Twitter campaign forces HS2 supporter to quit role (From Bucks Free Press)

Who are 'the majority of Buckinghamshire residents', bit of a sweeping statement. I live in Bucks and am all for it. Get fed up with NIMBY attitude.

There are a few Bucks residents in favour, those who haven't thought about the cost, damage and disruption it will cause, but the majority are against it and would prefer the £100 Billion was spent on something else.

I can empathise with Mr. Shillito - I live in Alderley Edge (Cheshire), which (if my best guess is accurate) will be in close proximity to Phase 2 of the new line. I've informed myself about HS2 and I can easily see the huge potential benefits accruing to UK plc collectively. When I attempt to post rebuttals of inaccuracies and deliberate exaggerations put forward by anti-HS2 campaigners, a standard response is to accuse me of financial benefit from the scheme (I have none and don't work in the rail industry), so instead of addressing the substantive issue, anti-campaigners routinely attempt to discredit the messenger. Some fool on the STOPHS2 site even searched my name, found another person with the same name involved in rail consultancy, put 2+2 together and got 5, even though I had previously explained where I lived and couldn't possibly be the that individual! Right now, in Wilmslow & Aldeley Edge, ignorance is bliss but I'm just waiting for information about a preferred route for phase 2 to become public knowledge (should be sometime in the Autumn) when World War III will break out and a sudden miraculous acquisition of (armchair) expert knowledge on any number of complex, related, technical subjects, will occur - I'm fully expecting to be villified when I am stupid enough to publicly admit my support for the project. My sympathies lie with Mr. Shillito - he has seen the ugly side of human nature exposed, warts and all!

@Malc London "would prefer the £100 Billion was spent on something else"............ONL
Y £100 Billion - surely you can do better than that Malc - why not go the whole hog and just claim it will be a cool £Trillion - much more of a headline grabber if you ask me?

Stokendoug wrote:
Who are 'the majority of Buckinghamshire residents', bit of a sweeping statement. I live in Bucks and am all for it. Get fed up with NIMBY attitude.

Good for you. I too live in Buckinghamshire and have the vision to invest in HS2. It is shameful that Mr Shillito has been forced out when he clearly argues a good case and pointed out the hypocritical Bucks CC (And Cllr Tett) who are short of cash but can misuse reserves from our council taxes to wasted on lawyers fees fighting the government in an un-winable challenge on HS2.

padav wrote:
I can empathise with Mr. Shillito - I live in Alderley Edge (Cheshire), which (if my best guess is accurate) will be in close proximity to Phase 2 of the new line. I've informed myself about HS2 and I can easily see the huge potential benefits accruing to UK plc collectively. When I attempt to post rebuttals of inaccuracies and deliberate exaggerations put forward by anti-HS2 campaigners, a standard response is to accuse me of financial benefit from the scheme (I have none and don't work in the rail industry), so instead of addressing the substantive issue, anti-campaigners routinely attempt to discredit the messenger. Some fool on the STOPHS2 site even searched my name, found another person with the same name involved in rail consultancy, put 2+2 together and got 5, even though I had previously explained where I lived and couldn't possibly be the that individual! Right now, in Wilmslow & Aldeley Edge, ignorance is bliss but I'm just waiting for information about a preferred route for phase 2 to become public knowledge (should be sometime in the Autumn) when World War III will break out and a sudden miraculous acquisition of (armchair) expert knowledge on any number of complex, related, technical subjects, will occur - I'm fully expecting to be villified when I am stupid enough to publicly admit my support for the project. My sympathies lie with Mr. Shillito - he has seen the ugly side of human nature exposed, warts and all!

Good post

Name calling from either side, bullying because people do not see your point of view is wrong.
I may not agree with you Padav and Carl, but I could not condone that sort of behaviour.
Dreadful :(

Personally I don't Tweet and have no intention of doing so!

Windsorian wrote:
Personally I don't Tweet and have no intention of doing so!

We are in rare agreement - horrible place
There is the expression.

Twitter is for tw*ts..
I tend to agree..

Well, I guess as the likes of Horsham Council are spending thousands supporting HS2, being paid to write comments on blogs in support etc, that it was a matter of time before the anti HS2 supporters upped the anti.

Job, Horsham Council, cost £97k a year responsible for 60 staff

Since receiving the Government’s go ahead, we have moved to a position of promoting HS2 – one of the most exciting projects of our generation and one of the more controversial. As Head of Public Affairs, you will take the lead in defining the strategy and lead HS2’s relationships with key stakeholders, the public and the media.

Reporting to the Chief Executive, and leading a team of 60, you will be responsible for overseeing THE SRATEGY AND IMPLEMENTATION FOR HS2 CONSULTATIONS and engagement with local authorities and communities in addition to developing and maintaining the corporate communications agenda and strategy via all communications channels.

http://www.taxpayers
alliance.com/waste

http://www.taxpayers
alliance.com/home/20
12/01/economic-case-
hs2-isnt-credible.ht
ml

Yes, I live in the Chilterns AONB and i support HS2. Most people either support it or don't actually care.

It is an absolute fact that only a very small minority of residents across Bucks are against HS2.

Chiltonians wrote:
Yes, I live in the Chilterns AONB and i support HS2. Most people either support it or don't actually care.

It is an absolute fact that only a very small minority of residents across Bucks are against HS2.

If it's an absolute fact, then you'll have absolutely no trouble in providing the source of that assertion, will you?

Chiltonians wrote:
Yes, I live in the Chilterns AONB and i support HS2. Most people either support it or don't actually care.

It is an absolute fact that only a very small minority of residents across Bucks are against HS2.

I'm 50/50, if it goes ahead, so be it, if it doesn't, then again so be it.

What i am against is all this money Tett and BCC are spending at a time when vital services are being cut, (ie special needs, disability etc which have been cut the most), and he just goes on spending, whether its reserve cash or not, that shouldn't make any difference.

And it has also been said many a time, "how rude the anti-hs2 people are, i think this just goes to show that this also goes for the people who are for it.

miccles wrote:

Chiltonians wrote:
Yes, I live in the Chilterns AONB and i support HS2. Most people either support it or don't actually care.

It is an absolute fact that only a very small minority of residents across Bucks are against HS2.

I'm 50/50, if it goes ahead, so be it, if it doesn't, then again so be it.

What i am against is all this money Tett and BCC are spending at a time when vital services are being cut, (ie special needs, disability etc which have been cut the most), and he just goes on spending, whether its reserve cash or not, that shouldn't make any difference.

And it has also been said many a time, "how rude the anti-hs2 people are, i think this just goes to show that this also goes for the people who are for it.

** And it has also been said that poeple who are FOR hs2 have been so rude, this just goes to show how rude the ANTI-hs2 people can be aswell.**

This is what i should have put.

@Wayneo - not quite certain what Horsham District Council have to do with HS2 - seems as though you might be confused - having reviewed the Tax Payers Alliance (TPA) website you appear to have merely cut and pasted two adjoining, but entirely separate pieces of information from their "Non-Job of the Week" section? Speaking of the TPA, we can safely bracket them alongside the Institute for Economic Affairs and Adam Smith Insitute in the category "ideologically opposed free-market nut jobs" arguing against HS2, or for that matter any large scale scheme involving tax-payer backed funding, essentially on the basis that they believe the "State" shouldn't be involved in this kind of activity - end of discussion. But be careful what you wish for because these very same dogma driven think-tanks recognise full well the requirement for a huge increase in transport capacity over the longer term if the UK is to remain in the Prosperity Premier League. Their, much less onerous on the taxpayer, solution - a series of private toll funded American style eight lane freeways complete with massively increased (over HS2) landtake and ongoing carbon footprint - we can all rest easy of course becuase users will be directly funding this new addition to the UK's transport infrastructure - not sure what we (as in humanity) do in fifty years time however when the oil runs dry - still it won't be my problem by then so why worry my little head about it?

I live in The Chilterns and I'm completely against HS2. I can tell you it is an absolute fact that this proposed project is a massively unpopular waste nationally, not even to mention the governments own figures not stacking up.

It seems that Mr Shillito has been the subject of a nasty and vindictive bullying campaign by these twittering tw*ts.

Where is the evidence that the majority of Bucks residents are against HS2?

The Anti-HS2 lobby ought to ask themselves some simple questions.
Have I ever flown on an aircraft?
Have I ever travelled on a motorway?
Have I ever used on a train?
Then ask. Does specific infrastructure need to be put in place to do any of these?
I think we all know the answer to that question. Some obviously choose to ignore.

There was a fabulous Spitting Image sketch. Prince Charles, dressed in the garb of the time, was complaining to Wren about the ‘carbuncle on the landscape’ he had created; he was talking about St Pauls. Four hundred years on what do we think. How about another architectural and engineering wonder, the canals. I dare say there was an Ant-canal lobby at the time but we look back now and marvel.
Life moves on. The Luddites a movement of the past.

demoness the second wrote:

Windsorian wrote:
Personally I don't Tweet and have no intention of doing so!

We are in rare agreement - horrible place
There is the expression.

Twitter is for tw*ts..
I tend to agree..

only an hour or so after posting

"demoness the second says...
4:03pm Sat 19 May 12

Name calling from either side, bullying because people do not see your point of view is wrong.
I may not agree with you Padav and Carl, but I could not condone that sort of behaviour.
Dreadful :("


Nice and consistent then D :-)


Still great result last night. I'm sure you are pleased as a chelsea supporter and I am happy that it stuffs spurs for next year :-)

Malc London wrote:
There are a few Bucks residents in favour, those who haven't thought about the cost, damage and disruption it will cause, but the majority are against it and would prefer the £100 Billion was spent on something else.

Sorry Malc but I live in Buckinghamshire and I have thought about HS2 and "the cost, damage and disruption it will cause". And I am in favour of this national investment for the good of GB. I have the vision that I want my children and grandchildren to have work in a successful growing economy which depends on infrastructure investment. The fact is that transport capacity is running out. So how do you solve this? HS2 is a sensible and logical use of money for our future. Or does the anti HS2 lobby want to see more motorways built or perhaps they would like us to go back to horses and carts or cars led by a man with a red flag?

How about ignoring Twitter? Call me a simpleton and internet-ignorant (been using the Internet for over 20 years .....) but we do still have the OFF button....

padav wrote:
@Malc London "would prefer the £100 Billion was spent on something else"............ONL

Y £100 Billion - surely you can do better than that Malc - why not go the whole hog and just claim it will be a cool £Trillion - much more of a headline grabber if you ask me?

£32 Billion is just the 1st phase and is what the supporters say it will cost.

Look up Holyrood and the estimated cost against the actual cost and you get an idea how it could spiral out of control.

Supporters see this as one way traffic too, assuming that it will increase exports and production. It can just as easily increase imports and wipe out jobs.

The rich mans toy might end up costing more than you think.

To save you looking it up, Holyrood was supposed to cost £40 million and ended up costing over £400 million.

This product is in the Billions and will certainly cost more than initial estimates set to archive support.

Cyclo wrote:
How about ignoring Twitter? Call me a simpleton and internet-ignorant (been using the Internet for over 20 years .....) but we do still have the OFF button....

We do but there's many who don't. I don't agree with Carl and his views on HS2 but he is entitled to them and I enjoyed reading them because they were from a man who quite evidently did not have anything personally to gain. From that I have seen of his opinions on here, he has always argued politely, cogently and maturely; as to why he let the comments get to him, is a matter for him, some take such comments personally while others are able to brush them off.

I expect that some of the unfounded comments had the potential to embarass the employer and employee, as such, a line was drawn, was crossed and that enough was enough, that is a **** shame but is also a symptom of what happens when people are afraid for the future.

wayneo wrote:

Chiltonians wrote:
Yes, I live in the Chilterns AONB and i support HS2. Most people either support it or don't actually care.

It is an absolute fact that only a very small minority of residents across Bucks are against HS2.

If it's an absolute fact, then you'll have absolutely no trouble in providing the source of that assertion, will you?

Easy!

Just read the HS2 reports produced to describe 55,000 responses to consultation.

Take the number of people that could be even bothered to pick up a pen a reply to the HS2 consultation who came from Buckinghamshire.

Use that figure as a basis of the number of people strongly against HS2 from Bucks.

Now compare that small figure against the massive population of Bucks.

Work out that this represent only a tiny % of the Bucks population and come to the same conclusion that any statistician would make!

Bingo!

wayneo wrote:

Chiltonians wrote:
Yes, I live in the Chilterns AONB and i support HS2. Most people either support it or don't actually care.

It is an absolute fact that only a very small minority of residents across Bucks are against HS2.

If it's an absolute fact, then you'll have absolutely no trouble in providing the source of that assertion, will you?

So, as asked by someone else above -

Where is your evidence that the majority of Bucks residents are in fact against HS2???

In a democratic society - what process or assessment has been undertaken in Buckinghamshire to allow Bucks County Council to waste over £150k of our local taxes this year legally fighting HS2?

This figure also doesn't include their funding of their three HS2 dedicated staff (at say £35k each).

Thats over £250k wasted (so,
goodbye local library, OAP rest home etc etc)!

Answers on a very small post card!

Chiltonians wrote:

wayneo wrote:

Chiltonians wrote:
Yes, I live in the Chilterns AONB and i support HS2. Most people either support it or don't actually care.

It is an absolute fact that only a very small minority of residents across Bucks are against HS2.

If it's an absolute fact, then you'll have absolutely no trouble in providing the source of that assertion, will you?

Easy!

Just read the HS2 reports produced to describe 55,000 responses to consultation.

Take the number of people that could be even bothered to pick up a pen a reply to the HS2 consultation who came from Buckinghamshire.

Use that figure as a basis of the number of people strongly against HS2 from Bucks.

Now compare that small figure against the massive population of Bucks.

Work out that this represent only a tiny % of the Bucks population and come to the same conclusion that any statistician would make!

Bingo!

So what? It's the same with election turnouts, an all to often small percentage of people turn out to elections yet those that do or can be bothered, have their voices heard and votes registered, their votes are then carried despite being in a minority.

Those that don't bother voting still have an opinion, they just aren't involved in the process of electing. You'll likely find that many don't respond to consultations because they have absolutely no faith in them so I don't think that either side nationally can claim to have overall support, so i'm afraid it's either the Consultation carries the day (unlikely as the Government will take the undemocratic route and ignore the results anyway), or people will have to take to the street and start shouting, which of course, both factions, for or against have the opportunity to do.

The silent majority argument is unmeasurable and as such it's use is superfluous to determining the percentage of persons for or against a particular cause or project.

wayneo wrote:

Chiltonians wrote:

wayneo wrote:

Chiltonians wrote:
Yes, I live in the Chilterns AONB and i support HS2. Most people either support it or don't actually care.

It is an absolute fact that only a very small minority of residents across Bucks are against HS2.

If it's an absolute fact, then you'll have absolutely no trouble in providing the source of that assertion, will you?

Easy!

Just read the HS2 reports produced to describe 55,000 responses to consultation.

Take the number of people that could be even bothered to pick up a pen a reply to the HS2 consultation who came from Buckinghamshire.

Use that figure as a basis of the number of people strongly against HS2 from Bucks.

Now compare that small figure against the massive population of Bucks.

Work out that this represent only a tiny % of the Bucks population and come to the same conclusion that any statistician would make!

Bingo!

So what? It's the same with election turnouts, an all to often small percentage of people turn out to elections yet those that do or can be bothered, have their voices heard and votes registered, their votes are then carried despite being in a minority.

Those that don't bother voting still have an opinion, they just aren't involved in the process of electing. You'll likely find that many don't respond to consultations because they have absolutely no faith in them so I don't think that either side nationally can claim to have overall support, so i'm afraid it's either the Consultation carries the day (unlikely as the Government will take the undemocratic route and ignore the results anyway), or people will have to take to the street and start shouting, which of course, both factions, for or against have the opportunity to do.

The silent majority argument is unmeasurable and as such it's use is superfluous to determining the percentage of persons for or against a particular cause or project.

The "silent" had their chance to comment. I did and support the proposals. If you cannot be bothered to participate why should the authorities take any notice of you? It is a shame that a small vocal Anti-HS2 group in Buckinghamshire are now coming out with myths and half-truths to frighten people. Do they want more motorways built or have us all in horses and carts?

I don't see that the anti HS2 group is small, I also think there's a number of articles where pro-HS2 supporters have shalle we say, been caught with their fingers in the till" regarding being economic with the truth. Either way, it is unfortunete that the Government has effectively signalled that the project will go ahead at all costs, being so pig-headed inevitably means that battle lines are drawn rather than respective groups sitting down,negotiating and being able to appreciate their positions.

wayneo wrote:
I don't see that the anti HS2 group is small, I also think there's a number of articles where pro-HS2 supporters have shalle we say, been caught with their fingers in the till" regarding being economic with the truth. Either way, it is unfortunete that the Government has effectively signalled that the project will go ahead at all costs, being so pig-headed inevitably means that battle lines are drawn rather than respective groups sitting down,negotiating and being able to appreciate their positions.

Many changes from the original proposals have been made. It is disingenious to pretend that the Government has not listened to people. (This is a good example of the Anti HS2 lobby using lies, myths and half-truths).There was much negotiation because large parts of the route were revised after consultation eg more being put in tunnels has pushed up the costs. (Probably the Anti HS2 lobby was hoping that as costs went up the project would be cancelled). They cannot have in both ways!

piran wrote:

wayneo wrote:
I don't see that the anti HS2 group is small, I also think there's a number of articles where pro-HS2 supporters have shalle we say, been caught with their fingers in the till" regarding being economic with the truth. Either way, it is unfortunete that the Government has effectively signalled that the project will go ahead at all costs, being so pig-headed inevitably means that battle lines are drawn rather than respective groups sitting down,negotiating and being able to appreciate their positions.

Many changes from the original proposals have been made. It is disingenious to pretend that the Government has not listened to people. (This is a good example of the Anti HS2 lobby using lies, myths and half-truths).There was much negotiation because large parts of the route were revised after consultation eg more being put in tunnels has pushed up the costs. (Probably the Anti HS2 lobby was hoping that as costs went up the project would be cancelled). They cannot have in both ways!

There might well have been changes but it doesn't address other issues of viability, affordability and that many people simply don't want the ruddy thing. i'm afraid that both sides are can be accused of scaremongering, of using incomplete and innacurate financial data, the winners unfortunately, will be lawyers and those with the best PR.

wayneo wrote:

piran wrote:

wayneo wrote:
I don't see that the anti HS2 group is small, I also think there's a number of articles where pro-HS2 supporters have shalle we say, been caught with their fingers in the till" regarding being economic with the truth. Either way, it is unfortunete that the Government has effectively signalled that the project will go ahead at all costs, being so pig-headed inevitably means that battle lines are drawn rather than respective groups sitting down,negotiating and being able to appreciate their positions.

Many changes from the original proposals have been made. It is disingenious to pretend that the Government has not listened to people. (This is a good example of the Anti HS2 lobby using lies, myths and half-truths).There was much negotiation because large parts of the route were revised after consultation eg more being put in tunnels has pushed up the costs. (Probably the Anti HS2 lobby was hoping that as costs went up the project would be cancelled). They cannot have in both ways!

There might well have been changes but it doesn't address other issues of viability, affordability and that many people simply don't want the ruddy thing. i'm afraid that both sides are can be accused of scaremongering, of using incomplete and innacurate financial data, the winners unfortunately, will be lawyers and those with the best PR.

Fact - we run out of capacity in the UK's transport infrastructure from 2025 on.
How do YOU suggest we solve this problem with an increasing population & supporting a more complex economy without causing the UK to do into terminal decline?
Is that what the comfortable & well-off in Buckinghamshire want for our nation? Or do you propose more motorways?
It is easy to criticise and do nothing but more difficult to come up with a workable solution.
That is why HS2 is the best option. Decisions need to be made now for our future - it is no good doing nothing! That is why all 3 main political parties support HS2. And that is the reason why HS2 has to be built and will be built.
Therefore it is criminal that so much of our taxes will be wasted on lawyers fees by organisations like Bucks CC and Cllr Tutt to fight the future & inevitable.

But HS2 doesn't benefit most of the population. If we wanted to do that, then we would be better off advancing and improving what we have.

How does saving 30 minutes on a journey from London to Birmingham save the country in an age of telephones, the internet and video meetings?

Ivor'sbestfriend wrote:
How does saving 30 minutes on a journey from London to Birmingham save the country in an age of telephones, the internet and video meetings?

Read up on HS2 it's a lot more than just improving our old and obsolete railways

Ivor'sbestfriend wrote:
How does saving 30 minutes on a journey from London to Birmingham save the country in an age of telephones, the internet and video meetings?

oh dear is that all you think HS2 is - a 30 minutes time saving to Birmingham and better to use the internet & VTCs! Suggest you do a bit of research. NO - I mean a LOT of research then you will not prove to the world how little you actually know about HS2.

P.S. it will go to Leeds & Scotland, it will provide 1,000 of jobs and it will provide much needed vital transport capacity etc etc.

It will go to Leeds and Scotland (not for £35 Billion by the way) and will COST 1,000's of jobs by reducing the cost further of cheap imports from abroad.

Trade is not one way and China and India can't wait.

Malc London wrote:
It will go to Leeds and Scotland (not for £35 Billion by the way) and will COST 1,000's of jobs by reducing the cost further of cheap imports from abroad.

Trade is not one way and China and India can't wait.

As usual you add nothing to intelligent debate!

Malc London wrote:
It will go to Leeds and Scotland (not for £35 Billion by the way) and will COST 1,000's of jobs by reducing the cost further of cheap imports from abroad. Trade is not one way and China and India can't wait.

If you used the East Coast Main Line regularly, as I do, you'd realise how desperately we need HS2.

wayneo wrote:
But HS2 doesn't benefit most of the population. If we wanted to do that, then we would be better off advancing and improving what we have.

And how do you suggest we do 'that' ?

wayneo wrote:
But HS2 doesn't benefit most of the population. If we wanted to do that, then we would be better off advancing and improving what we have.

It will benefit the whole nation!
Easy to be negative.
So what are your practical proposals to solve the lack of transport infrastructure?

Do nothing is NOT an option post-2025.

More motorways?
More canals?
More horses and carts?

Or no future for UK??

Stokendoug wrote:

wayneo wrote:
But HS2 doesn't benefit most of the population. If we wanted to do that, then we would be better off advancing and improving what we have.

And how do you suggest we do 'that' ?

by spending money on existing infrastructure than wasting it on new infrastructure that doesn't benefit the majority of people.

Pirin, do you deny that imports will become cheaper if they can be delivered to the North?

Also interesting that you note "changes" have been made yet the estimate hasn't?

Finally, do you HONESTLY believe that the project will be delivered within budget? (and on time).

piran wrote:

wayneo wrote:
But HS2 doesn't benefit most of the population. If we wanted to do that, then we would be better off advancing and improving what we have.

It will benefit the whole nation!
Easy to be negative.
So what are your practical proposals to solve the lack of transport infrastructure?

Do nothing is NOT an option post-2025.

More motorways?
More canals?
More horses and carts?

Or no future for UK??

How about making use of ports and creating jobs? We are surrounded by water. I'm sure not every import needs to go through London.

piran wrote:

wayneo wrote:
But HS2 doesn't benefit most of the population. If we wanted to do that, then we would be better off advancing and improving what we have.

It will benefit the whole nation!
Easy to be negative.
So what are your practical proposals to solve the lack of transport infrastructure?

Do nothing is NOT an option post-2025.

More motorways?
More canals?
More horses and carts?

Or no future for UK??

Is there a lack of transport infrastructure? How will HS2, that we are told is needed to lessen Journey times, solve capacity issues?

With the ever increasing population, capacity of the railways are going to be the least of our worries Piran.

wayneo wrote:

Stokendoug wrote:

wayneo wrote: But HS2 doesn't benefit most of the population. If we wanted to do that, then we would be better off advancing and improving what we have.

And how do you suggest we do 'that' ?

by spending money on existing infrastructure than wasting it on new infrastructure that doesn't benefit the majority of people.

Yes but how?
Again, I use the main line rail network on a regular basis.
We need more track taking an alternative route to allow for track maintenance and the dreaded 'disruption'. Its not just all about High Speed but increasing capacity.
It's not practical to widen the present 'Permanent Way'
What do you suggest ?

Tell me, seeing as you're a regular mainline user and all, How many interchanges are proposed for HS2 between London and Birmingham? How does this provide more track for an 'alternative' route when the number of interchanges is limited between cities?

In what way is it not practical to "widen the present 'permanent way"?.

If I wanted to use HS2, i'd have to use the existing instructure, go back on myself into London, then up to Birmingham, why would I want to do that and how does that provide me with an alternative to the existing infrastructure and than it taking much longer?

wayneo wrote:
Tell me, seeing as you're a regular mainline user and all, How many interchanges are proposed for HS2 between London and Birmingham? How does this provide more track for an 'alternative' route when the number of interchanges is limited between cities? In what way is it not practical to "widen the present 'permanent way"?. If I wanted to use HS2, i'd have to use the existing instructure, go back on myself into London, then up to Birmingham, why would I want to do that and how does that provide me with an alternative to the existing infrastructure and than it taking much longer?

Because part of the proposed Y will take you to Leeds via Birmingham bypassing the East Coast mainline that also goes to Leeds. Also Birmingham can be reached on the Chiltern Line saving you the trip into London and eventually giving a fast route north of the border.
If you want to understand the practicalities of widening just take a ride from Kings Cross as far, as say, Stevenage let alone the rest of the route.

Yet another avalanche of ill-informed claptrap masequerading as reasoned debate - @Malc London, one can only presume you're taking your figures from a dodgy anti-HS2 website - here are the actual budget figures extracted from the Dept. for Transport Website, copy and paste this URL into your browser for confirmation - http://www.dft.gov.u
k/news/press-release
s/dft-press-20120110
/ Quote "HS2 will be a Y-shaped rail network with stations in London, Birmingham, Leeds, Manchester, Sheffield and the East Midlands" Unquote.............
Quote "A high speed line will deliver £6.2bn more of economic benefits than a line running at conventional speed – and around £3.5 more revenues – at a cost of only £3bn more than building a conventional speed equivalent. HS2 will cost a total of £32.7bn" So you are factually wrong @Malc London - HS2 phases 1 AND 2 will cost a total of £32.7bn - please acknowledge this mistake on your part. @Wayneo argues for investment in the existing infrastructure but omits the fact that this is already taking place - copy and paste this URL into your browser; http://www.railnews.
co.uk/news/2011/09/2
9-network-rail-unvei
ls-its-grand.html and the same story reported in the Guardian; http://www.guardian.
co.uk/uk/2011/sep/29
/rail-chiefs-service
s-information-costs - what these reports of factual information tell us is that records sums of money ARE being invested into the classic rail network but of course these FACTS are glossed over by anti-HS2 campaigners focussed on their own narrow agenda - getting rid of the threat posed to their own backyards by the new line. @Wayneo blithely calls for the idea of simply laying an extra track next to the WCML, without even considering the massive extra costs and disruption involved - if you want to discover the horrors of upgrading an existing live line, read the following account of the WCML updgrad debacle, original budget £1.9bn - eventual cost £9bn. Finally Anti-HS2 campaigners routinely invoke the idea of investing in Super-Fast Broadband as an alternative means of dampening demand for travel but they conveniently forget to tell readers that the world leaders in Super-Fast Broadband; South Korea, also recognise the worth of investing in High Speed Rail technology - copy and paste this URL to read about the new 430km per hour High Speed Train in South Korea - http://www.railwayga
zette.com/nc/news/si
ngle-view/view/exper
imental-430-kmh-high
-speed-train-unveile
d.html - again and again the FACTS unravel the case put forward by the anti-HS2 brigade but they are relentless in their attempts to undermine support for HS2 and why - because they want to prevent the new line coming close to them - that's why!!!

Here are the URLs relating to WCML upgrade - part one of the story; http://www.guardian.
co.uk/world/2004/apr
/01/transport.politi
cs - part two of the story; http://www.guardian.
co.uk/world/2004/apr
/01/transport.politi
cs1

Another classic James Nadal meaningless story.

All this story shows is how evil a very small number of NIMBYS can be.

Malc London wrote:

padav wrote:
@Malc London "would prefer the £100 Billion was spent on something else"............ONL


Y £100 Billion - surely you can do better than that Malc - why not go the whole hog and just claim it will be a cool £Trillion - much more of a headline grabber if you ask me?

£32 Billion is just the 1st phase and is what the supporters say it will cost.

Look up Holyrood and the estimated cost against the actual cost and you get an idea how it could spiral out of control.

Supporters see this as one way traffic too, assuming that it will increase exports and production. It can just as easily increase imports and wipe out jobs.

The rich mans toy might end up costing more than you think.

No. The first phase will cost £16.3b. This will take the route between Birmingham and London. The phase 2 to Manchester Leeds etc will cost over £30b.

Try to get your facts right!

Here are some more to put things into context:

Obesity currently costs the national health service over £2bn per year.

Between now and HS2 being fully operational (by 2026 at a cost of £16.3bn) we will have blown at least £28bn on overweight people through NHS medical support!

That is forgetting the cost to business etc due to obesity caused related illness etc.

Malc London wrote:

piran wrote:

wayneo wrote:
But HS2 doesn't benefit most of the population. If we wanted to do that, then we would be better off advancing and improving what we have.

It will benefit the whole nation!
Easy to be negative.
So what are your practical proposals to solve the lack of transport infrastructure?

Do nothing is NOT an option post-2025.

More motorways?
More canals?
More horses and carts?

Or no future for UK??

How about making use of ports and creating jobs? We are surrounded by water. I'm sure not every import needs to go through London.

Not sure where the harbours are in Birmingham and Leeds?

piran wrote:

Malc London wrote:

piran wrote:

wayneo wrote: But HS2 doesn't benefit most of the population. If we wanted to do that, then we would be better off advancing and improving what we have.

It will benefit the whole nation! Easy to be negative. So what are your practical proposals to solve the lack of transport infrastructure? Do nothing is NOT an option post-2025. More motorways? More canals? More horses and carts? Or no future for UK??

How about making use of ports and creating jobs? We are surrounded by water. I'm sure not every import needs to go through London.

Not sure where the harbours are in Birmingham and Leeds?

Thanks to the defeat of the Anti-canal lobby back in the 1700's we do have canals :O)

Chiltonians wrote:
Another classic James Nadal meaningless story. All this story shows is how evil a very small number of NIMBYS can be.

Would you care to qualify that statement? What possible justification could you use to label those against a railway development 'evil'?

Stokendoug wrote:

piran wrote:

Malc London wrote:

piran wrote:

wayneo wrote: But HS2 doesn't benefit most of the population. If we wanted to do that, then we would be better off advancing and improving what we have.

It will benefit the whole nation! Easy to be negative. So what are your practical proposals to solve the lack of transport infrastructure? Do nothing is NOT an option post-2025. More motorways? More canals? More horses and carts? Or no future for UK??

How about making use of ports and creating jobs? We are surrounded by water. I'm sure not every import needs to go through London.

Not sure where the harbours are in Birmingham and Leeds?

Thanks to the defeat of the Anti-canal lobby back in the 1700's we do have canals :O)

We do have canals, most of them are now, aredefunct, useless and falling apart.

Stokendoug wrote:

wayneo wrote: Tell me, seeing as you're a regular mainline user and all, How many interchanges are proposed for HS2 between London and Birmingham? How does this provide more track for an 'alternative' route when the number of interchanges is limited between cities? In what way is it not practical to "widen the present 'permanent way"?. If I wanted to use HS2, i'd have to use the existing instructure, go back on myself into London, then up to Birmingham, why would I want to do that and how does that provide me with an alternative to the existing infrastructure and than it taking much longer?

Because part of the proposed Y will take you to Leeds via Birmingham bypassing the East Coast mainline that also goes to Leeds. Also Birmingham can be reached on the Chiltern Line saving you the trip into London and eventually giving a fast route north of the border. If you want to understand the practicalities of widening just take a ride from Kings Cross as far, as say, Stevenage let alone the rest of the route.

Really?

Is there an official map of the proposed route?

wayneo wrote:

Stokendoug wrote:

piran wrote:

Malc London wrote:

piran wrote:

wayneo wrote: But HS2 doesn't benefit most of the population. If we wanted to do that, then we would be better off advancing and improving what we have.

It will benefit the whole nation! Easy to be negative. So what are your practical proposals to solve the lack of transport infrastructure? Do nothing is NOT an option post-2025. More motorways? More canals? More horses and carts? Or no future for UK??

How about making use of ports and creating jobs? We are surrounded by water. I'm sure not every import needs to go through London.

Not sure where the harbours are in Birmingham and Leeds?

Thanks to the defeat of the Anti-canal lobby back in the 1700's we do have canals :O)

We do have canals, most of them are now, aredefunct, useless and falling apart.

Far from it.... Canals are widely used for many leisure activities both on and off the water. Take a walk up the Grand Union round Denham for example.

tom.marlow2 wrote:

wayneo wrote:

Stokendoug wrote:

piran wrote:

Malc London wrote:

piran wrote:

wayneo wrote: But HS2 doesn't benefit most of the population. If we wanted to do that, then we would be better off advancing and improving what we have.

It will benefit the whole nation! Easy to be negative. So what are your practical proposals to solve the lack of transport infrastructure? Do nothing is NOT an option post-2025. More motorways? More canals? More horses and carts? Or no future for UK??

How about making use of ports and creating jobs? We are surrounded by water. I'm sure not every import needs to go through London.

Not sure where the harbours are in Birmingham and Leeds?

Thanks to the defeat of the Anti-canal lobby back in the 1700's we do have canals :O)

We do have canals, most of them are now, aredefunct, useless and falling apart.

Far from it.... Canals are widely used for many leisure activities both on and off the water. Take a walk up the Grand Union round Denham for example.

But not many container ports in Leeds or Birmingham for all these imports!

wayneo wrote:

Chiltonians wrote:
Another classic James Nadal meaningless story. All this story shows is how evil a very small number of NIMBYS can be.

Would you care to qualify that statement? What possible justification could you use to label those against a railway development 'evil'?

Easy! Read the article above. This is a story about how a group of individuals hounded a person to the extent where he quit his job!

So, you endorse their approach do you?

Padav, the spiralling cost of other major projects is relevant because it shows that a runaway train can eat up the budget in no time. A budget set by supporters who want to get the project started knowing that it's unlikely to be pulled even when costs go out of control.

Promises of jobs up north and untold wealth for those living beside the line have clouded your judgement.

You are very adept at accepting the positives you have been fed, and ignoring anything negative.

You dismiss people losing their homes as a natural consequence and something tells me you are secretly happy about it.

Chiltonians wrote:

wayneo wrote:

Chiltonians wrote: Another classic James Nadal meaningless story. All this story shows is how evil a very small number of NIMBYS can be.

Would you care to qualify that statement? What possible justification could you use to label those against a railway development 'evil'?

Easy! Read the article above. This is a story about how a group of individuals hounded a person to the extent where he quit his job! So, you endorse their approach do you?

I did read it and it wasn't his job, it was a volunteer position of the Neighbourhood Action Group. As for it being wrong, if it is true then of course it is but evil? I don't think so.

Malc London wrote:
Padav, the spiralling cost of other major projects is relevant because it shows that a runaway train can eat up the budget in no time. A budget set by supporters who want to get the project started knowing that it's unlikely to be pulled even when costs go out of control.

Promises of jobs up north and untold wealth for those living beside the line have clouded your judgement.

You are very adept at accepting the positives you have been fed, and ignoring anything negative.

You dismiss people losing their homes as a natural consequence and something tells me you are secretly happy about it.

You simply need to look at HS1 and the Olympics to establish if these large infrastructure projects are able to be delivered on time and within budget?

wayneo wrote:

Chiltonians wrote:

wayneo wrote:

Chiltonians wrote: Another classic James Nadal meaningless story. All this story shows is how evil a very small number of NIMBYS can be.

Would you care to qualify that statement? What possible justification could you use to label those against a railway development 'evil'?

Easy! Read the article above. This is a story about how a group of individuals hounded a person to the extent where he quit his job! So, you endorse their approach do you?

I did read it and it wasn't his job, it was a volunteer position of the Neighbourhood Action Group. As for it being wrong, if it is true then of course it is but evil? I don't think so.

Perhaps not evil but pretty bad, underhand and a pathetic attack by some in the Anti-HS2 lobby. Especially despicable because this person always argued a good case without resorting to insults, underhand methods or pathetic and selective use of myths. Anti HS2 must be feeling they are losing the argument if they go as low as this.

piran wrote:

wayneo wrote:

Chiltonians wrote:

wayneo wrote:

Chiltonians wrote: Another classic James Nadal meaningless story. All this story shows is how evil a very small number of NIMBYS can be.

Would you care to qualify that statement? What possible justification could you use to label those against a railway development 'evil'?

Easy! Read the article above. This is a story about how a group of individuals hounded a person to the extent where he quit his job! So, you endorse their approach do you?

I did read it and it wasn't his job, it was a volunteer position of the Neighbourhood Action Group. As for it being wrong, if it is true then of course it is but evil? I don't think so.

Perhaps not evil but pretty bad, underhand and a pathetic attack by some in the Anti-HS2 lobby. Especially despicable because this person always argued a good case without resorting to insults, underhand methods or pathetic and selective use of myths. Anti HS2 must be feeling they are losing the argument if they go as low as this.

If it is true then I agree, though tarring the whole HS2 lobby with the same brush, would be like tarring the pro-campaign as all being despicable, espcially those who attempt to dismiss those that might lose their homes, businesses, way-of-life, as backwards,luddites or Nimbys.

Mr Shilletto has deemed the comments unacceptable enough to stand down from his NAG (whatever NAG is) position, despite denying that the comments have validity; his reasons/motives for doing so, then going to the press are his alone but I have found him to be polite and honest while corresponding with him, it is unfortunate that he doesn't appear to want to participate in further discussions.

Chiltonians wrote:

Malc London wrote:
Padav, the spiralling cost of other major projects is relevant because it shows that a runaway train can eat up the budget in no time. A budget set by supporters who want to get the project started knowing that it's unlikely to be pulled even when costs go out of control.

Promises of jobs up north and untold wealth for those living beside the line have clouded your judgement.

You are very adept at accepting the positives you have been fed, and ignoring anything negative.

You dismiss people losing their homes as a natural consequence and something tells me you are secretly happy about it.

You simply need to look at HS1 and the Olympics to establish if these large infrastructure projects are able to be delivered on time and within budget?

http://www.nao.org.u
k/publications/1012/
high_speed_1.aspx

http://news.sky.com/
home/london-olympics
/article/16156780

For the record I stood down as Chair of the Denham Neighbourhood Action Group because although the comments were unjust some people obviously believed them. I therefore felt that the NAG's reputation for political independence was being harmed, and it was only fair to the other members that I should step down at this time.

I did not actually "go to the press" as such, but since I am in contact with and speak to local journalists about HS2 I did mention the matter and they seemed to think it was a newsworthy item. I am actually quite surprised at the level of interest in the story.

Finally I must emphasise that the comments were NOT part of an official campaign by Denham Against HS2. I know several members of this organisation personally and work with them successfully in the community despite our differences on HS2.

Carl@Denham wrote:
For the record I stood down as Chair of the Denham Neighbourhood Action Group because although the comments were unjust some people obviously believed them. I therefore felt that the NAG's reputation for political independence was being harmed, and it was only fair to the other members that I should step down at this time.

I did not actually "go to the press" as such, but since I am in contact with and speak to local journalists about HS2 I did mention the matter and they seemed to think it was a newsworthy item. I am actually quite surprised at the level of interest in the story.

Finally I must emphasise that the comments were NOT part of an official campaign by Denham Against HS2. I know several members of this organisation personally and work with them successfully in the community despite our differences on HS2.

Good post Carl, and sorry to hear you are standing down.
As a supporter of HS2 (also with no axe to grind or hidden agenda) I always enjoy reading your well-informed and reasoned comments on the debate.
Personally I am totally fed up with the Anti HS2 lobby who never listen, use selective data, perpetuate myths; yet never come up with any practical alternatives to produce more transport capacity in the future.