United councils spend £400k fighting High Speed 2 (From Bucks Free Press)

JOHNHEALY wrote:
Councillor Tett and his 51m group are a disgrace having spent £383,803 on the fight against HS2 when they have got precisely nowhere. What would have been better would have been to have used the money for a different and more realistic strategy where the end result is that we all get what we want at the best price.

piran wrote:
What a waste of my council taxes. On one hand Bucks CC reduces services yet can find thousands of pounds (Tett states it is from reserves - so what) to fund a political Anti HS2 campaign. It's shameful. If Bucks CC wants to fight then get voluntary monies not stealing my hard earned cash that I pay for services NOT Anti HS2 legal fees etc

yog wrote:
Criminal waste of money. Services are being cut by the Tories to fund this pointless campaign.

miccles wrote:
Absolulutely Disgusting,

Tett you should resign, because one day you will have no option but to go.

Even though you are spending "reserves", that money is intended for what it is called "RESERVES", not money to put against a project, that at the end of the day you are more than likely to lose, you have the nerve to cut vital services in the county, and people are going to suffer just because of you, just so that you can plough hundreds of thousands of pounds into this project, next year, the councils including BCC will probably raise the council tax, that will be more money for you to waste, you are a disgrace to the county.

RESIGN.

wayneo wrote:

yog wrote:
Criminal waste of money. Services are being cut by the Tories to fund this pointless campaign.

Are you telling voters that the LibDems wouldn't challenge it then Yog?

demoness the second wrote:

wayneo wrote:

yog wrote:
Criminal waste of money. Services are being cut by the Tories to fund this pointless campaign.

Are you telling voters that the LibDems wouldn't challenge it then Yog?

They would see what would make them look good and then decide accordingly ;)

miccles wrote:
I hope the same people who think Tett is doing a good job, and is right in doing this, have some disabled/slow learning/mentally handicapped friends and relatives who will suffer under the cuts of Tett, and then you can just tell them "we don't want a train line, sorry, but you are going to have to suffer".

TETT SHOULD RESIGN BEFORE THE DAY COMES HE IS PUSHED.

IanBartlett wrote:
If Tett is so opposed to HS2, why doesn't he quit the Tory party? Trying to influence from the inside perhaps..? Why do I suspect he is more interested in his own political career. He is wasting OUR money...typical local politician with a small-minded view on the world and a voracious appetite for spending.

Chiltonian wrote:
This needs to be answered: Did the candidates/party machinery of elected candidates currently leading the 51M Group of local councils include a clear commitment within respective manifestos, prior to the last set of elections, to pursue such policies? If not, there are clear grounds to legally challenge their actions, through a Judicial Review of their decision to launch a Judicial Review. I will sending an FOI to Bucks County Council on this basis and will report back.

Chiltonian wrote:
Bucks County Council have already spent over £200k fighting HS2- this doesnt include staff salaries and expenses. They will continue to do so. Yet on 55,000 people from the whole UK replied to HS2 consultation - a fraction came from Bucks! Why are the vast majority of people in Bucks not being represented here? The vast majority do not care a smaller number want to make sure that reasonable mitigation is put in place if the scheme proceeds. This is our tax money and this isn't how our money should be wasted! Where is the democracy in this stupid Marin Tett? He must go!

piran wrote:
What a waste of my council taxes. On one hand Bucks CC reduces services yet can find thousands of pounds (Tett states it is from reserves - so what) to fund a political Anti HS2 campaign. It's shameful. If Bucks CC wants to fight then get voluntary monies not stealing my hard earned cash that I pay for services NOT Anti HS2 legal fees etc

Chiltonian wrote:
When are Bucks Free Press going to start providing some balance in their reporting on HS2? You are reporting to a very noisy minority in a way that you think they want to hear. I've listened to almost two years of your biased local spin - often verging on utter rubbish - most of it not even checked back to HS2 Ltd for their comment. There are VERY clear issues about the approach and stance of local authorities to date but no reporting into these matters from this paper. Isn't it time you local journalists started to raise your own bar and start acting like professionals?

moonshot wrote:
I have to admit that from where i am ( Manchester ) , Mr Tett does the voters of Bucks CC absolutely no favours whatsoever......this guy clearly has his own agenda and self interest at heart. The sooner you vote the idiot out the better ......

wayneo wrote:

moonshot wrote:
I have to admit that from where i am ( Manchester ) , Mr Tett does the voters of Bucks CC absolutely no favours whatsoever......this guy clearly has his own agenda and self interest at heart. The sooner you vote the idiot out the better ......

If it is so clear, perhaps you could explain to the rest of us what that agenda and self interest is?

moonshot wrote:
I have to admit that from where i am ( Manchester ) , Mr Tett does the voters of Bucks CC absolutely no favours whatsoever......this guy clearly has his own agenda and self interest at heart. The sooner you vote the idiot out the better ......

miccles wrote:

wayneo wrote:

moonshot wrote:
I have to admit that from where i am ( Manchester ) , Mr Tett does the voters of Bucks CC absolutely no favours whatsoever......this guy clearly has his own agenda and self interest at heart. The sooner you vote the idiot out the better ......

If it is so clear, perhaps you could explain to the rest of us what that agenda and self interest is?

Well if you cannot work out by now what the "self interest" is by now, then that is a very poor state to be in, don't you think?

By the way you side tracked my earlier question above

Would you like to explain to a close relative/friend who is either a slow learner, or who is mentally handicapped, or is severley disabled that their care/services are being cut dramatically because a train line is more important that their day to day needs?

IanBartlett wrote:
This will be the last political job Martin Tett ever has. As his arguments unravel, his temporary support will melt away and he'll be left isolated. I thought it was pretty much only me in the Chilterns who felt this way about Stop HS2 and its vocal supporters, but it seems not...

Carl@Denham wrote:
Just a brief word in support of BFP journalists. The BFP has been steadfastly anti-HS2 like all the other local media and circulation has probably benefitted from sales to anti-HS2 types chuffed at seeing their photo in the paper. However the BFP has covered my campaign to put Mr Tett on the spot and even published an editorial coming out against using taxpayers' money to fight HS2. And they put my photo in the paper 2 weeks running much to my eternal embarassment. So a bit of welcome balance in the HS2 debate at last, good for BFP. I only hope that our councillors take on board the arguments and abandon their ludicrous, expensive and doomed plan to mount a legal challenge.

piran wrote:

IanBartlett wrote:
This will be the last political job Martin Tett ever has. As his arguments unravel, his temporary support will melt away and he'll be left isolated. I thought it was pretty much only me in the Chilterns who felt this way about Stop HS2 and its vocal supporters, but it seems not...

Martin Tett, in a letter to my MP (he would not reply to my emails only when my MP wrote on my behalf - shows what sort of person Tett is!!) told me that I and only 1 other person were for HS2 in Buckinghamshire and he had lots of emails, letters and phone calls supporting his misuse of council tax money to fight HS2. Glad to see that there are more than 2 of us objecting to him!

wayneo wrote:

miccles wrote:

wayneo wrote:

moonshot wrote:
I have to admit that from where i am ( Manchester ) , Mr Tett does the voters of Bucks CC absolutely no favours whatsoever......this guy clearly has his own agenda and self interest at heart. The sooner you vote the idiot out the better ......

If it is so clear, perhaps you could explain to the rest of us what that agenda and self interest is?

Well if you cannot work out by now what the "self interest" is by now, then that is a very poor state to be in, don't you think?

By the way you side tracked my earlier question above

Would you like to explain to a close relative/friend who is either a slow learner, or who is mentally handicapped, or is severley disabled that their care/services are being cut dramatically because a train line is more important that their day to day needs?

It's not that I "can't work it out", it's that I don't know of any self-interest, I'd therefore be eternally grateful if it is so clear, as to what this self interest is.
!
As for your friend who is having care "dramatically cut", I'm not side-stepping the question, I don't know the answer to it and as you are relying on hearsay rather than solid facts, it doesn't appear that you do either; maybe you could provide the details so that we can make a proper assessment rather than what your mate claims. Anyway, as a result, I stated that you could apply the same question to HS2 on a national scale.

miccles wrote:

wayneo wrote:

miccles wrote:

wayneo wrote:

moonshot wrote:
I have to admit that from where i am ( Manchester ) , Mr Tett does the voters of Bucks CC absolutely no favours whatsoever......this guy clearly has his own agenda and self interest at heart. The sooner you vote the idiot out the better ......

If it is so clear, perhaps you could explain to the rest of us what that agenda and self interest is?

Well if you cannot work out by now what the "self interest" is by now, then that is a very poor state to be in, don't you think?

By the way you side tracked my earlier question above

Would you like to explain to a close relative/friend who is either a slow learner, or who is mentally handicapped, or is severley disabled that their care/services are being cut dramatically because a train line is more important that their day to day needs?

It's not that I "can't work it out", it's that I don't know of any self-interest, I'd therefore be eternally grateful if it is so clear, as to what this self interest is.
!
As for your friend who is having care "dramatically cut", I'm not side-stepping the question, I don't know the answer to it and as you are relying on hearsay rather than solid facts, it doesn't appear that you do either; maybe you could provide the details so that we can make a proper assessment rather than what your mate claims. Anyway, as a result, I stated that you could apply the same question to HS2 on a national scale.

"Would you explain to a close relative/friend who is either a slow learner, or who is mentally handicapped, or is severley disabled that their care/services are being cut dramatically because a train line is more important than their day to day needs?"

This is just a simple question YES or NO??????

If you can't answer this time, then i will take it that you don't care about these people's needs at all.

wayneo wrote:

miccles wrote:

wayneo wrote:

miccles wrote:

wayneo wrote:

moonshot wrote:
I have to admit that from where i am ( Manchester ) , Mr Tett does the voters of Bucks CC absolutely no favours whatsoever......this guy clearly has his own agenda and self interest at heart. The sooner you vote the idiot out the better ......

If it is so clear, perhaps you could explain to the rest of us what that agenda and self interest is?

Well if you cannot work out by now what the "self interest" is by now, then that is a very poor state to be in, don't you think?

By the way you side tracked my earlier question above

Would you like to explain to a close relative/friend who is either a slow learner, or who is mentally handicapped, or is severley disabled that their care/services are being cut dramatically because a train line is more important that their day to day needs?

It's not that I "can't work it out", it's that I don't know of any self-interest, I'd therefore be eternally grateful if it is so clear, as to what this self interest is.
!
As for your friend who is having care "dramatically cut", I'm not side-stepping the question, I don't know the answer to it and as you are relying on hearsay rather than solid facts, it doesn't appear that you do either; maybe you could provide the details so that we can make a proper assessment rather than what your mate claims. Anyway, as a result, I stated that you could apply the same question to HS2 on a national scale.

"Would you explain to a close relative/friend who is either a slow learner, or who is mentally handicapped, or is severley disabled that their care/services are being cut dramatically because a train line is more important than their day to day needs?"

This is just a simple question YES or NO??????

If you can't answer this time, then i will take it that you don't care about these people's needs at all.

So what is your friend, a slow learner, mentally handicapped,severely disabled or all three? Did you just make this up in a misguided attempt at an appeal to emotion? I'm not saying is not true but you haven't provided me with and I'm not aware of any evidence that supports your little story. Secondly, having ignored my request for you to provide proof as the onus probanti is on you having made the claim, your appeal to emotion and the insinuation that I "don't care about these people's needs at all", can be attributed to a fallacy known as false attrition; it's a shame that you have insinuated that I don't care about disabled persons because I happen to agree with the Council mounting a legal challenge against a project that in my opinion is foolhardy, unwanted and wrong, for the most part I agree with what you have to say on many topics but I don't recall you stooping to such a level before which is a shame.

miccles wrote:

wayneo wrote:

miccles wrote:

wayneo wrote:

miccles wrote:

wayneo wrote:

moonshot wrote: I have to admit that from where i am ( Manchester ) , Mr Tett does the voters of Bucks CC absolutely no favours whatsoever......this guy clearly has his own agenda and self interest at heart. The sooner you vote the idiot out the better ......

If it is so clear, perhaps you could explain to the rest of us what that agenda and self interest is?

Well if you cannot work out by now what the "self interest" is by now, then that is a very poor state to be in, don't you think? By the way you side tracked my earlier question above Would you like to explain to a close relative/friend who is either a slow learner, or who is mentally handicapped, or is severley disabled that their care/services are being cut dramatically because a train line is more important that their day to day needs?

It's not that I "can't work it out", it's that I don't know of any self-interest, I'd therefore be eternally grateful if it is so clear, as to what this self interest is. ! As for your friend who is having care "dramatically cut", I'm not side-stepping the question, I don't know the answer to it and as you are relying on hearsay rather than solid facts, it doesn't appear that you do either; maybe you could provide the details so that we can make a proper assessment rather than what your mate claims. Anyway, as a result, I stated that you could apply the same question to HS2 on a national scale.

"Would you explain to a close relative/friend who is either a slow learner, or who is mentally handicapped, or is severley disabled that their care/services are being cut dramatically because a train line is more important than their day to day needs?" This is just a simple question YES or NO?????? If you can't answer this time, then i will take it that you don't care about these people's needs at all.

So what is your friend, a slow learner, mentally handicapped,severely disabled or all three? Did you just make this up in a misguided attempt at an appeal to emotion? I'm not saying is not true but you haven't provided me with and I'm not aware of any evidence that supports your little story. Secondly, having ignored my request for you to provide proof as the onus probanti is on you having made the claim, your appeal to emotion and the insinuation that I "don't care about these people's needs at all", can be attributed to a fallacy known as false attrition; it's a shame that you have insinuated that I don't care about disabled persons because I happen to agree with the Council mounting a legal challenge against a project that in my opinion is foolhardy, unwanted and wrong, for the most part I agree with what you have to say on many topics but I don't recall you stooping to such a level before which is a shame.

Again, you failed to answer, a simple question, i cannot put it in more simple english, who said anything about being a friend of mine??, its just a simple question, to which you have to answer "Yes i would explain" or "No i wouldn't explain", and this time if you side step the answer, then i will take the answer as NO. I can't put it any more straight forward than this. "Would you explain to a close relative/friend who is either a slow learner, or who is mentally handicapped, or is severley disabled that their care/services are being cut dramatically because a train line is more important than their day to day needs?" This is just a simple question YES or NO?????? If you can't answer this time, then i will take it that you don't care about these people's needs at all.

GloPen wrote:
If HS2 goes ahead there will be ongoing costs to be paid for out of our taxes for at least sixty years, probably much longer; unless the debt is written off as an investment, as with HS1. In which case why can’t our £1,004bn national debt be written off as investments and be done with it? That would save the country around £2.3 billion a week in interest incurrence, some of which could be spent on technically advancing our great Victorian railway network, developing new clean modes of transport and promoting Business Boarders and Walk for Work schemes. If a fraction of our local taxes is spent now, to prevent HS2 from being constructed to destruct, then in the long term there will be more of our hard earned taxes to spend to everyone’s practical advantage - rich and poor, young and old, able bodied and disabled, north and south alike. You are not happy contributing to the £400,000 to be spent to defend our country’s future wellbeing, when you are happy to pay towards the increasing £2,300,000,000 weekly interest payments on our national debt, which will get even worse by building HS2? That’s where the money needed to support our welfare programme is going! If HS2 can guarantee the national profit it promises, guarantee its ability to prevent rather than cause an increase in carbon emissions into the atmosphere, and prove that they have majority national support for this project I may eat my words. But I really don’t think they can.

Edwina Lee wrote:
Our quantitative easing programme amounts to 100s of billion of pounds (e.g. £325 billion dec 2010 to purchase assets in QE2). These did not create assets for the future world. We are coming up to QE3, and this should be applied to create assets of higher value than the QE. Hence, renewable energy projects, high speed rail projects, . . . should be the objectives of QE3. We need higher asset ratio in UK and to transition to a green sustainable economy through these infrastructures in order to adapt to a more crowded and resource scarcity world.

Edwina Lee wrote:
Our quantitative easing programme amounts to 100s of billion of pounds (e.g. £325 billion dec 2010 to purchase assets in QE2). These did not create assets for the future world.

We are coming up to QE3, and this should be applied to create assets of higher value than the QE.

Hence, renewable energy projects, high speed rail projects, . . . should be the objectives of QE3.

We need higher asset ratio in UK and to transition to a green sustainable economy through these infrastructures in order to adapt to a more crowded and resource scarcity world.

GloPen wrote:

Edwina Lee wrote:
Our quantitative easing programme amounts to 100s of billion of pounds (e.g. £325 billion dec 2010 to purchase assets in QE2). These did not create assets for the future world.

We are coming up to QE3, and this should be applied to create assets of higher value than the QE.

Hence, renewable energy projects, high speed rail projects, . . . should be the objectives of QE3.

We need higher asset ratio in UK and to transition to a green sustainable economy through these infrastructures in order to adapt to a more crowded and resource scarcity world.

Doesn't QE just pass the problem on for the next generation to sort out?
I would say pass the buck, but pass the negative pound is more apt.

For assets to be assets, don't they have to be paid for?

If we want a green sustainable economy then we have to stop people from depending on power so much and from creating urban sprawl under relaxed planning laws.

HS2 is being built to encourage crowds to travel, and the people in these crowds will need more resources, so I can't see how this particular infrastructure is going to help us to become green or to have a sustainable economy.

Edwina Lee wrote:
The internet is the biggest relationship creator in history. I postulate that in future, people will want to travel to meet all over the world more than ever, and production of stuff will decline dramatically.

Therefore, it makes tremendous sense to make travelling as efficient as possible.

Hence, I see railways as a key component of future infrastructure.

GloPen wrote:

Edwina Lee wrote:
The internet is the biggest relationship creator in history. I postulate that in future, people will want to travel to meet all over the world more than ever, and production of stuff will decline dramatically.

Therefore, it makes tremendous sense to make travelling as efficient as possible.

Hence, I see railways as a key component of future infrastructure.

Yes I agree the internet brings people into contact, and that may lead to travel. But the internet will also enable people to work without the need to travel, and work during travel.

However, people cannot live by internet alone - they will always need many things to be produced and recycled.

For future clean efficient travel, my fare goes to the hybrid airship.

Windsorian wrote:
For airship, read "Wind Bags".

markskoyles wrote:
Waste of public money!

I wonder how far Cllr Tetts house is from the proposed line...?

Chiltonian wrote:

markskoyles wrote:
Waste of public money!

I wonder how far Cllr Tetts house is from the proposed line...?

Easy = on BucksCC website:
Amersham Way Little Chalfont Amersham HP6 6SG

Nick1042 wrote:

Chiltonian wrote:

markskoyles wrote:
Waste of public money!

I wonder how far Cllr Tetts house is from the proposed line...?

Easy = on BucksCC website:
Amersham Way Little Chalfont Amersham HP6 6SG

I wonder how far your's and markskoyles' houses are from the proposed line?

piran wrote:
If you cannot undestand why someone wanted to know where Cllr Tett lives you are on a different planet. Interestingly the vocal minority of NIMBYs in Buckinghamshire are close to the HS2 route so do not want their comfortable lives changed by this vital NATIONAL project. Are you close to the route or do you live in Wales??

piran wrote:
If you cannot undestand why someone wanted to know where Cllr Tett lives you are on a different planet. Interestingly the vocal minority of NIMBYs in Buckinghamshire are close to the HS2 route so do not want their comfortable lives changed by this vital NATIONAL project. Are you close to the route or do you live in Wales??

Nick1042 wrote:

piran wrote:
If you cannot undestand why someone wanted to know where Cllr Tett lives you are on a different planet. Interestingly the vocal minority of NIMBYs in Buckinghamshire are close to the HS2 route so do not want their comfortable lives changed by this vital NATIONAL project. Are you close to the route or do you live in Wales??

If somebody wants to know where Cllr Tett lives then why can't we know where the people are asking from? Because it is very easy to throw the name calling NIMBY thing around when you will not be effected at all.

I think you have a problem because I have commented against many of your posts and say several times that I live in Bucks but am not a NIMBY as I do not live anywhere near the proposed route. Also (you may not believe this as you keep saying it is only people in Bucks against HS2) but I was near Shrewsbury at the weekend visiting family and in a local pub there we got speaking to a group of people who were disgusted at the idea of HS2. And once again there are groups in Warwickshire, Leciestershire, Northamptonshire, Oxfordshire and London against HS2 so please stop the whole minority against HS2 are Bucks Nimbys name calling.

Nick1042 wrote:
The only minority are the ones in favour of HS2!

Windsorian wrote:

Nick1042 wrote:
The only minority are the ones in favour of HS2!

Like the 26 million people who voted for the 3 main political parties who had included support for High Speed Rail in their 2010 General Election manifestos ??

Nick1042 wrote:
The only minority are the ones in favour of HS2!

Carl@Denham wrote:
You may have a point, but you would at least have expected local Tories and Lib Dems to have raised HS2 during the General Election campaign. If they did I didn't hear about it. So they should accept HS2 in principle was a manifesto committment and stand by it.

piran wrote:
HS2 will cut journey times between our major cities

To ensure that travellers will be able to benefit from the most up-to-date train technology over the long-term, the line will be built to accommodate speeds of up to 250mph, similar to lines being designed elsewhere in Europe, although the expected maximum line speed at opening will be 225mph.
This will see journey times from London to Birmingham reduced to just 45 minutes – less time than it takes to make a journey across London from Hackney to Wimbledon. Journey times to Leeds and Manchester will also fall significantly to around 88 and 68 minutes, respectively.

piran wrote:
HS2 will cut journey times between our major cities

To ensure that travellers will be able to benefit from the most up-to-date train technology over the long-term, the line will be built to accommodate speeds of up to 250mph, similar to lines being designed elsewhere in Europe, although the expected maximum line speed at opening will be 225mph.
This will see journey times from London to Birmingham reduced to just 45 minutes – less time than it takes to make a journey across London from Hackney to Wimbledon. Journey times to Leeds and Manchester will also fall significantly to around 88 and 68 minutes, respectively.

piran wrote:
Major transport projects have been delivered on budget recently.

Anti HS2 responses suggested that HS2 would be beset by cost overruns.
In line with HM Treasury requirements, the costings prepared for HS2 include allowances of up to 64 per cent for cost overruns. HS1, the only current high speed line in Britain, was delivered on time and on budget. More recently, the £371 million Hindhead Tunnel on the A3 was opened in July 2011 on time and on budget, and the major construction programme for the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games is similarly on target.
The Government will continue to work with HS2 Ltd and Infrastructure UK and its range of private sector advisers to ensure that the costs of HS2 continue to be properly developed, managed and reviewed

wayneo wrote:

piran wrote:
Major transport projects have been delivered on budget recently.

Anti HS2 responses suggested that HS2 would be beset by cost overruns.
In line with HM Treasury requirements, the costings prepared for HS2 include allowances of up to 64 per cent for cost overruns. HS1, the only current high speed line in Britain, was delivered on time and on budget. More recently, the £371 million Hindhead Tunnel on the A3 was opened in July 2011 on time and on budget, and the major construction programme for the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games is similarly on target.
The Government will continue to work with HS2 Ltd and Infrastructure UK and its range of private sector advisers to ensure that the costs of HS2 continue to be properly developed, managed and reviewed

Err,The Olympic and paralympic games "on target", are you sure about that?

piran wrote:

wayneo wrote:

piran wrote: Major transport projects have been delivered on budget recently. Anti HS2 responses suggested that HS2 would be beset by cost overruns. In line with HM Treasury requirements, the costings prepared for HS2 include allowances of up to 64 per cent for cost overruns. HS1, the only current high speed line in Britain, was delivered on time and on budget. More recently, the £371 million Hindhead Tunnel on the A3 was opened in July 2011 on time and on budget, and the major construction programme for the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games is similarly on target. The Government will continue to work with HS2 Ltd and Infrastructure UK and its range of private sector advisers to ensure that the costs of HS2 continue to be properly developed, managed and reviewed

Err,The Olympic and paralympic games "on target", are you sure about that?

Yes despite the whingers the infrastructure is all on time and budget. Many of the venues have already been tested and used. I know it doesn't suit the popular press because good news doses not sell papers.

JOHNHEALY wrote:
Yes Wayneo indeed I am saying that we should accept HS2 but I am not saying that we should try to influence the decision from the inside nor that we should have a referendum on the subject.

The best way to deal with the HS2 as I have said many times is not to act in an "I don't want it NIMBY fashion" but for all the protestors to unite and not only promote a different route but also put pressure on Justine Greening to resign. Incidentally I have put forward a possible alternative route to the Bucks Free Press but this sadly has not been published yet

wayneo wrote:

Nick1042 wrote:
The only minority are the ones in favour of HS2!

How do you qualify such a statement?

Chiltonian wrote:

wayneo wrote:

Nick1042 wrote:
The only minority are the ones in favour of HS2!

How do you qualify such a statement?

The HS2 consultation report makes it explicitly clear that only a tiny minority of the UK's population - including ` tiny representation from even Buckinghamshire - responded to this proposal.

The only concluson to be made to this is:

1. People simply do not care unless they live next to it.
2. People simply support HS2 so didn't respond.

Chiltonian wrote:

wayneo wrote:

Nick1042 wrote:
The only minority are the ones in favour of HS2!

How do you qualify such a statement?

The HS2 consultation report makes it explicitly clear that only a tiny minority of the UK's population - including ` tiny representation from even Buckinghamshire - responded to this proposal.

The only concluson to be made to this is:

1. People simply do not care unless they live next to it.
2. People simply support HS2 so didn't respond.

Chiltonian wrote:

wayneo wrote:

Nick1042 wrote:
The only minority are the ones in favour of HS2!

How do you qualify such a statement?

The HS2 consultation report makes it explicitly clear that only a tiny minority of the UK's population - including ` tiny representation from even Buckinghamshire - responded to this proposal.

The only concluson to be made to this is:

1. People simply do not care unless they live next to it.
2. People simply support HS2 so didn't respond.

gpn01 wrote:

Chiltonian wrote:

wayneo wrote:

Nick1042 wrote:
The only minority are the ones in favour of HS2!

How do you qualify such a statement?

The HS2 consultation report makes it explicitly clear that only a tiny minority of the UK's population - including ` tiny representation from even Buckinghamshire - responded to this proposal.

The only concluson to be made to this is:

1. People simply do not care unless they live next to it.
2. People simply support HS2 so didn't respond.

Oh dear, dear, dear. It's observations like that that show why we really should teach logic and reasoning at school.
.
No, there are MANY other conclusions that you could reach from the comment about the tiny response. A far more likely scenario is that most people in the UK simply didn't know about the consultation proposal.

Chiltonian wrote:

wayneo wrote:

Nick1042 wrote: The only minority are the ones in favour of HS2!

How do you qualify such a statement?

The HS2 consultation report makes it explicitly clear that only a tiny minority of the UK's population - including ` tiny representation from even Buckinghamshire - responded to this proposal. The only concluson to be made to this is: 1. People simply do not care unless they live next to it. 2. People simply support HS2 so didn't respond.

gpn01 wrote:

Chiltonian wrote:

wayneo wrote:

Nick1042 wrote:
The only minority are the ones in favour of HS2!

How do you qualify such a statement?

The HS2 consultation report makes it explicitly clear that only a tiny minority of the UK's population - including ` tiny representation from even Buckinghamshire - responded to this proposal.

The only concluson to be made to this is:

1. People simply do not care unless they live next to it.
2. People simply support HS2 so didn't respond.

Oh dear, dear, dear. It's observations like that that show why we really should teach logic and reasoning at school.
.
No, there are MANY other conclusions that you could reach from the comment about the tiny response. A far more likely scenario is that most people in the UK simply didn't know about the consultation proposal.

Nick1042 wrote:

Chiltonian wrote:

wayneo wrote:

Nick1042 wrote: The only minority are the ones in favour of HS2!

How do you qualify such a statement?

The HS2 consultation report makes it explicitly clear that only a tiny minority of the UK's population - including ` tiny representation from even Buckinghamshire - responded to this proposal. The only concluson to be made to this is: 1. People simply do not care unless they live next to it. 2. People simply support HS2 so didn't respond.

Are you a politican??

The reason I ask is that this is the sort of response that I would expect from a politican. If nobody bothers to tell us their views then OBVIOUSLY they agree with us and we carry on doing whatever we want.

There could be so many reasons why so few of the UK's residents did not respond to the consultation. For example: they did not care about the project to take the time to complete it, did not know about the consultation, meant to complete it but forgot about it or maybe just felt that it is a waste of time as the government would not listen and just press on through regardless of what the consultation results showed.

I ask you whats the point of spending time and money on a consultation process if your not going to take on board the responses?

Nick1042 wrote:

Chiltonian wrote:

wayneo wrote:

Nick1042 wrote: The only minority are the ones in favour of HS2!

How do you qualify such a statement?

The HS2 consultation report makes it explicitly clear that only a tiny minority of the UK's population - including ` tiny representation from even Buckinghamshire - responded to this proposal. The only concluson to be made to this is: 1. People simply do not care unless they live next to it. 2. People simply support HS2 so didn't respond.

Are you a politican??

The reason I ask is that this is the sort of response that I would expect from a politican. If nobody bothers to tell us their views then OBVIOUSLY they agree with us and we carry on doing whatever we want.

There could be so many reasons why so few of the UK's residents did not respond to the consultation. For example: they did not care about the project to take the time to complete it, did not know about the consultation, meant to complete it but forgot about it or maybe just felt that it is a waste of time as the government would not listen and just press on through regardless of what the consultation results showed.

I ask you whats the point of spending time and money on a consultation process if your not going to take on board the responses?

Chiltonian wrote:

wayneo wrote:

Nick1042 wrote:
The only minority are the ones in favour of HS2!

How do you qualify such a statement?

The HS2 consultation report makes it explicitly clear that only a tiny minority of the UK's population - including ` tiny representation from even Buckinghamshire - responded to this proposal.

The only concluson to be made to this is:

1. People simply do not care unless they live next to it.
2. People simply support HS2 so didn't respond.

piran wrote:

Chiltonian wrote:

wayneo wrote:

Nick1042 wrote:
The only minority are the ones in favour of HS2!

How do you qualify such a statement?

The HS2 consultation report makes it explicitly clear that only a tiny minority of the UK's population - including ` tiny representation from even Buckinghamshire - responded to this proposal.

The only concluson to be made to this is:

1. People simply do not care unless they live next to it.
2. People simply support HS2 so didn't respond.

Chiltonian point well made but wasted on the Anti HS2 brigade. They want it always. Because so few objected they think it was a sham but conveniently have not bothered to read the consultation documents and note that many changes were made - that actually put up many project costs.
For the Antis they have no vision - it is so much easier to do nothing and ruin our economy from 2050 - being selfish it won't affect them only their children and grandchildren

Nick1042 wrote:

piran wrote:

Chiltonian wrote:

wayneo wrote:

Nick1042 wrote:
The only minority are the ones in favour of HS2!

How do you qualify such a statement?

The HS2 consultation report makes it explicitly clear that only a tiny minority of the UK's population - including ` tiny representation from even Buckinghamshire - responded to this proposal.

The only concluson to be made to this is:

1. People simply do not care unless they live next to it.
2. People simply support HS2 so didn't respond.

Chiltonian point well made but wasted on the Anti HS2 brigade. They want it always. Because so few objected they think it was a sham but conveniently have not bothered to read the consultation documents and note that many changes were made - that actually put up many project costs.
For the Antis they have no vision - it is so much easier to do nothing and ruin our economy from 2050 - being selfish it won't affect them only their children and grandchildren

Who says people against HS2 have no vision? There are alternatives and I find it so laughable that you believe that HS2 will somehow be the saviour to the UK, when it won't even be built until 2026, by then one hopes our economy will be booming again! Please enough with the guilt trip thing about children and grandchildren, if you really cared you would want to concentrate on reducing the £trillon of debt the UK is in because this what our children will be having to pay off in the future.

piran wrote:

Nick1042 wrote:

piran wrote:

Chiltonian wrote:

wayneo wrote:

Nick1042 wrote:
The only minority are the ones in favour of HS2!

How do you qualify such a statement?

The HS2 consultation report makes it explicitly clear that only a tiny minority of the UK's population - including ` tiny representation from even Buckinghamshire - responded to this proposal.

The only concluson to be made to this is:

1. People simply do not care unless they live next to it.
2. People simply support HS2 so didn't respond.

Chiltonian point well made but wasted on the Anti HS2 brigade. They want it always. Because so few objected they think it was a sham but conveniently have not bothered to read the consultation documents and note that many changes were made - that actually put up many project costs.
For the Antis they have no vision - it is so much easier to do nothing and ruin our economy from 2050 - being selfish it won't affect them only their children and grandchildren

Who says people against HS2 have no vision? There are alternatives and I find it so laughable that you believe that HS2 will somehow be the saviour to the UK, when it won't even be built until 2026, by then one hopes our economy will be booming again! Please enough with the guilt trip thing about children and grandchildren, if you really cared you would want to concentrate on reducing the £trillon of debt the UK is in because this what our children will be having to pay off in the future.

OK Mr Transport Expert please share with us all your detailed transport infrastructure plans and how you will create capacity and investement. Let us judge your wonderful plans to develop Britain post AD 2026.

piran wrote:

Nick1042 wrote:

piran wrote:

Chiltonian wrote:

wayneo wrote:

Nick1042 wrote: The only minority are the ones in favour of HS2!

How do you qualify such a statement?

The HS2 consultation report makes it explicitly clear that only a tiny minority of the UK's population - including ` tiny representation from even Buckinghamshire - responded to this proposal. The only concluson to be made to this is: 1. People simply do not care unless they live next to it. 2. People simply support HS2 so didn't respond.

Chiltonian point well made but wasted on the Anti HS2 brigade. They want it always. Because so few objected they think it was a sham but conveniently have not bothered to read the consultation documents and note that many changes were made - that actually put up many project costs. For the Antis they have no vision - it is so much easier to do nothing and ruin our economy from 2050 - being selfish it won't affect them only their children and grandchildren

Who says people against HS2 have no vision? There are alternatives and I find it so laughable that you believe that HS2 will somehow be the saviour to the UK, when it won't even be built until 2026, by then one hopes our economy will be booming again! Please enough with the guilt trip thing about children and grandchildren, if you really cared you would want to concentrate on reducing the £trillon of debt the UK is in because this what our children will be having to pay off in the future.

OK Mr Transport Expert please share with us all your detailed transport infrastructure plans and how you will create capacity and investement. Let us judge your wonderful plans to develop Britain post AD 2026.

gpn01 wrote:

piran wrote:

Nick1042 wrote:

piran wrote:

Chiltonian wrote:

wayneo wrote:

Nick1042 wrote: The only minority are the ones in favour of HS2!

How do you qualify such a statement?

The HS2 consultation report makes it explicitly clear that only a tiny minority of the UK's population - including ` tiny representation from even Buckinghamshire - responded to this proposal. The only concluson to be made to this is: 1. People simply do not care unless they live next to it. 2. People simply support HS2 so didn't respond.

Chiltonian point well made but wasted on the Anti HS2 brigade. They want it always. Because so few objected they think it was a sham but conveniently have not bothered to read the consultation documents and note that many changes were made - that actually put up many project costs. For the Antis they have no vision - it is so much easier to do nothing and ruin our economy from 2050 - being selfish it won't affect them only their children and grandchildren

Who says people against HS2 have no vision? There are alternatives and I find it so laughable that you believe that HS2 will somehow be the saviour to the UK, when it won't even be built until 2026, by then one hopes our economy will be booming again! Please enough with the guilt trip thing about children and grandchildren, if you really cared you would want to concentrate on reducing the £trillon of debt the UK is in because this what our children will be having to pay off in the future.

OK Mr Transport Expert please share with us all your detailed transport infrastructure plans and how you will create capacity and investement. Let us judge your wonderful plans to develop Britain post AD 2026.

In order to provide a solution we need to first understand what the problem is you're trying to solve. It seems that HS2 is being cited as the answer (in fact the only answer) without being clear on what the question is. Many people on this forum are expressing concerns which are entirely valid. That doesn't make them NIMBY's or luddites. It just means they don't "get" what HS2 is seeking to address and why it's the only option.

piran wrote:

gpn01 wrote:

piran wrote:

Nick1042 wrote:

piran wrote:

Chiltonian wrote:

wayneo wrote:

Nick1042 wrote: The only minority are the ones in favour of HS2!

How do you qualify such a statement?

The HS2 consultation report makes it explicitly clear that only a tiny minority of the UK's population - including ` tiny representation from even Buckinghamshire - responded to this proposal. The only concluson to be made to this is: 1. People simply do not care unless they live next to it. 2. People simply support HS2 so didn't respond.

Chiltonian point well made but wasted on the Anti HS2 brigade. They want it always. Because so few objected they think it was a sham but conveniently have not bothered to read the consultation documents and note that many changes were made - that actually put up many project costs. For the Antis they have no vision - it is so much easier to do nothing and ruin our economy from 2050 - being selfish it won't affect them only their children and grandchildren

Who says people against HS2 have no vision? There are alternatives and I find it so laughable that you believe that HS2 will somehow be the saviour to the UK, when it won't even be built until 2026, by then one hopes our economy will be booming again! Please enough with the guilt trip thing about children and grandchildren, if you really cared you would want to concentrate on reducing the £trillon of debt the UK is in because this what our children will be having to pay off in the future.

OK Mr Transport Expert please share with us all your detailed transport infrastructure plans and how you will create capacity and investement. Let us judge your wonderful plans to develop Britain post AD 2026.

In order to provide a solution we need to first understand what the problem is you're trying to solve. It seems that HS2 is being cited as the answer (in fact the only answer) without being clear on what the question is. Many people on this forum are expressing concerns which are entirely valid. That doesn't make them NIMBY's or luddites. It just means they don't "get" what HS2 is seeking to address and why it's the only option.

So Transport Expert please share with us all your detailed transport infrastructure plans and how you will create capacity and investement??

Let us judge your wonderful plans to develop Britain post AD 2026. That will help us, both pro and anti HS2.

Or, as I thought, so much easier to be a negative critic than do something positive?

Nick1042 wrote:

piran wrote:

gpn01 wrote:

piran wrote:

Nick1042 wrote:

piran wrote:

Chiltonian wrote:

wayneo wrote:

Nick1042 wrote: The only minority are the ones in favour of HS2!

How do you qualify such a statement?

The HS2 consultation report makes it explicitly clear that only a tiny minority of the UK's population - including ` tiny representation from even Buckinghamshire - responded to this proposal. The only concluson to be made to this is: 1. People simply do not care unless they live next to it. 2. People simply support HS2 so didn't respond.

Chiltonian point well made but wasted on the Anti HS2 brigade. They want it always. Because so few objected they think it was a sham but conveniently have not bothered to read the consultation documents and note that many changes were made - that actually put up many project costs. For the Antis they have no vision - it is so much easier to do nothing and ruin our economy from 2050 - being selfish it won't affect them only their children and grandchildren

Who says people against HS2 have no vision? There are alternatives and I find it so laughable that you believe that HS2 will somehow be the saviour to the UK, when it won't even be built until 2026, by then one hopes our economy will be booming again! Please enough with the guilt trip thing about children and grandchildren, if you really cared you would want to concentrate on reducing the £trillon of debt the UK is in because this what our children will be having to pay off in the future.

OK Mr Transport Expert please share with us all your detailed transport infrastructure plans and how you will create capacity and investement. Let us judge your wonderful plans to develop Britain post AD 2026.

In order to provide a solution we need to first understand what the problem is you're trying to solve. It seems that HS2 is being cited as the answer (in fact the only answer) without being clear on what the question is. Many people on this forum are expressing concerns which are entirely valid. That doesn't make them NIMBY's or luddites. It just means they don't "get" what HS2 is seeking to address and why it's the only option.

So Transport Expert please share with us all your detailed transport infrastructure plans and how you will create capacity and investement??

Let us judge your wonderful plans to develop Britain post AD 2026. That will help us, both pro and anti HS2.

Or, as I thought, so much easier to be a negative critic than do something positive?

Surely increasing capacity on existing lines and looking at more favourable options that both sides can agree on is doing something positive. Name calling (NIMBY's) and accussing people of having 'no vision' because they have a difference of opinion to you is negative.

piran wrote:

Nick1042 wrote:

piran wrote:

gpn01 wrote:

piran wrote:

Nick1042 wrote:

piran wrote:

Chiltonian wrote:

wayneo wrote:

Nick1042 wrote: The only minority are the ones in favour of HS2!

How do you qualify such a statement?

The HS2 consultation report makes it explicitly clear that only a tiny minority of the UK's population - including ` tiny representation from even Buckinghamshire - responded to this proposal. The only concluson to be made to this is: 1. People simply do not care unless they live next to it. 2. People simply support HS2 so didn't respond.

Chiltonian point well made but wasted on the Anti HS2 brigade. They want it always. Because so few objected they think it was a sham but conveniently have not bothered to read the consultation documents and note that many changes were made - that actually put up many project costs. For the Antis they have no vision - it is so much easier to do nothing and ruin our economy from 2050 - being selfish it won't affect them only their children and grandchildren

Who says people against HS2 have no vision? There are alternatives and I find it so laughable that you believe that HS2 will somehow be the saviour to the UK, when it won't even be built until 2026, by then one hopes our economy will be booming again! Please enough with the guilt trip thing about children and grandchildren, if you really cared you would want to concentrate on reducing the £trillon of debt the UK is in because this what our children will be having to pay off in the future.

OK Mr Transport Expert please share with us all your detailed transport infrastructure plans and how you will create capacity and investement. Let us judge your wonderful plans to develop Britain post AD 2026.

In order to provide a solution we need to first understand what the problem is you're trying to solve. It seems that HS2 is being cited as the answer (in fact the only answer) without being clear on what the question is. Many people on this forum are expressing concerns which are entirely valid. That doesn't make them NIMBY's or luddites. It just means they don't "get" what HS2 is seeking to address and why it's the only option.

So Transport Expert please share with us all your detailed transport infrastructure plans and how you will create capacity and investement?? Let us judge your wonderful plans to develop Britain post AD 2026. That will help us, both pro and anti HS2. Or, as I thought, so much easier to be a negative critic than do something positive?

Surely increasing capacity on existing lines and looking at more favourable options that both sides can agree on is doing something positive. Name calling (NIMBY's) and accussing people of having 'no vision' because they have a difference of opinion to you is negative.

Yes you are right because without vision is a negative thing. No future, no economic growth, rising unemployment. Is that the aim of the Anti HS2? It is so much easier to be critical than provide a solution, isn't it?

Windsorian wrote:
@Nick1042
Three new 11 car Pendolinos + another to replace the one destroyed in the Grayrigg disaster have already been ordered, as have 62 extra carriages to extend 31 Pendolinos to 11 car; these were ordered in October 2010 and their introduction should start in April this year.

As for converting at least one of the existing 1st Class carriages to Standard Class, this is a matter for the (new) WCML franchise operation due to start in December this year. I've no doubt that every franchisee is monitoring existing 1st Class usage and everyone knows a 49 seat 1st Class motor carriage could be transformed into a 65 or 75 seat Standard Class motor carriage.

It is quite possible that these changes will be complete in the next 18 months, but all the predictions are they will not cater for anticipated growth after 2026; that is unless you start limiting rail travel through personal rationing or increased fares!

Nick1042 wrote:

Windsorian wrote:
@Nick1042
Three new 11 car Pendolinos + another to replace the one destroyed in the Grayrigg disaster have already been ordered, as have 62 extra carriages to extend 31 Pendolinos to 11 car; these were ordered in October 2010 and their introduction should start in April this year.

As for converting at least one of the existing 1st Class carriages to Standard Class, this is a matter for the (new) WCML franchise operation due to start in December this year. I've no doubt that every franchisee is monitoring existing 1st Class usage and everyone knows a 49 seat 1st Class motor carriage could be transformed into a 65 or 75 seat Standard Class motor carriage.

It is quite possible that these changes will be complete in the next 18 months, but all the predictions are they will not cater for anticipated growth after 2026; that is unless you start limiting rail travel through personal rationing or increased fares!

So maybe before committing ourselves to spending billions on a new super high speed rail, we could wait and see how these improvements help with the capacity issue. Don't forget, 'predictions' can be very wrong, HS1 has never met the passenger predictions the government quoted. Many believe that the passenger numbers the government are predicating for HS2 are based on old forecasting models and are way above what can be expected.

piran wrote:

Nick1042 wrote:

piran wrote:

gpn01 wrote:

piran wrote:

Nick1042 wrote:

piran wrote:

Chiltonian wrote:

wayneo wrote:

Nick1042 wrote: The only minority are the ones in favour of HS2!

How do you qualify such a statement?

The HS2 consultation report makes it explicitly clear that only a tiny minority of the UK's population - including ` tiny representation from even Buckinghamshire - responded to this proposal. The only concluson to be made to this is: 1. People simply do not care unless they live next to it. 2. People simply support HS2 so didn't respond.

Chiltonian point well made but wasted on the Anti HS2 brigade. They want it always. Because so few objected they think it was a sham but conveniently have not bothered to read the consultation documents and note that many changes were made - that actually put up many project costs. For the Antis they have no vision - it is so much easier to do nothing and ruin our economy from 2050 - being selfish it won't affect them only their children and grandchildren

Who says people against HS2 have no vision? There are alternatives and I find it so laughable that you believe that HS2 will somehow be the saviour to the UK, when it won't even be built until 2026, by then one hopes our economy will be booming again! Please enough with the guilt trip thing about children and grandchildren, if you really cared you would want to concentrate on reducing the £trillon of debt the UK is in because this what our children will be having to pay off in the future.

OK Mr Transport Expert please share with us all your detailed transport infrastructure plans and how you will create capacity and investement. Let us judge your wonderful plans to develop Britain post AD 2026.

In order to provide a solution we need to first understand what the problem is you're trying to solve. It seems that HS2 is being cited as the answer (in fact the only answer) without being clear on what the question is. Many people on this forum are expressing concerns which are entirely valid. That doesn't make them NIMBY's or luddites. It just means they don't "get" what HS2 is seeking to address and why it's the only option.

So Transport Expert please share with us all your detailed transport infrastructure plans and how you will create capacity and investement??

Let us judge your wonderful plans to develop Britain post AD 2026. That will help us, both pro and anti HS2.

Or, as I thought, so much easier to be a negative critic than do something positive?

Surely increasing capacity on existing lines and looking at more favourable options that both sides can agree on is doing something positive. Name calling (NIMBY's) and accussing people of having 'no vision' because they have a difference of opinion to you is negative.

Yes you are right because without vision is a negative thing. No future, no economic growth, rising unemployment. Is that the aim of the Anti HS2?
It is so much easier to be critical than provide a solution, isn't it?

Chiltonian wrote:
i think you will find that the rail industry - not HS2- have completely put to bed any arguments that money could best invested in the current railway system. They all agree that the existing rail network is not future proof and it is simply grinding to a halt. We are in recession - yet train use continues to rapidly grow each year. They conclude that this country's main railway line would be at capacity in 15 years regardless of how much money you spend on it.

piran wrote:

Nick1042 wrote:

Windsorian wrote:
@Nick1042
Three new 11 car Pendolinos + another to replace the one destroyed in the Grayrigg disaster have already been ordered, as have 62 extra carriages to extend 31 Pendolinos to 11 car; these were ordered in October 2010 and their introduction should start in April this year.

As for converting at least one of the existing 1st Class carriages to Standard Class, this is a matter for the (new) WCML franchise operation due to start in December this year. I've no doubt that every franchisee is monitoring existing 1st Class usage and everyone knows a 49 seat 1st Class motor carriage could be transformed into a 65 or 75 seat Standard Class motor carriage.

It is quite possible that these changes will be complete in the next 18 months, but all the predictions are they will not cater for anticipated growth after 2026; that is unless you start limiting rail travel through personal rationing or increased fares!

So maybe before committing ourselves to spending billions on a new super high speed rail, we could wait and see how these improvements help with the capacity issue. Don't forget, 'predictions' can be very wrong, HS1 has never met the passenger predictions the government quoted. Many believe that the passenger numbers the government are predicating for HS2 are based on old forecasting models and are way above what can be expected.

End of conversation. You want to do nothing. Fine but all the studies show despite tinkering with current structures, that THERE WILL NOT BE ENOUGH CAPACITY AFTER 2026!!
It takes time to build capacity so we need to start now because it will take 10+ years to build/ Ever heard of PLANING FOR THE FUTURE or you would be better to bury your head in the sand? Luckily the Government and all 3 major political parties do understand the problem so HS2 will be going ahead.

Windsorian wrote:

Chiltonian wrote:
i think you will find that the rail industry - not HS2- have completely put to bed any arguments that money could best invested in the current railway system. They all agree that the existing rail network is not future proof and it is simply grinding to a halt. We are in recession - yet train use continues to rapidly grow each year. They conclude that this country's main railway line would be at capacity in 15 years regardless of how much money you spend on it.

I think it is worth remembering that HS2 is not just about projected passenger growth, it is also about freeing up existing infrastructure for a massive expansion of rail freight. There is a key objective of getting many more lorries off our roads and also meeting the government's environmental targets.

Nick1042 wrote:

Windsorian wrote:

Chiltonian wrote:
i think you will find that the rail industry - not HS2- have completely put to bed any arguments that money could best invested in the current railway system. They all agree that the existing rail network is not future proof and it is simply grinding to a halt. We are in recession - yet train use continues to rapidly grow each year. They conclude that this country's main railway line would be at capacity in 15 years regardless of how much money you spend on it.

I think it is worth remembering that HS2 is not just about projected passenger growth, it is also about freeing up existing infrastructure for a massive expansion of rail freight. There is a key objective of getting many more lorries off our roads and also meeting the government's environmental targets.

But this has a problem in itself. Firstly building the darn thing will create more emissons and then high speed rail is not green itself so there will still be emissons when running. Then if you did get lorries off the roads then those drivers will lose their jobs and then the fact that HS2 will create so many jobs will be ofset against the numbers of jobs lost.

piran wrote:

Nick1042 wrote:

Windsorian wrote:

Chiltonian wrote:
i think you will find that the rail industry - not HS2- have completely put to bed any arguments that money could best invested in the current railway system. They all agree that the existing rail network is not future proof and it is simply grinding to a halt. We are in recession - yet train use continues to rapidly grow each year. They conclude that this country's main railway line would be at capacity in 15 years regardless of how much money you spend on it.

I think it is worth remembering that HS2 is not just about projected passenger growth, it is also about freeing up existing infrastructure for a massive expansion of rail freight. There is a key objective of getting many more lorries off our roads and also meeting the government's environmental targets.

But this has a problem in itself. Firstly building the darn thing will create more emissons and then high speed rail is not green itself so there will still be emissons when running. Then if you did get lorries off the roads then those drivers will lose their jobs and then the fact that HS2 will create so many jobs will be ofset against the numbers of jobs lost.

I don't know why you bother commenting because everything you put is basically negative to HS2 and down to you not wanting HS2! Everything else is just distractions and side arguments. Nothing will convince a person like you, despite the evidence. I am not wasting any more of my time reading your comments because they are so totally predictable!

gpn01 wrote:
I think it's time that the Luddites came into the 21st Century and accepted that we need extensive investment in modern capabilities.
.
We need investment in 21st Century infrastructure that enables us to compete in a globalized environment against other modernized countries. That's what will help employment and improve our economy.
.
As a quick reminder, trains have been in operation in the UK since the early 1800's. In comparison, the Internet came into being in the 1980's.
.
So,
.
trains = 210 year-old
.
Internet = 30 year-old
.
Funny when you think about it in these terms, the HS2's lobbyists who're saying that those who're against HS2 would probably prefer us stuck in the 19th century with canals instead of motorways are actually advocating spending money on a 200 year old infrastructure!

piran wrote:

gpn01 wrote: I think it's time that the Luddites came into the 21st Century and accepted that we need extensive investment in modern capabilities. . We need investment in 21st Century infrastructure that enables us to compete in a globalized environment against other modernized countries. That's what will help employment and improve our economy. . As a quick reminder, trains have been in operation in the UK since the early 1800's. In comparison, the Internet came into being in the 1980's. . So, . trains = 210 year-old . Internet = 30 year-old . Funny when you think about it in these terms, the HS2's lobbyists who're saying that those who're against HS2 would probably prefer us stuck in the 19th century with canals instead of motorways are actually advocating spending money on a 200 year old infrastructure!

So do please explain how I can see/visit family and friends in the Midlands by transporting myself by the internet or is this by Star Trek magic - "Beam me Up Scottie"?