum Party comes to mind.. Darren Hayday
  • Score: 3

8:19pm Wed 22 Jan 14

Windsorian says...

Pleased to see common sense prevailed today; its not for the courts to overturn the wishes of the people as expressed at the ballot box.

For anyone thinking about voting for UKIP because of their opposition to HS2 then go right ahead; it's still a free country.

The Victorians criss crossed the county with railways which provoked opposition from the Luddites who wanted to continue with horse and carts.

Our legacy is what we leave our children and grand children; will they be shocked by HS2 ?
Pleased to see common sense prevailed today; its not for the courts to overturn the wishes of the people as expressed at the ballot box. For anyone thinking about voting for UKIP because of their opposition to HS2 then go right ahead; it's still a free country. The Victorians criss crossed the county with railways which provoked opposition from the Luddites who wanted to continue with horse and carts. Our legacy is what we leave our children and grand children; will they be shocked by HS2 ? Windsorian
  • Score: -4

9:31pm Wed 22 Jan 14

legiopatrianostra says...

Windsorian wrote:
Pleased to see common sense prevailed today; its not for the courts to overturn the wishes of the people as expressed at the ballot box. For anyone thinking about voting for UKIP because of their opposition to HS2 then go right ahead; it's still a free country. The Victorians criss crossed the county with railways which provoked opposition from the Luddites who wanted to continue with horse and carts. Our legacy is what we leave our children and grand children; will they be shocked by HS2 ?
Oh? as I understand it there wasn't an outright majority for any party, that's why there's a coalition, that's why the Limpdems ditched their promises regarding tuition fees etc etc. The Court also ruled previously that parties were not obliged to keep promises made in any manifesto, so your 'democratic mandate' is folly.
[quote][p][bold]Windsorian[/bold] wrote: Pleased to see common sense prevailed today; its not for the courts to overturn the wishes of the people as expressed at the ballot box. For anyone thinking about voting for UKIP because of their opposition to HS2 then go right ahead; it's still a free country. The Victorians criss crossed the county with railways which provoked opposition from the Luddites who wanted to continue with horse and carts. Our legacy is what we leave our children and grand children; will they be shocked by HS2 ?[/p][/quote]Oh? as I understand it there wasn't an outright majority for any party, that's why there's a coalition, that's why the Limpdems ditched their promises regarding tuition fees etc etc. The Court also ruled previously that parties were not obliged to keep promises made in any manifesto, so your 'democratic mandate' is folly. legiopatrianostra
  • Score: 5

10:18pm Wed 22 Jan 14

s6blr says...

Thank goodness the court saw sense, something missing from these continued protests. I believe the same NIMBY-mob full will be in effect when the Heathrow replacement is announced.

Brunel has quit spinning quite so much in his grave today.
Thank goodness the court saw sense, something missing from these continued protests. I believe the same NIMBY-mob full will be in effect when the Heathrow replacement is announced. Brunel has quit spinning quite so much in his grave today. s6blr
  • Score: -3

10:40pm Wed 22 Jan 14

demoness the second says...

s6blr wrote:
Thank goodness the court saw sense, something missing from these continued protests. I believe the same NIMBY-mob full will be in effect when the Heathrow replacement is announced.

Brunel has quit spinning quite so much in his grave today.
Perhaps you might like to go and do your research on all of the opponents of hs2. When you have done that and seen how many respected and knowledgeable groups there are nationwide, not just Bucks, you might consider retracting your remarks
[quote][p][bold]s6blr[/bold] wrote: Thank goodness the court saw sense, something missing from these continued protests. I believe the same NIMBY-mob full will be in effect when the Heathrow replacement is announced. Brunel has quit spinning quite so much in his grave today.[/p][/quote]Perhaps you might like to go and do your research on all of the opponents of hs2. When you have done that and seen how many respected and knowledgeable groups there are nationwide, not just Bucks, you might consider retracting your remarks demoness the second
  • Score: 3

10:44pm Wed 22 Jan 14

demoness the second says...

Windsorian wrote:
Pleased to see common sense prevailed today; its not for the courts to overturn the wishes of the people as expressed at the ballot box.

For anyone thinking about voting for UKIP because of their opposition to HS2 then go right ahead; it's still a free country.

The Victorians criss crossed the county with railways which provoked opposition from the Luddites who wanted to continue with horse and carts.

Our legacy is what we leave our children and grand children; will they be shocked by HS2 ?
No but they might wonder what a barn owl is.
We have a duty to protect our environment. I remain sceptical about the carving up of our countryside. You cannot compare hs2 to the Victorian era. There is no valid comparison.
[quote][p][bold]Windsorian[/bold] wrote: Pleased to see common sense prevailed today; its not for the courts to overturn the wishes of the people as expressed at the ballot box. For anyone thinking about voting for UKIP because of their opposition to HS2 then go right ahead; it's still a free country. The Victorians criss crossed the county with railways which provoked opposition from the Luddites who wanted to continue with horse and carts. Our legacy is what we leave our children and grand children; will they be shocked by HS2 ?[/p][/quote]No but they might wonder what a barn owl is. We have a duty to protect our environment. I remain sceptical about the carving up of our countryside. You cannot compare hs2 to the Victorian era. There is no valid comparison. demoness the second
  • Score: 4

11:06pm Wed 22 Jan 14

gpn01 says...

Windsorian wrote:
Pleased to see common sense prevailed today; its not for the courts to overturn the wishes of the people as expressed at the ballot box.

For anyone thinking about voting for UKIP because of their opposition to HS2 then go right ahead; it's still a free country.

The Victorians criss crossed the county with railways which provoked opposition from the Luddites who wanted to continue with horse and carts.

Our legacy is what we leave our children and grand children; will they be shocked by HS2 ?
What the Victorians didn't do was waste a spectacular amount of taxpayers money on a project which didn't make financialfinancial, social or economic sense. When the railways were built they were new technology. Building another railway line in 21st Century would be more akin to the Victorians crisscrossing the country with canals
[quote][p][bold]Windsorian[/bold] wrote: Pleased to see common sense prevailed today; its not for the courts to overturn the wishes of the people as expressed at the ballot box. For anyone thinking about voting for UKIP because of their opposition to HS2 then go right ahead; it's still a free country. The Victorians criss crossed the county with railways which provoked opposition from the Luddites who wanted to continue with horse and carts. Our legacy is what we leave our children and grand children; will they be shocked by HS2 ?[/p][/quote]What the Victorians didn't do was waste a spectacular amount of taxpayers money on a project which didn't make financialfinancial, social or economic sense. When the railways were built they were new technology. Building another railway line in 21st Century would be more akin to the Victorians crisscrossing the country with canals gpn01
  • Score: 2

11:07pm Wed 22 Jan 14

Undercover Euro Yob says...

Darren Hayday wrote:
miccles wrote:
Darren Hayday wrote:
miccles wrote:
Darren Hayday wrote:
The honest answer = none of them. and this is where the problem is. They are all as bad as each-other and only looking out for their own careers, etc

It's about time that the whole system was changed.

= the power should go to the people and not political parties.
They are all as bad as each-other and only looking out for their own careers, etc
But aren't you looking out for your career??
Short answer = no. I have a career in marketing, politics is my hobby, I enjoy it and I enjoy helping people. I would rather give talks in colleges and schools on politics or help the Independent Network rather than looking to become an MP (for example). You can achieve whatever you want in life but you must be prepared to pay for it. I could join a political party and climb the greasy pole but I choose not to. I've seen the other side of the curtain and it’s not nice. There are those that go and seek power, and good luck to them. But I would rather start a revolution to make the system fairer for normal people, rather than look to further my own political career and sell out my principles.
Ok fair enough, you answer me this question, as I answered yours

Can you see Nigel Farage and UKIP running the country?
No. They are the new kids on the block and are much different to the other main parties. They seem to appeal more to the right. I do know a few of their members and they are a decent bunch - however there are also decent people in the other parties as well. I think that UKIP will reach a high watermark level and either merge into the Conservative Party or become the 4th political party in the UK. They will properly replace the Libdems and become the 3rd main party, I remember not too long ago that everyone wanted to 'vote for Nick' as they then seemed to be the best of a bad bunch.

The Conservatives are still the nasty party, Labour lost all credibility when they went to war in Iraq and sent us all nearly bankrupt, the Libdems sold out with the issue of student fees and no-one knows or cares what they stand for these days - so I can see the appeal of a party that is making the right noises (i.e. no to HS2 and the EU) but what would happen to them if and when we do come out of the EU? The Referendum Party comes to mind..
‘The Referendum Party comes to mind.’


I remember James Goldsmith and the Referendum Party - none of its supporters were able to say what question would be asked in a referendum (OED says ‘Referendum’ = 1. The process or principle of referring an important political question (e.g. a proposed constitutional change) to be decided by a general vote of the entire electorate; a vote taken by referendum. Cf. plebiscite n.)


As you have brought up the question of a referendum perhaps you could tell us what question would be put to the electorate by such a party.
[quote][p][bold]Darren Hayday[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miccles[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Darren Hayday[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miccles[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Darren Hayday[/bold] wrote: The honest answer = none of them. and this is where the problem is. They are all as bad as each-other and only looking out for their own careers, etc It's about time that the whole system was changed. = the power should go to the people and not political parties.[/p][/quote]They are all as bad as each-other and only looking out for their own careers, etc But aren't you looking out for your career??[/p][/quote]Short answer = no. I have a career in marketing, politics is my hobby, I enjoy it and I enjoy helping people. I would rather give talks in colleges and schools on politics or help the Independent Network rather than looking to become an MP (for example). You can achieve whatever you want in life but you must be prepared to pay for it. I could join a political party and climb the greasy pole but I choose not to. I've seen the other side of the curtain and it’s not nice. There are those that go and seek power, and good luck to them. But I would rather start a revolution to make the system fairer for normal people, rather than look to further my own political career and sell out my principles.[/p][/quote]Ok fair enough, you answer me this question, as I answered yours Can you see Nigel Farage and UKIP running the country?[/p][/quote]No. They are the new kids on the block and are much different to the other main parties. They seem to appeal more to the right. I do know a few of their members and they are a decent bunch - however there are also decent people in the other parties as well. I think that UKIP will reach a high watermark level and either merge into the Conservative Party or become the 4th political party in the UK. They will properly replace the Libdems and become the 3rd main party, I remember not too long ago that everyone wanted to 'vote for Nick' as they then seemed to be the best of a bad bunch. The Conservatives are still the nasty party, Labour lost all credibility when they went to war in Iraq and sent us all nearly bankrupt, the Libdems sold out with the issue of student fees and no-one knows or cares what they stand for these days - so I can see the appeal of a party that is making the right noises (i.e. no to HS2 and the EU) but what would happen to them if and when we do come out of the EU? The Referendum Party comes to mind..[/p][/quote][italic] ‘The Referendum Party comes to mind.’ [/italic] I remember James Goldsmith and the Referendum Party - none of its supporters were able to say what question would be asked in a referendum (OED says ‘Referendum’ = 1. The process or principle of referring an important political question (e.g. a proposed constitutional change) to be decided by a general vote of the entire electorate; a vote taken by referendum. Cf. plebiscite n.) As you have brought up the question of a referendum perhaps you could tell us what question would be put to the electorate by such a party. Undercover Euro Yob
  • Score: 0

11:14pm Wed 22 Jan 14

Undercover Euro Yob says...

Windsorian wrote:
Pleased to see common sense prevailed today; its not for the courts to overturn the wishes of the people as expressed at the ballot box.

For anyone thinking about voting for UKIP because of their opposition to HS2 then go right ahead; it's still a free country.

The Victorians criss crossed the county with railways which provoked opposition from the Luddites who wanted to continue with horse and carts.

Our legacy is what we leave our children and grand children; will they be shocked by HS2 ?
its not for the courts to overturn the wishes of the people as expressed at the ballot box.
This reminds me of the saying that if the ballot box really changed anything then they would get rid of it. Did the government put a statement about HS2 in its manifesto and is HS2 intended to benefit ordinary people or big money and the Chinese government which will take a major part in the line construction?


The Victorians criss crossed the county with railways which provoked opposition from the Luddites who wanted to continue with horse and carts.
The railways were opposed by great landowners - see the files of the Bucks Herald for 1832 - the Luddites were working men who objected to losing their jobs to machines.

Our legacy is what we leave our children and grand children; will they be shocked by HS2 ?
I think they may regret the disappearance of rural England.
[quote][p][bold]Windsorian[/bold] wrote: Pleased to see common sense prevailed today; its not for the courts to overturn the wishes of the people as expressed at the ballot box. For anyone thinking about voting for UKIP because of their opposition to HS2 then go right ahead; it's still a free country. The Victorians criss crossed the county with railways which provoked opposition from the Luddites who wanted to continue with horse and carts. Our legacy is what we leave our children and grand children; will they be shocked by HS2 ?[/p][/quote][italic] its not for the courts to overturn the wishes of the people as expressed at the ballot box. [/italic] This reminds me of the saying that if the ballot box really changed anything then they would get rid of it. Did the government put a statement about HS2 in its manifesto and is HS2 intended to benefit ordinary people or big money and the Chinese government which will take a major part in the line construction? [italic] The Victorians criss crossed the county with railways which provoked opposition from the Luddites who wanted to continue with horse and carts. [/italic] The railways were opposed by great landowners - see the files of the Bucks Herald for 1832 - the Luddites were working men who objected to losing their jobs to machines. [italic] Our legacy is what we leave our children and grand children; will they be shocked by HS2 ? [/italic] I think they may regret the disappearance of rural England. Undercover Euro Yob
  • Score: 3

11:35pm Wed 22 Jan 14

Grumpyaskett says...

Enough of our councillors wasting our money and their time on these pointless attempts to stop HS2. They talk about the government wasting money on HS2. At least if that were the case, which it patently isn't, it would be over 30 years. Our money is being spent NOW when the councils are (said to be) cutting back on urgent services
Enough of our councillors wasting our money and their time on these pointless attempts to stop HS2. They talk about the government wasting money on HS2. At least if that were the case, which it patently isn't, it would be over 30 years. Our money is being spent NOW when the councils are (said to be) cutting back on urgent services Grumpyaskett
  • Score: 0

4:33am Thu 23 Jan 14

Windsorian says...

@Undercover Euro Yob

Q. Our legacy is what we leave our children and grand children; will they be shocked by HS2 ?
A. I think they may regret the disappearance of rural England.

Young people grow up today in an enviroment full of fast food, cars, motorways, TVs, i-pads. mobile phones, trains, aeroplanes etc. Do you really think they want to return to a rural England of pre-Victorian times ?

In my opinion the people opposed to HS2 are akin the oddballs and loony tunes who opposed the construction of the M25, but now accept that it was necessary, inevitable and an essential of modern day living.

The reality is that when you are tired of progress, you are tired with life.
@Undercover Euro Yob Q. Our legacy is what we leave our children and grand children; will they be shocked by HS2 ? A. I think they may regret the disappearance of rural England. Young people grow up today in an enviroment full of fast food, cars, motorways, TVs, i-pads. mobile phones, trains, aeroplanes etc. Do you really think they want to return to a rural England of pre-Victorian times ? In my opinion the people opposed to HS2 are akin the oddballs and loony tunes who opposed the construction of the M25, but now accept that it was necessary, inevitable and an essential of modern day living. The reality is that when you are tired of progress, you are tired with life. Windsorian
  • Score: -1

7:29am Thu 23 Jan 14

demoness the second says...

Windsorian wrote:
@Undercover Euro Yob

Q. Our legacy is what we leave our children and grand children; will they be shocked by HS2 ?
A. I think they may regret the disappearance of rural England.

Young people grow up today in an enviroment full of fast food, cars, motorways, TVs, i-pads. mobile phones, trains, aeroplanes etc. Do you really think they want to return to a rural England of pre-Victorian times ?

In my opinion the people opposed to HS2 are akin the oddballs and loony tunes who opposed the construction of the M25, but now accept that it was necessary, inevitable and an essential of modern day living.

The reality is that when you are tired of progress, you are tired with life.
Again, your arguments are invalid and unsound. Undercover Euro did not say that young people will want to return to a rural England of pre victorian times. He said that young people would regret the loss of countryside - a fact that does not seem to bother you. I think you should also do your research properly and see just how many large organisations and think tanks have advised against HS2 - not oddballs or loony tunes at all. And they have done it for sound economic reasons.
Progress is one thing - but as another poster pointed out, building yet another railway is not progress,
The interesting thing is, you are just repeating the same tired arguments all over again.
This railway as well as being an environmental disaster, is an economical folly - there is no real need or justification for it . However this and the previous government signed up to it and there is no going back because too much money has been spent already. That can be the only reason they are forging ahead - despite the over whelming opposition very from very large groups - not just a few "nimbys" in Bucks.
[quote][p][bold]Windsorian[/bold] wrote: @Undercover Euro Yob Q. Our legacy is what we leave our children and grand children; will they be shocked by HS2 ? A. I think they may regret the disappearance of rural England. Young people grow up today in an enviroment full of fast food, cars, motorways, TVs, i-pads. mobile phones, trains, aeroplanes etc. Do you really think they want to return to a rural England of pre-Victorian times ? In my opinion the people opposed to HS2 are akin the oddballs and loony tunes who opposed the construction of the M25, but now accept that it was necessary, inevitable and an essential of modern day living. The reality is that when you are tired of progress, you are tired with life.[/p][/quote]Again, your arguments are invalid and unsound. Undercover Euro did not say that young people will want to return to a rural England of pre victorian times. He said that young people would regret the loss of countryside - a fact that does not seem to bother you. I think you should also do your research properly and see just how many large organisations and think tanks have advised against HS2 - not oddballs or loony tunes at all. And they have done it for sound economic reasons. Progress is one thing - but as another poster pointed out, building yet another railway is not progress, The interesting thing is, you are just repeating the same tired arguments all over again. This railway as well as being an environmental disaster, is an economical folly - there is no real need or justification for it . However this and the previous government signed up to it and there is no going back because too much money has been spent already. That can be the only reason they are forging ahead - despite the over whelming opposition very from very large groups - not just a few "nimbys" in Bucks. demoness the second
  • Score: 0

8:16am Thu 23 Jan 14

gpn01 says...

Windsorian wrote:
@Undercover Euro Yob

Q. Our legacy is what we leave our children and grand children; will they be shocked by HS2 ?
A. I think they may regret the disappearance of rural England.

Young people grow up today in an enviroment full of fast food, cars, motorways, TVs, i-pads. mobile phones, trains, aeroplanes etc. Do you really think they want to return to a rural England of pre-Victorian times ?

In my opinion the people opposed to HS2 are akin the oddballs and loony tunes who opposed the construction of the M25, but now accept that it was necessary, inevitable and an essential of modern day living.

The reality is that when you are tired of progress, you are tired with life.
I am completely in favour of progress when it's taking us forwards. HS2 takes us backwards, using 150 year old technology. That's not progress, it's regress.
[quote][p][bold]Windsorian[/bold] wrote: @Undercover Euro Yob Q. Our legacy is what we leave our children and grand children; will they be shocked by HS2 ? A. I think they may regret the disappearance of rural England. Young people grow up today in an enviroment full of fast food, cars, motorways, TVs, i-pads. mobile phones, trains, aeroplanes etc. Do you really think they want to return to a rural England of pre-Victorian times ? In my opinion the people opposed to HS2 are akin the oddballs and loony tunes who opposed the construction of the M25, but now accept that it was necessary, inevitable and an essential of modern day living. The reality is that when you are tired of progress, you are tired with life.[/p][/quote]I am completely in favour of progress when it's taking us forwards. HS2 takes us backwards, using 150 year old technology. That's not progress, it's regress. gpn01
  • Score: 0

8:16am Thu 23 Jan 14

gpn01 says...

Windsorian wrote:
@Undercover Euro Yob

Q. Our legacy is what we leave our children and grand children; will they be shocked by HS2 ?
A. I think they may regret the disappearance of rural England.

Young people grow up today in an enviroment full of fast food, cars, motorways, TVs, i-pads. mobile phones, trains, aeroplanes etc. Do you really think they want to return to a rural England of pre-Victorian times ?

In my opinion the people opposed to HS2 are akin the oddballs and loony tunes who opposed the construction of the M25, but now accept that it was necessary, inevitable and an essential of modern day living.

The reality is that when you are tired of progress, you are tired with life.
I am completely in favour of progress when it's taking us forwards. HS2 takes us backwards, using 150 year old technology. That's not progress, it's regress.
[quote][p][bold]Windsorian[/bold] wrote: @Undercover Euro Yob Q. Our legacy is what we leave our children and grand children; will they be shocked by HS2 ? A. I think they may regret the disappearance of rural England. Young people grow up today in an enviroment full of fast food, cars, motorways, TVs, i-pads. mobile phones, trains, aeroplanes etc. Do you really think they want to return to a rural England of pre-Victorian times ? In my opinion the people opposed to HS2 are akin the oddballs and loony tunes who opposed the construction of the M25, but now accept that it was necessary, inevitable and an essential of modern day living. The reality is that when you are tired of progress, you are tired with life.[/p][/quote]I am completely in favour of progress when it's taking us forwards. HS2 takes us backwards, using 150 year old technology. That's not progress, it's regress. gpn01
  • Score: -1

9:31am Thu 23 Jan 14

Windsorian says...

@ gpn01 (twice)
"I am completely in favour of progress when it's taking us forwards. HS2 takes us backwards, using 150 year old technology. That's not progress, it's regress."

Now there I was thinking Mallard held the world speed record of 126mph; yet here we are talking about building a modern railway capable of operating at twice that speed. The Victorians couldn't do it or they would have done so; hardly 150 year old technology.

You should accept that for some people fast food is much too fast whilst for others broadband has destroyed letter writing and forced the Post Office into delivering huge quantities of junk mail.

It seems that King Canute is alive and kicking in the Chilterns !
@ gpn01 (twice) "I am completely in favour of progress when it's taking us forwards. HS2 takes us backwards, using 150 year old technology. That's not progress, it's regress." Now there I was thinking Mallard held the world speed record of 126mph; yet here we are talking about building a modern railway capable of operating at twice that speed. The Victorians couldn't do it or they would have done so; hardly 150 year old technology. You should accept that for some people fast food is much too fast whilst for others broadband has destroyed letter writing and forced the Post Office into delivering huge quantities of junk mail. It seems that King Canute is alive and kicking in the Chilterns ! Windsorian
  • Score: -2

9:46am Thu 23 Jan 14

bluebanana says...

demoness the second wrote:
Windsorian wrote:
@Undercover Euro Yob

Q. Our legacy is what we leave our children and grand children; will they be shocked by HS2 ?
A. I think they may regret the disappearance of rural England.

Young people grow up today in an enviroment full of fast food, cars, motorways, TVs, i-pads. mobile phones, trains, aeroplanes etc. Do you really think they want to return to a rural England of pre-Victorian times ?

In my opinion the people opposed to HS2 are akin the oddballs and loony tunes who opposed the construction of the M25, but now accept that it was necessary, inevitable and an essential of modern day living.

The reality is that when you are tired of progress, you are tired with life.
Again, your arguments are invalid and unsound. Undercover Euro did not say that young people will want to return to a rural England of pre victorian times. He said that young people would regret the loss of countryside - a fact that does not seem to bother you. I think you should also do your research properly and see just how many large organisations and think tanks have advised against HS2 - not oddballs or loony tunes at all. And they have done it for sound economic reasons.
Progress is one thing - but as another poster pointed out, building yet another railway is not progress,
The interesting thing is, you are just repeating the same tired arguments all over again.
This railway as well as being an environmental disaster, is an economical folly - there is no real need or justification for it . However this and the previous government signed up to it and there is no going back because too much money has been spent already. That can be the only reason they are forging ahead - despite the over whelming opposition very from very large groups - not just a few "nimbys" in Bucks.
'over whelming opposition'??

Personally I'd call those opposed to this essential infrastructure project a vocal minority. I think you'll find the vast majority of the UK population either couldn't care less about it or are (quietly) in favour of it.
[quote][p][bold]demoness the second[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Windsorian[/bold] wrote: @Undercover Euro Yob Q. Our legacy is what we leave our children and grand children; will they be shocked by HS2 ? A. I think they may regret the disappearance of rural England. Young people grow up today in an enviroment full of fast food, cars, motorways, TVs, i-pads. mobile phones, trains, aeroplanes etc. Do you really think they want to return to a rural England of pre-Victorian times ? In my opinion the people opposed to HS2 are akin the oddballs and loony tunes who opposed the construction of the M25, but now accept that it was necessary, inevitable and an essential of modern day living. The reality is that when you are tired of progress, you are tired with life.[/p][/quote]Again, your arguments are invalid and unsound. Undercover Euro did not say that young people will want to return to a rural England of pre victorian times. He said that young people would regret the loss of countryside - a fact that does not seem to bother you. I think you should also do your research properly and see just how many large organisations and think tanks have advised against HS2 - not oddballs or loony tunes at all. And they have done it for sound economic reasons. Progress is one thing - but as another poster pointed out, building yet another railway is not progress, The interesting thing is, you are just repeating the same tired arguments all over again. This railway as well as being an environmental disaster, is an economical folly - there is no real need or justification for it . However this and the previous government signed up to it and there is no going back because too much money has been spent already. That can be the only reason they are forging ahead - despite the over whelming opposition very from very large groups - not just a few "nimbys" in Bucks.[/p][/quote]'over whelming opposition'?? Personally I'd call those opposed to this essential infrastructure project a vocal minority. I think you'll find the vast majority of the UK population either couldn't care less about it or are (quietly) in favour of it. bluebanana
  • Score: 0

9:54am Thu 23 Jan 14

gpn01 says...

Windsorian wrote:
@ gpn01 (twice)
"I am completely in favour of progress when it's taking us forwards. HS2 takes us backwards, using 150 year old technology. That's not progress, it's regress."

Now there I was thinking Mallard held the world speed record of 126mph; yet here we are talking about building a modern railway capable of operating at twice that speed. The Victorians couldn't do it or they would have done so; hardly 150 year old technology.

You should accept that for some people fast food is much too fast whilst for others broadband has destroyed letter writing and forced the Post Office into delivering huge quantities of junk mail.

It seems that King Canute is alive and kicking in the Chilterns !
"broadband has destroyed letter writing". Yes, that's called progress...Thought you were in favour of that?

"Mallard held the world speed record of 126mph; yet here we are talking about building a modern railway capable of operating at twice that speed".....simply doign the same thing faster isn't progress. Henry Ford was once claimed to have said "if you ask the people what they want they will say faster horses". I think this statement is an urban myth but makes the point entirely that simply doing what you do, but faster, isn't the best form of progress.
[quote][p][bold]Windsorian[/bold] wrote: @ gpn01 (twice) "I am completely in favour of progress when it's taking us forwards. HS2 takes us backwards, using 150 year old technology. That's not progress, it's regress." Now there I was thinking Mallard held the world speed record of 126mph; yet here we are talking about building a modern railway capable of operating at twice that speed. The Victorians couldn't do it or they would have done so; hardly 150 year old technology. You should accept that for some people fast food is much too fast whilst for others broadband has destroyed letter writing and forced the Post Office into delivering huge quantities of junk mail. It seems that King Canute is alive and kicking in the Chilterns ![/p][/quote]"broadband has destroyed letter writing". Yes, that's called progress...Thought you were in favour of that? "Mallard held the world speed record of 126mph; yet here we are talking about building a modern railway capable of operating at twice that speed".....simply doign the same thing faster isn't progress. Henry Ford was once claimed to have said "if you ask the people what they want they will say faster horses". I think this statement is an urban myth but makes the point entirely that simply doing what you do, but faster, isn't the best form of progress. gpn01
  • Score: 4

9:55am Thu 23 Jan 14

Windsorian says...

@ demoness the second

"He said that young people would regret the loss of countryside "

Do you genuinely regret the loss of the countryside caused before you were born (in Victorian times ?) of the canals and railways; or in modern times the construction of the motorway network ?

The reality is people grow up in an environment they know and understand; things that happened before they were born - is history !

I particularly dislike the way some parents have tried to indoctrinate their young children against HS2; after it is built and part of everyday life, these children will probably remember their parents as cranky.
@ demoness the second "He said that young people would regret the loss of countryside " Do you genuinely regret the loss of the countryside caused before you were born (in Victorian times ?) of the canals and railways; or in modern times the construction of the motorway network ? The reality is people grow up in an environment they know and understand; things that happened before they were born - is history ! I particularly dislike the way some parents have tried to indoctrinate their young children against HS2; after it is built and part of everyday life, these children will probably remember their parents as cranky. Windsorian
  • Score: 0

3:31pm Thu 23 Jan 14

gpn01 says...

Windsorian wrote:
@ demoness the second

"He said that young people would regret the loss of countryside "

Do you genuinely regret the loss of the countryside caused before you were born (in Victorian times ?) of the canals and railways; or in modern times the construction of the motorway network ?

The reality is people grow up in an environment they know and understand; things that happened before they were born - is history !

I particularly dislike the way some parents have tried to indoctrinate their young children against HS2; after it is built and part of everyday life, these children will probably remember their parents as cranky.
Based on how previous major Government projects have gone ? More likely they'll question why so much of taxpayers money was wasted on HS1, HS2, NHS IT, aircraft carriers without aeroplanes, Universal Credit, etc. Whilst at the same time allowing healthcare to be slashed, emergency services cut, etc. And how our generation has massively increased the size of the National Debt.
[quote][p][bold]Windsorian[/bold] wrote: @ demoness the second "He said that young people would regret the loss of countryside " Do you genuinely regret the loss of the countryside caused before you were born (in Victorian times ?) of the canals and railways; or in modern times the construction of the motorway network ? The reality is people grow up in an environment they know and understand; things that happened before they were born - is history ! I particularly dislike the way some parents have tried to indoctrinate their young children against HS2; after it is built and part of everyday life, these children will probably remember their parents as cranky.[/p][/quote]Based on how previous major Government projects have gone ? More likely they'll question why so much of taxpayers money was wasted on HS1, HS2, NHS IT, aircraft carriers without aeroplanes, Universal Credit, etc. Whilst at the same time allowing healthcare to be slashed, emergency services cut, etc. And how our generation has massively increased the size of the National Debt. gpn01
  • Score: 2

4:04pm Thu 23 Jan 14

Kadoogan says...

Windsorian wrote:
Pleased to see common sense prevailed today; its not for the courts to overturn the wishes of the people as expressed at the ballot box.

For anyone thinking about voting for UKIP because of their opposition to HS2 then go right ahead; it's still a free country.

The Victorians criss crossed the county with railways which provoked opposition from the Luddites who wanted to continue with horse and carts.

Our legacy is what we leave our children and grand children; will they be shocked by HS2 ?
All three major parties at the 2010 election were pro HS2, so stop trotting out this tired old nonsense that the election result represented people's opinion on HS2 in any way. There was no serious alternative for those against HS2.
[quote][p][bold]Windsorian[/bold] wrote: Pleased to see common sense prevailed today; its not for the courts to overturn the wishes of the people as expressed at the ballot box. For anyone thinking about voting for UKIP because of their opposition to HS2 then go right ahead; it's still a free country. The Victorians criss crossed the county with railways which provoked opposition from the Luddites who wanted to continue with horse and carts. Our legacy is what we leave our children and grand children; will they be shocked by HS2 ?[/p][/quote]All three major parties at the 2010 election were pro HS2, so stop trotting out this tired old nonsense that the election result represented people's opinion on HS2 in any way. There was no serious alternative for those against HS2. Kadoogan
  • Score: 3

10:52pm Thu 23 Jan 14

Undercover Euro Yob says...

Windsorian wrote:
@ demoness the second

"He said that young people would regret the loss of countryside "

Do you genuinely regret the loss of the countryside caused before you were born (in Victorian times ?) of the canals and railways; or in modern times the construction of the motorway network ?

The reality is people grow up in an environment they know and understand; things that happened before they were born - is history !

I particularly dislike the way some parents have tried to indoctrinate their young children against HS2; after it is built and part of everyday life, these children will probably remember their parents as cranky.
I'm not sure whether to smile or frown at the massively firm, dismissive, and ignorant pronouncements by 'Windsorian'.

He (I take it ‘Windsorian’ is a bloke) seems to have a slash and burn attitude to the world we live in - once something’s gone there’s no point in thinking further about it: '' … things that happened before they were born - is (sic) history .

You speak as if history were dead and irrelevant - history is what produces us and it’s no wonder you make ignorant mistakes about it if that is your attitude. Do you think if Jack Scruton and the others half a century ago had failed to stop the council building a road along the Rye that it would make no difference now if the Rye were to be occupied by a road and adjacent developments?

The Victorians had a lot more open space than we do and there was a lot fewer Victorians than there is of us. I regret the fact that the green hills and woods we see in illustrations and descriptions of this area before 1914 no longer exist and that what is left is so small in extent - it gives a hint of what we have lost. People did not evolve to live in air-conditioned apartments. When do you think we will have consumed enough of the planet - when the last field is covered by a car park?

None of the enthusiasts for HS2 seem to have made a convincing or consistent case for it. If, instead of making generalisations based on your own partial (in both senses of the word) appreciation of the past, you were to produce a good case for HS2, then your own children (assuming you have some) would be less likely to remember their parents as cranky.
[quote][p][bold]Windsorian[/bold] wrote: @ demoness the second "He said that young people would regret the loss of countryside " Do you genuinely regret the loss of the countryside caused before you were born (in Victorian times ?) of the canals and railways; or in modern times the construction of the motorway network ? The reality is people grow up in an environment they know and understand; things that happened before they were born - is history ! I particularly dislike the way some parents have tried to indoctrinate their young children against HS2; after it is built and part of everyday life, these children will probably remember their parents as cranky.[/p][/quote]I'm not sure whether to smile or frown at the massively firm, dismissive, and ignorant pronouncements by 'Windsorian'. He (I take it ‘Windsorian’ is a bloke) seems to have a slash and burn attitude to the world we live in - once something’s gone there’s no point in thinking further about it: '' [italic]… things that happened before they were born - is (sic) history [/italic]. You speak as if history were dead and irrelevant - history is what produces us and it’s no wonder you make ignorant mistakes about it if that is your attitude. Do you think if Jack Scruton and the others half a century ago had failed to stop the council building a road along the Rye that it would make no difference now if the Rye were to be occupied by a road and adjacent developments? The Victorians had a lot more open space than we do and there was a lot fewer Victorians than there is of us. I regret the fact that the green hills and woods we see in illustrations and descriptions of this area before 1914 no longer exist and that what is left is so small in extent - it gives a hint of what we have lost. People did not evolve to live in air-conditioned apartments. When do you think we will have consumed enough of the planet - when the last field is covered by a car park? None of the enthusiasts for HS2 seem to have made a convincing or consistent case for it. If, instead of making generalisations based on your own partial (in both senses of the word) appreciation of the past, you were to produce a good case for HS2, then your own children (assuming you have some) would be less likely to remember their parents as cranky. Undercover Euro Yob
  • Score: -1

4:06am Fri 24 Jan 14

Windsorian says...

I think it's time some writers took a reality check, as 7 Supreme Court judges have unanimously ruled on the various issues and effectively told the anti-HS2 objectors to take their case to Parliament.

Not that they are likely to have much luck there, as last year only 34 MPs out of 650 opposed the 3rd Reading of the High Speed Rail (Preparation) Bill. I think it is worth remembering that Cheryl Gillan sacraficed her ministerial career to oppose HS2, but really the cause is hopeless.

So the anti-HS2 brigade can either put up their own candidate(s) at the 2015 General Election or fall in behind UKIP - if their policy is still to oppose HS2. I would have thought it best to support UKIP, as they already have a large and growing anti-EU base.
I think it's time some writers took a reality check, as 7 Supreme Court judges have unanimously ruled on the various issues and effectively told the anti-HS2 objectors to take their case to Parliament. Not that they are likely to have much luck there, as last year only 34 MPs out of 650 opposed the 3rd Reading of the High Speed Rail (Preparation) Bill. I think it is worth remembering that Cheryl Gillan sacraficed her ministerial career to oppose HS2, but really the cause is hopeless. So the anti-HS2 brigade can either put up their own candidate(s) at the 2015 General Election or fall in behind UKIP - if their policy is still to oppose HS2. I would have thought it best to support UKIP, as they already have a large and growing anti-EU base. Windsorian
  • Score: 0

6:57am Fri 24 Jan 14

demoness the second says...

Undercover Euro Yob wrote:
Windsorian wrote:
@ demoness the second

"He said that young people would regret the loss of countryside "

Do you genuinely regret the loss of the countryside caused before you were born (in Victorian times ?) of the canals and railways; or in modern times the construction of the motorway network ?

The reality is people grow up in an environment they know and understand; things that happened before they were born - is history !

I particularly dislike the way some parents have tried to indoctrinate their young children against HS2; after it is built and part of everyday life, these children will probably remember their parents as cranky.
I'm not sure whether to smile or frown at the massively firm, dismissive, and ignorant pronouncements by 'Windsorian'.

He (I take it ‘Windsorian’ is a bloke) seems to have a slash and burn attitude to the world we live in - once something’s gone there’s no point in thinking further about it: '' … things that happened before they were born - is (sic) history .

You speak as if history were dead and irrelevant - history is what produces us and it’s no wonder you make ignorant mistakes about it if that is your attitude. Do you think if Jack Scruton and the others half a century ago had failed to stop the council building a road along the Rye that it would make no difference now if the Rye were to be occupied by a road and adjacent developments?

The Victorians had a lot more open space than we do and there was a lot fewer Victorians than there is of us. I regret the fact that the green hills and woods we see in illustrations and descriptions of this area before 1914 no longer exist and that what is left is so small in extent - it gives a hint of what we have lost. People did not evolve to live in air-conditioned apartments. When do you think we will have consumed enough of the planet - when the last field is covered by a car park?

None of the enthusiasts for HS2 seem to have made a convincing or consistent case for it. If, instead of making generalisations based on your own partial (in both senses of the word) appreciation of the past, you were to produce a good case for HS2, then your own children (assuming you have some) would be less likely to remember their parents as cranky.
He won't answer - you have made some great points. All he can come back with is " you are afraid of progress and we are all luddites". Oh and " everyone voted for it"
Facile empty points with no real basis of fact - I predict that by the time our children's children are grown up we won't have railways because we are running out of sustainable energy as it is. There will be no need to rush up and down the country .
But the boys have got their toy railway - who gives a toss about anything else ;)
[quote][p][bold]Undercover Euro Yob[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Windsorian[/bold] wrote: @ demoness the second "He said that young people would regret the loss of countryside " Do you genuinely regret the loss of the countryside caused before you were born (in Victorian times ?) of the canals and railways; or in modern times the construction of the motorway network ? The reality is people grow up in an environment they know and understand; things that happened before they were born - is history ! I particularly dislike the way some parents have tried to indoctrinate their young children against HS2; after it is built and part of everyday life, these children will probably remember their parents as cranky.[/p][/quote]I'm not sure whether to smile or frown at the massively firm, dismissive, and ignorant pronouncements by 'Windsorian'. He (I take it ‘Windsorian’ is a bloke) seems to have a slash and burn attitude to the world we live in - once something’s gone there’s no point in thinking further about it: '' [italic]… things that happened before they were born - is (sic) history [/italic]. You speak as if history were dead and irrelevant - history is what produces us and it’s no wonder you make ignorant mistakes about it if that is your attitude. Do you think if Jack Scruton and the others half a century ago had failed to stop the council building a road along the Rye that it would make no difference now if the Rye were to be occupied by a road and adjacent developments? The Victorians had a lot more open space than we do and there was a lot fewer Victorians than there is of us. I regret the fact that the green hills and woods we see in illustrations and descriptions of this area before 1914 no longer exist and that what is left is so small in extent - it gives a hint of what we have lost. People did not evolve to live in air-conditioned apartments. When do you think we will have consumed enough of the planet - when the last field is covered by a car park? None of the enthusiasts for HS2 seem to have made a convincing or consistent case for it. If, instead of making generalisations based on your own partial (in both senses of the word) appreciation of the past, you were to produce a good case for HS2, then your own children (assuming you have some) would be less likely to remember their parents as cranky.[/p][/quote]He won't answer - you have made some great points. All he can come back with is " you are afraid of progress and we are all luddites". Oh and " everyone voted for it" Facile empty points with no real basis of fact - I predict that by the time our children's children are grown up we won't have railways because we are running out of sustainable energy as it is. There will be no need to rush up and down the country . But the boys have got their toy railway - who gives a toss about anything else ;) demoness the second
  • Score: -2

8:42am Fri 24 Jan 14

gpn01 says...

Windsorian wrote:
I think it's time some writers took a reality check, as 7 Supreme Court judges have unanimously ruled on the various issues and effectively told the anti-HS2 objectors to take their case to Parliament.

Not that they are likely to have much luck there, as last year only 34 MPs out of 650 opposed the 3rd Reading of the High Speed Rail (Preparation) Bill. I think it is worth remembering that Cheryl Gillan sacraficed her ministerial career to oppose HS2, but really the cause is hopeless.

So the anti-HS2 brigade can either put up their own candidate(s) at the 2015 General Election or fall in behind UKIP - if their policy is still to oppose HS2. I would have thought it best to support UKIP, as they already have a large and growing anti-EU base.
The Supreme Court judges rule only on the legal process, they do not rule on the economic, business or social case.

There is another option at the General Election and that is when one of the main parties wake up and realise that this project is squandering billions of pounds of taxpayers money, at a time that we can ill afford it, and decide to change their stance. As a political ploy that would be an attractive vote winner. The financial and feasibility review that Sir David Higgins , recently appointed Chairman of HS2, has been tasked with producing by March could well act as a catalyst. If it confirms that the budget for HS2 exceeds the estimate of £54Bn (2014 prices) then that'll act as a great excuse for Labour to blame Conservative mismanagement for the rise in costs and say that they now withdraw their support.
[quote][p][bold]Windsorian[/bold] wrote: I think it's time some writers took a reality check, as 7 Supreme Court judges have unanimously ruled on the various issues and effectively told the anti-HS2 objectors to take their case to Parliament. Not that they are likely to have much luck there, as last year only 34 MPs out of 650 opposed the 3rd Reading of the High Speed Rail (Preparation) Bill. I think it is worth remembering that Cheryl Gillan sacraficed her ministerial career to oppose HS2, but really the cause is hopeless. So the anti-HS2 brigade can either put up their own candidate(s) at the 2015 General Election or fall in behind UKIP - if their policy is still to oppose HS2. I would have thought it best to support UKIP, as they already have a large and growing anti-EU base.[/p][/quote]The Supreme Court judges rule only on the legal process, they do not rule on the economic, business or social case. There is another option at the General Election and that is when one of the main parties wake up and realise that this project is squandering billions of pounds of taxpayers money, at a time that we can ill afford it, and decide to change their stance. As a political ploy that would be an attractive vote winner. The financial and feasibility review that Sir David Higgins , recently appointed Chairman of HS2, has been tasked with producing by March could well act as a catalyst. If it confirms that the budget for HS2 exceeds the estimate of £54Bn (2014 prices) then that'll act as a great excuse for Labour to blame Conservative mismanagement for the rise in costs and say that they now withdraw their support. gpn01
  • Score: 6

11:58am Fri 24 Jan 14

Windsorian says...

@ gpn01

Your only proposal is to pray that Labour changes tack and HS2 costs rise ?

The Higgins review is to try and cut costs whilst proceeding with the project.

Instead of boring us to death, why not get out there and support UKIP ?
@ gpn01 Your only proposal is to pray that Labour changes tack and HS2 costs rise ? The Higgins review is to try and cut costs whilst proceeding with the project. Instead of boring us to death, why not get out there and support UKIP ? Windsorian
  • Score: -3

1:12pm Fri 24 Jan 14

gpn01 says...

Windsorian wrote:
@ gpn01

Your only proposal is to pray that Labour changes tack and HS2 costs rise ?

The Higgins review is to try and cut costs whilst proceeding with the project.

Instead of boring us to death, why not get out there and support UKIP ?
It'll certainlybe interesting to see if he can use his experience at Network Rail and the Olympics to develop a realistic budget. Remember that the original budget for the Olympics was £2.4 billion and it officially came at £9.3 billion, with independent estimates reaching up to £11 billion, £13 billion & £24 billion. When he was at Network Rail, their profits went down and their debts went up. With these experiences in mind one would hope he's adopted a fiscally prudent approach to the project. The Government clearly expects him to pull a magic rabbit out of the hat given that his salary, at £750,000 p.a. is six times that of his predecessor Alison Munro, who will remain as managing director of development. Meanwhile, the project is already spending more than budget with the total spend by HS2 Ltd on the civil and structural engineering design services contracts £10.6m above the £58.7m estimated worth of the contracts. In total well over £300m has been spent already. An awful lot of it on PR (which doesn't seem to be working).

I would prefer to gain support from taxpayers against the project as this will lead to politicians realising that it's a dreadful way to waste tax revenue and that the electorate want money spending on essential services such as health, education and welfare, not a new trainset.
[quote][p][bold]Windsorian[/bold] wrote: @ gpn01 Your only proposal is to pray that Labour changes tack and HS2 costs rise ? The Higgins review is to try and cut costs whilst proceeding with the project. Instead of boring us to death, why not get out there and support UKIP ?[/p][/quote]It'll certainlybe interesting to see if he can use his experience at Network Rail and the Olympics to develop a realistic budget. Remember that the original budget for the Olympics was £2.4 billion and it officially came at £9.3 billion, with independent estimates reaching up to £11 billion, £13 billion & £24 billion. When he was at Network Rail, their profits went down and their debts went up. With these experiences in mind one would hope he's adopted a fiscally prudent approach to the project. The Government clearly expects him to pull a magic rabbit out of the hat given that his salary, at £750,000 p.a. is six times that of his predecessor Alison Munro, who will remain as managing director of development. Meanwhile, the project is already spending more than budget with the total spend by HS2 Ltd on the civil and structural engineering design services contracts £10.6m above the £58.7m estimated worth of the contracts. In total well over £300m has been spent already. An awful lot of it on PR (which doesn't seem to be working). I would prefer to gain support from taxpayers against the project as this will lead to politicians realising that it's a dreadful way to waste tax revenue and that the electorate want money spending on essential services such as health, education and welfare, not a new trainset. gpn01
  • Score: -2

9:14am Sat 25 Jan 14

Windsorian says...

The 2012 Olympics was Britain at its best, both in organisation and results; the predictions of the gloomsters came to nothing. Yes it was horrendously expensive, but that applies for any country hosting the event. It was a once in a lifetime event and we can be pleased with our performance.

The gloomsters were also out over HS1 and the Channel Tunnel, however their birthing pains are now history and both projects are growing up well.

Now is the time for the rail network ito be moderised; people are aware of the present problems and are looking for solutions. The brief is vast with population growth, lack of capacity, modal shift and climate change all to be considered.

The major political parties have a plan to link our major conurbations with a HSR network, by-passing rural areas and freeing up capacity on the classic network for additional services and freight.

Many of us think HS2 is an essential ingredient for the 21st century and the expansion and upgrading of the existing (mainly Victorian) rail netwok.
The 2012 Olympics was Britain at its best, both in organisation and results; the predictions of the gloomsters came to nothing. Yes it was horrendously expensive, but that applies for any country hosting the event. It was a once in a lifetime event and we can be pleased with our performance. The gloomsters were also out over HS1 and the Channel Tunnel, however their birthing pains are now history and both projects are growing up well. Now is the time for the rail network ito be moderised; people are aware of the present problems and are looking for solutions. The brief is vast with population growth, lack of capacity, modal shift and climate change all to be considered. The major political parties have a plan to link our major conurbations with a HSR network, by-passing rural areas and freeing up capacity on the classic network for additional services and freight. Many of us think HS2 is an essential ingredient for the 21st century and the expansion and upgrading of the existing (mainly Victorian) rail netwok. Windsorian
  • Score: 3

9:32am Sat 25 Jan 14

gpn01 says...

Windsorian wrote:
The 2012 Olympics was Britain at its best, both in organisation and results; the predictions of the gloomsters came to nothing. Yes it was horrendously expensive, but that applies for any country hosting the event. It was a once in a lifetime event and we can be pleased with our performance.

The gloomsters were also out over HS1 and the Channel Tunnel, however their birthing pains are now history and both projects are growing up well.

Now is the time for the rail network ito be moderised; people are aware of the present problems and are looking for solutions. The brief is vast with population growth, lack of capacity, modal shift and climate change all to be considered.

The major political parties have a plan to link our major conurbations with a HSR network, by-passing rural areas and freeing up capacity on the classic network for additional services and freight.

Many of us think HS2 is an essential ingredient for the 21st century and the expansion and upgrading of the existing (mainly Victorian) rail netwok.
And !many of us think iut ids time for radical progress. Instead of building more railway lines and destroying the countryside, develop employment areas adjacent to housing and reduce the need to travel. Embrace 21st Century technologies and use videoconferencing, Skype, email, telephone, etc..which mean you don't need to travel in the first place. Invest in the infrastructure to introduce driverless transport. The list goes..
[quote][p][bold]Windsorian[/bold] wrote: The 2012 Olympics was Britain at its best, both in organisation and results; the predictions of the gloomsters came to nothing. Yes it was horrendously expensive, but that applies for any country hosting the event. It was a once in a lifetime event and we can be pleased with our performance. The gloomsters were also out over HS1 and the Channel Tunnel, however their birthing pains are now history and both projects are growing up well. Now is the time for the rail network ito be moderised; people are aware of the present problems and are looking for solutions. The brief is vast with population growth, lack of capacity, modal shift and climate change all to be considered. The major political parties have a plan to link our major conurbations with a HSR network, by-passing rural areas and freeing up capacity on the classic network for additional services and freight. Many of us think HS2 is an essential ingredient for the 21st century and the expansion and upgrading of the existing (mainly Victorian) rail netwok.[/p][/quote]And !many of us think iut ids time for radical progress. Instead of building more railway lines and destroying the countryside, develop employment areas adjacent to housing and reduce the need to travel. Embrace 21st Century technologies and use videoconferencing, Skype, email, telephone, etc..which mean you don't need to travel in the first place. Invest in the infrastructure to introduce driverless transport. The list goes.. gpn01
  • Score: -1

10:19am Sat 25 Jan 14

Windsorian says...

@ gpn01

Then why not vote for the Green party; you could stand for election yourself and see how many of your neighbours support your proposal for employment areas (in the green belt) adjacent to existing housing ?

I don't see any evidence that the introduction of the telephone, e-mail or video conferencing has done anything to reduce peoples desire to travel; in fact the opposite is true.

After the last Council elections the Green Party in Brighton attempted on one day a week to ban meat from its restaurants; their dustmen were up in arms when they were told they were not allowed bacon or sausage rolls !
@ gpn01 Then why not vote for the Green party; you could stand for election yourself and see how many of your neighbours support your proposal for employment areas (in the green belt) adjacent to existing housing ? I don't see any evidence that the introduction of the telephone, e-mail or video conferencing has done anything to reduce peoples desire to travel; in fact the opposite is true. After the last Council elections the Green Party in Brighton attempted on one day a week to ban meat from its restaurants; their dustmen were up in arms when they were told they were not allowed bacon or sausage rolls ! Windsorian
  • Score: 3

10:28am Sat 25 Jan 14

gpn01 says...

Windsorian wrote:
@ gpn01

Then why not vote for the Green party; you could stand for election yourself and see how many of your neighbours support your proposal for employment areas (in the green belt) adjacent to existing housing ?

I don't see any evidence that the introduction of the telephone, e-mail or video conferencing has done anything to reduce peoples desire to travel; in fact the opposite is true.

After the last Council elections the Green Party in Brighton attempted on one day a week to ban meat from its restaurants; their dustmen were up in arms when they were told they were not allowed bacon or sausage rolls !
@windsorian I didn't say I was a Green person, although I am cogniscent ofof the impact of HS2 on the countryside. I also appreciate the amount of energy required to power the trainbs will need to be generated and that will involve fossil fuels being burned which ius an ecological issue in its own right. Importantly HS2 will burn another resource that we have a limited amountamount of called money. There are many other things that we should invest in instead of squandering £53bn+ on another railway.

You really think that travel hasn't been affected by improved communications such as telephone, web and email? Next time you use one of these, ask how you would have done it otherwise.
[quote][p][bold]Windsorian[/bold] wrote: @ gpn01 Then why not vote for the Green party; you could stand for election yourself and see how many of your neighbours support your proposal for employment areas (in the green belt) adjacent to existing housing ? I don't see any evidence that the introduction of the telephone, e-mail or video conferencing has done anything to reduce peoples desire to travel; in fact the opposite is true. After the last Council elections the Green Party in Brighton attempted on one day a week to ban meat from its restaurants; their dustmen were up in arms when they were told they were not allowed bacon or sausage rolls ![/p][/quote]@windsorian I didn't say I was a Green person, although I am cogniscent ofof the impact of HS2 on the countryside. I also appreciate the amount of energy required to power the trainbs will need to be generated and that will involve fossil fuels being burned which ius an ecological issue in its own right. Importantly HS2 will burn another resource that we have a limited amountamount of called money. There are many other things that we should invest in instead of squandering £53bn+ on another railway. You really think that travel hasn't been affected by improved communications such as telephone, web and email? Next time you use one of these, ask how you would have done it otherwise. gpn01
  • Score: 0

4:32pm Tue 28 Jan 14

Undercover Euro Yob says...

Windsorian wrote:
The 2012 Olympics was Britain at its best, both in organisation and results; the predictions of the gloomsters came to nothing. Yes it was horrendously expensive, but that applies for any country hosting the event. It was a once in a lifetime event and we can be pleased with our performance.

The gloomsters were also out over HS1 and the Channel Tunnel, however their birthing pains are now history and both projects are growing up well.

Now is the time for the rail network ito be moderised; people are aware of the present problems and are looking for solutions. The brief is vast with population growth, lack of capacity, modal shift and climate change all to be considered.

The major political parties have a plan to link our major conurbations with a HSR network, by-passing rural areas and freeing up capacity on the classic network for additional services and freight.

Many of us think HS2 is an essential ingredient for the 21st century and the expansion and upgrading of the existing (mainly Victorian) rail netwok.
… Britain at its best, both in organisation and results; the predictions of the gloomsters came to nothing … a once in a lifetime event and we can be pleased with our performance … their birthing pains are now history and both projects are growing up well.

Now is the time …. The brief is vast with population growth, lack of capacity, modal shift and climate change all to be considered.

The major political parties have a plan … an essential ingredient for the 21st century …

They don’t seem to have put their plan over very well.

Plenty of buzz words here and very little reasoning. The major cities and centres of industry and population are still where they were during (and before) the 19th Century. I’ve wondered more than once if you are some kind of lobby employee pretending to be a common man speaking common sense - it all sounds a bit vague and positive without being specific - a bit like some of the uplifting parts of the speeches of Sir Oswald Mosley.
[quote][p][bold]Windsorian[/bold] wrote: The 2012 Olympics was Britain at its best, both in organisation and results; the predictions of the gloomsters came to nothing. Yes it was horrendously expensive, but that applies for any country hosting the event. It was a once in a lifetime event and we can be pleased with our performance. The gloomsters were also out over HS1 and the Channel Tunnel, however their birthing pains are now history and both projects are growing up well. Now is the time for the rail network ito be moderised; people are aware of the present problems and are looking for solutions. The brief is vast with population growth, lack of capacity, modal shift and climate change all to be considered. The major political parties have a plan to link our major conurbations with a HSR network, by-passing rural areas and freeing up capacity on the classic network for additional services and freight. Many of us think HS2 is an essential ingredient for the 21st century and the expansion and upgrading of the existing (mainly Victorian) rail netwok.[/p][/quote][italic]… Britain at its best, both in organisation and results; the predictions of the gloomsters came to nothing … a once in a lifetime event and we can be pleased with our performance … their birthing pains are now history and both projects are growing up well. Now is the time …. The brief is vast with population growth, lack of capacity, modal shift and climate change all to be considered. The major political parties have a plan … an essential ingredient for the 21st century … [/italic] They don’t seem to have put their plan over very well. Plenty of buzz words here and very little reasoning. The major cities and centres of industry and population are still where they were during (and before) the 19th Century. I’ve wondered more than once if you are some kind of lobby employee pretending to be a common man speaking common sense - it all sounds a bit vague and positive without being specific - a bit like some of the uplifting parts of the speeches of Sir Oswald Mosley. Undercover Euro Yob
  • Score: -1

10:06pm Tue 28 Jan 14

Marsbarmad says...

Bunch of bloody idiots, utter madness. I hate other people.
Bunch of bloody idiots, utter madness. I hate other people. Marsbarmad
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree