Northern Powerhouse? Unlikely if this is true.

[royaloak]

True that, I saw a similar dynamic in parts of Cumbria before we moved down here ten years ago.

 

I have little time for North - South arguments. For a start it ignores that the South West (which isn't in the North) and parts of the South East face pretty similar issues as the North. One of the complaints of many people in the North is that people in the South don't know anything about the North. There is quite a lot of truth in that, but it is equally true about Northerners and their knowledge of Southern England.

The only thing South of where I live is the Peoples Republic of Kernow!

 

 

 

Thats Cornwall for all you grockles.

 

 

My problem isnt the amount of money being spent per se but the amount of money being spent PER HEAD, spend the same sort of money down here or up there and we wouldnt be bleating about it, but seeing MY taxes being spent to make sure Londoners have basically a very regular, 24 hour service while we have to put up with a poor service at best simply stinks, you want it you pay for it!

Edited December 15, 2018 by royaloak

[APOLLO]

Network Rail photos & video of Pendolino test run thru Bolton here

 

https://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/first-electric-test-train-passes-through-bolton-as-upgrade-nears-completion

 

Brit15

[black and decker boy]

Not sure why Heathrow (or Gatwick) expansion is dragged into this as it’s private money.

 

As for Stanstead, it’s owned by the people of the north being part of Manchester Airports Group whose shareholders are the 10(or12?) local councils within greater Manchester.

 

Doncaster airport is also privately owned by Peel Holdings (another Northern company) and planning permission has been submitted for large scale regeneration of the area around it.

[Clearwater]

Not sure why Heathrow (or Gatwick) expansion is dragged into this as it’s private money.

 

As for Stanstead, it’s owned by the people of the north being part of Manchester Airports Group whose shareholders are the 10(or12?) local councils within greater Manchester.

 

Doncaster airport is also privately owned by Peel Holdings (another Northern company) and planning permission has been submitted for large scale regeneration of the area around it.

Any expansion of lhr or lgw would need public sector money for the road/rail infrastructure. I understand that GiP, Gatwick’s investors, are in the process of selling their stake. On Stansted, whilst MAG is the majority owner, in order to fund their acquisition of Stansted, they sold approx 30% of the combined group to the Australian Fund Manager IFM. Amongst other things, I think IFM is now the owner of the M6 Toll road.

 

Being brutal, Doncaster Airport isn’t really a major UK airport. I think Peel has tried to sell it a couple of times but not found a buyer...

 

David

[Barry O]

Perhaps people should step back and look at what the UK needs rather than whoever shouts loudest gets the money.

 

Saying that rush hour trains in the Manchester and Leeds areas are not rammed full of people shows a distinct lack of knowledge..this cuts both ways so people elsewhere are envious of large sums of money being spent on alleviating the crush in such trains anywhere in Britain.

 

If it is so expensive to undertake work in London move the jobs somewhere else...but look what happened when they moved NHS Central to the Kremlin in Leeds...the power scene for the Civil Service and companies is London. Which is also where a lot of our tax dominates from.

 

Baz

[Mike Storey]

The only thing South of where I live is the Peoples Republic of Kernow!

 

 

 

Thats Cornwall for all you grockles.

 

 

My problem isnt the amount of money being spent per se but the amount of money being spent PER HEAD, spend the same sort of money down here or up there and we wouldnt be bleating about it, but seeing MY taxes being spent to make sure Londoners have basically a very regular, 24 hour service while we have to put up with a poor service at best simply stinks, you want it you pay for it!

 

But..... in London now, it isn't your taxes. London residents and businesses (plus fares) are paying for all improvements and subsidies there. There is no longer any state grant at all.

 

Only enhancements outside the TfL/GLA controlled parts of the railway and metro systems receive any funds from general taxation.

[jjb1970]

When people pay taxes they're not paying into a sort of personal account to fund their own existence, they're paying into a general fund to be used as the government see's fit. That is something motorists ignore when talking about VED in particular, VED is a general tax and not a mechanism for funding road construction. The idea of ring fencing taxes to fund projects in your local area or which benefit your own lifestyle or activities is the ultimate example of "be careful what you wish for". If such a system was ever instituted on a country wide scale as opposed to supplementary local taxation and grants for devolved authorities then the loser wouldn't be London.

[caradoc]

I live in Lincolnshire, and I am closer to East Midlands and Doncaster Airports, my nearest mainline is the East Coast at Grantham. The new infrastructure that is being created;- CrossRail, Heathrow expansion and HS2 will have no beneficial effect to me what so ever - is it any wonder us "northerners" get a bit miffed.

And regarding Voting for a Regional Mayor, it was only offered to certain (mainly city) areas.

 

I live even further north than the 'North', ie in Scotland, and HS2 will directly benefit me as it will speed up long-distance, including Anglo-Scottish, trains (and release capacity for medium distance services). And as I regularly visit London Crossrail will be useful too. Not so bothered with Heathrow expansion but I'm not paying for it anyway !

[Reorte]

The fewer "improvements" I get quite honestly, I usually just find them depressing additions that herald somewhere becoming busier, more heavily developed, and they're usually pretty obnxious in their own right. And the most recent near me (a bit of new road) has made traffic rather worse.

[The Stationmaster]

I doubt the regional airport approach will find any favour, given the ludicrous situation of Luton, Stansted and now Southend trying to pass themselves off as "London" airports. Even Manston (near Ramsgate) had probably one of the most superbly equipped (at one time) and lengthy runways in the UK, and would soon be within perhaps an hour of London, once the new Thanet Parkway station is built. But no takers (apart from UKIP, who soon found they could not afford the means to keep it open) and it is soon to be a housing and mixed development estate.

 

As for you gaining no benefit from HS2, I suspect you may find that to be a little wide of the mark, when at least two of the current five (some hours six) paths per hour reserved for Anglo-Scottish blow-throughs will cease to be needed (as they will be faster routed via HS2), at last allowing paths for more frequent semi-fasts on the existing route and additional frequencies from places like Lincoln. However, this does assume Phase 2 is not de-scoped, and it will be another 18 years, at least, before that benefit is fully realised. Which makes a six year tiemscale for the initial benefits of Trans-Pennine upgrade phase 1 (of more hopefully) look a tad more attractive.

 

Mike you forgot this 'London' Airport 

http://www.oxfordairport.co.uk/the-airport/

[The Stationmaster]

The only thing South of where I live is the Peoples Republic of Kernow!

 

 

 

Thats Cornwall for all you grockles.

 

 

My problem isnt the amount of money being spent per se but the amount of money being spent PER HEAD, spend the same sort of money down here or up there and we wouldnt be bleating about it, but seeing MY taxes being spent to make sure Londoners have basically a very regular, 24 hour service while we have to put up with a poor service at best simply stinks, you want it you pay for it!

 

Actually it's not your tax which is being spent in London and the South East but the other way round.   In the most recent year (2014-15 of complete detailed figures London and the South East between them accounted for 27.8% of UK Income Tax payers.

[Joseph_Pestell]

Actually it's not your tax which is being spent in London and the South East but the other way round.   In the most recent year (2014-15 of complete detailed figures London and the South East between them accounted for 27.8% of UK Income Tax payers.

 

And that is only a part of the calculation. London & South East folk will be paying more income tax (from higher average earnings), higher stamp duty on their house purchases, and, probably, more VAT. Add to that corporation tax from city companies etc......

[Mike Storey]

When people pay taxes they're not paying into a sort of personal account to fund their own existence, they're paying into a general fund to be used as the government see's fit. That is something motorists ignore when talking about VED in particular, VED is a general tax and not a mechanism for funding road construction. The idea of ring fencing taxes to fund projects in your local area or which benefit your own lifestyle or activities is the ultimate example of "be careful what you wish for". If such a system was ever instituted on a country wide scale as opposed to supplementary local taxation and grants for devolved authorities then the loser wouldn't be London.

 

Sorry, but you are a little out of date. VED is now hypothecated to Highways maintenance, renewals and new schemes. That came up in the PAC Select Committee on Transport. They gave the impression that it used all of VED income, but I am not certain about that.

 

You also need to be clear about the difference between "general" taxation and local taxation. For example, all of TfL's CrossRail work is funded through special supplements to business rates and council tax for Londoners.

 

Your overall point is true enough.

[ardbealach]

I have followed this thread with interest - as a Northerner.

 

Am I missing something but if longer trains with a greater number of seats were available would that not maintain the track occupancy of individual train sets, but allow for more to be carried on each train?  Looking back, for example, at West Highland and Oban line trains in the 1960's, these were often composed of six or seven Mark 1's with a full brake for goods / bicycles and prams.  The whole lot are now crammed into two car 158's or similar.  And that is equally the case here in the North West with Northern Rail operations. 

 

I appreciate I have added the extra layer of rolling stock leasing companies into the argument. (AM)    

[royaloak]

So just keep spending everything in the South East, what could possibly go wrong with enticing even more businesses into the area!

 

Simply building more is encouraging the problem, not dealing with it!

[jjb1970]

So just keep spending everything in the South East, what could possibly go wrong with enticing even more businesses into the area!

 

Simply building more is encouraging the problem, not dealing with it!

Perhaps, but that is a very different issue as to whether or not the rest of the country is paying for the South East via taxes or whether the opposite is true.

[The Stationmaster]

Sorry, but you are a little out of date. VED is now hypothecated to Highways maintenance, renewals and new schemes. That came up in the PAC Select Committee on Transport. They gave the impression that it used all of VED income, but I am not certain about that.

 

You also need to be clear about the difference between "general" taxation and local taxation. For example, all of TfL's CrossRail work is funded through special supplements to business rates and council tax for Londoners.

 

Your overall point is true enough.

 

All the information I can find indicates that hypothecation ceased in 1936/37 and there is (or rather I can't find) anything in any Govt information in respect of VED to indicate that it has been reintroduced.  In view of the massive an mount of de-trunking of principal roads which has occurred in the past decade or more the continued existence of hypothecation would surely have resulted in the transfer of additional funds to local authorities (principally County Councils or their equivalent)  but the state of repair of many roads suggests this has not happened.  And past statements by at least one council in this area which indicated that its Transport Supplementary Grant did not include any money hypothecated to highway maintenance and renewal but was simply absorbed into its general expenditure.

 

These graphs published by the RAC indicate that only a small percentage of the total of VED and vehicle fuel tax is spent on the roads (yes, I realise it combines the income from the two sources) -

 

https://www.racfoundation.org/data/road-user-taxation-highways-spending-data-chart

 

But if we now look at these graphs it will be seen that in fact the revenue from Vehicle Excise Duty falls a long way short of actual expenditure on roads.  This could perhaps then be presented as showing that all VED income is spent on the roads but that would, I suspect, be a somewhat contorted manner of presenting what actually happens.  VED goes into the general Govt tax etc income pot, spending on roads comes out of that pot and there is no hypothecation (which is probably just as well as far as VED is concerned because there'd be less available to spend on roads!)

 

 Scroll down for the graphs

 

https://obr.uk/forecasts-in-depth/tax-by-tax-spend-by-spend/vehicle-excise-duty/

Edited December 16, 2018 by The Stationmaster

[jamie92208]

All the information I can find indicates that hypothecation ceased in 1936/37 and there is (or rather I can't find) anything in any Govt information in respect of VED to indicate that it has been reintroduced.  In view of the massive an mount of de-trunking of principal roads which has occurred in the past decade or more the continued existence of hypothecation would surely have resulted in the transfer of additional funds to local authorities (principally County Councils or their equivalent)  but the state of repair of many roads suggests this has not happened.  And past statements by at least one council in this area which indicated that its Transport Supplementary Grant did not include any money hypothecated to highway maintenance and renewal but was simply absorbed into its general expenditure.

 

These graphs published by the RAC indicate that only a small percentage of the total of VED and vehicle fuel tax is spent on the roads (yes, I realise it combines the income from the two sources) -

 

https://www.racfoundation.org/data/road-user-taxation-highways-spending-data-chart

 

But if we now look at these graphs it will be seen that in fact the revenue from Vehicle Excise Duty falls a long way short of actual expenditure on roads.  This could perhaps then be presented as showing that all VED income is spent on the roads but that would, I suspect, be a somewhat contorted manner of presenting what actually happens.  VED goes into the general Govt tax etc income pot, spending on roads comes out of that pot and there is no hypothecation (which is probably just as well as far as VED is concerned because there'd be less available to spend on roads!)

 

 Scroll down for the graphs

 

https://obr.uk/forecasts-in-depth/tax-by-tax-spend-by-spend/vehicle-excise-duty/

 

VED used to be called the Road Fund Licence and as Mike has said the Road fund was abolished in the 30's.   The fall in VED income is actually quite a worry to the treasury.  It's come about due to the changes in how it's calculated and the number of low tax and tax exempt cars plus there has been quite a drop since the actual licences were abolished to save a little bit of money (In government terms).  They've lost a lot more through fraud than they saved. 

 

Jamie

[bimble]

Mike you forgot this 'London' Airport 

http://www.oxfordairport.co.uk/the-airport/

 

I'll see you and raise you London Prestwick... thanks to Ryanair...

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1510045/Prestwick-Ryanairs-airport-for-London.html

[Mike Storey]

All the information I can find indicates that hypothecation ceased in 1936/37 and there is (or rather I can't find) anything in any Govt information in respect of VED to indicate that it has been reintroduced.  In view of the massive an mount of de-trunking of principal roads which has occurred in the past decade or more the continued existence of hypothecation would surely have resulted in the transfer of additional funds to local authorities (principally County Councils or their equivalent)  but the state of repair of many roads suggests this has not happened.  And past statements by at least one council in this area which indicated that its Transport Supplementary Grant did not include any money hypothecated to highway maintenance and renewal but was simply absorbed into its general expenditure.

 

These graphs published by the RAC indicate that only a small percentage of the total of VED and vehicle fuel tax is spent on the roads (yes, I realise it combines the income from the two sources) -

 

https://www.racfoundation.org/data/road-user-taxation-highways-spending-data-chart

 

But if we now look at these graphs it will be seen that in fact the revenue from Vehicle Excise Duty falls a long way short of actual expenditure on roads.  This could perhaps then be presented as showing that all VED income is spent on the roads but that would, I suspect, be a somewhat contorted manner of presenting what actually happens.  VED goes into the general Govt tax etc income pot, spending on roads comes out of that pot and there is no hypothecation (which is probably just as well as far as VED is concerned because there'd be less available to spend on roads!)

 

 Scroll down for the graphs

 

https://obr.uk/forecasts-in-depth/tax-by-tax-spend-by-spend/vehicle-excise-duty/

 

Hypothecation for VED is to start with Philip Hammond's most recent budget. I cannot find any HMG site to detail this as yet, but the attached may explain. It was certainly referenced more than once at the PAC sub-committee on transport, referring to Highways Agency business plans by a series of acronyms which are just as baffling to me, as such railway acronyms would be to a road nut.

 

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/budget-2018-what-it-means-for-motorists

 

You may have to reject an invitation to participate in a poll and sign your near life away to receiving "relevant" messages from Autocar's "partners", to read this. Sorry.....

[caradoc]

Mike you forgot this 'London' Airport 

http://www.oxfordairport.co.uk/the-airport/

 

I grew up in Oxford but calling the airport (which is north of Kidlington and therefore not especially close to Oxford, never mind London) is utterly ludicrous !

[phil-b259]

The only thing South of where I live is the Peoples Republic of Kernow!

 

 

 

Thats Cornwall for all you grockles.

 

 

My problem isnt the amount of money being spent per se but the amount of money being spent PER HEAD, spend the same sort of money down here or up there and we wouldnt be bleating about it, but seeing MY taxes being spent to make sure Londoners have basically a very regular, 24 hour service while we have to put up with a poor service at best simply stinks, you want it you pay for it!

 

However if London has a significantly larger population then say Manchester, even if the Government worked on a £10 per person basis across England then London would still get more money!

 

Also given the grater population - and thus the number of taxpayers, the statistics actually prove that if anything London taxpayers subsidiser the rest of the country by a significant margin.

 

So while there may well be issues over how the Government chooses what projects to invest in across the UK that does not justify the use of 'London gets all the money jibes'

[phil-b259]

VED used to be called the Road Fund Licence and as Mike has said the Road fund was abolished in the 30's.   The fall in VED income is actually quite a worry to the treasury.  It's come about due to the changes in how it's calculated and the number of low tax and tax exempt cars plus there has been quite a drop since the actual licences were abolished to save a little bit of money (In government terms).  They've lost a lot more through fraud than they saved. 

 

Jamie

 

Why does this not surprise me.....

 

UK Governments of all shades have this fetish of selling stuff off or 'streamlining operations' to save  cash in the short term - only for it to end up costing the country far more in the long term....

[phil-b259]

So just keep spending everything in the South East, what could possibly go wrong with enticing even more businesses into the area!

 

Simply building more is encouraging the problem, not dealing with it!

 

I quite agree - however there is a saying "you can take a horse to water but cannot make it drink"

 

This is why building the most fantastic infrastructure in the northern regions will not on its own make much difference. For that Government needs to be de-centralised (and by that I mean moving the HQ of big hitting departments out of London*, not simply shifting various processing agencies out to the regions) and also encourage the development of industries other than financial and legal services (which have a very unhealthy relationship with politicians and which seem to value the ability to 'network' with ministers / Whitehall to protect their profits).

 

* While it may be a result of the partition of Germany after WW2, I believe their equivalent of the  HM Treasury department is still based in Bonn - a long way from the political capital of Berlin.

Edited December 16, 2018 by phil-b259

[phil-b259]

Not sure why Heathrow (or Gatwick) expansion is dragged into this as it’s private money.

 

 

 

Heathrow expansion isn't - unlike Gatwick (where the owners were willing to splash the cash outside the airports boundaries), the cost of putting the M25 into a tunnel will fall on the taxpayer - who we are assured by ministers will make a fortune back from the expansion...

 

Ever since the competition authorities forced the break up of BAA and the sale of Heathrow to a Spanish outfit that is not exactly in the best of shape financially, Heathrow have been trying to minimise what they have to pay for - and because they know as far as the Government and big business are concerned any expansion has to be at Heathrow they are in a fairly powerful position...