HS2

[Phil Himsworth]

The company over the road from where I work in Telford seems to be doing a good trade in precast concrete sections for HS2, and a garage down the road always has a few HS2 trucks around it. Telford is far enough away that any knock on effects from the trains themselves must have knocked on a few times before they get here, but stuff like this all over the country must be doing far more good than any bank bailout ever could.

Edited December 6, 2022 by Phil Himsworth

[RJS1977]

The converse though is that so much concrete  and labour is being used in HS2 that it is causing shortages in other parts of the construction industry.

[JeffP]

15 hours ago, Phil Himsworth said:

The company over the road from where I work in Telford seems to be doing a good trade in precast concrete sections for HS2, and a garage down the road always has a few HS2 trucks around it. Telford is far enough away that any knock on effects from the trains themselves must have knocked on a few times before they get here, but stuff like this all over the country must be doing far more good than any bank bailout ever could.

Not sure what it is doing, or will ever do for the north.

[Pete the Elaner]

1 hour ago, JeffP said:

Not sure what it is doing, or will ever do for the north.

 

Where would you suggest starting? Newcastle to Darlington?

 

HS2 is only part of a larger project which will get to the North.

A complete network; London-Birmingham-Manchester-Leeds-Newcastle-Glasgow-Edinburgh is expensive.

So in order to make more manageable & the budget more acceptable, it gets split into several smaller projects. The parts which need it most get done first. London-Rugby is the most congested long distance line in the country (sorry but it is) so this is the first section to target.

The rest & therefore their costs gets moved to other projects. They will not have been completely cancelled.

[woodenhead]

1 hour ago, JeffP said:

Not sure what it is doing, or will ever do for the north.

Here's a different way of looking at it.

 

HS2 is a new trainline that will benefit people who wish to travel to and from London as long as they want to go to Birmingham or the North.

 

If they want to travel anywhere south of Birmingham they will have to make do with 350s (or their replacements) or ageing Pendolinos.

 

Whilst Birmingham is not strictly the North, it is north of Watford the polictical boundary between 'the important bit' and the 'rest'

Edited December 7, 2022 by woodenhead

[corneliuslundie]

I am a little puzzled. If HS2 is being built as suggested by a "hands off" company, not by the government, why doe the government make every little decision about it?

Jonathan

[JeffP]

Pete: I think you misunderstood me.

I do both understand and accept the reasoning for the line as it being constructed.

My comment was referring to the fact that the construction is putting money into businesses as far afield as Telford, but can't see that aspect benefitting the north at present...or ever, the way things are going.

And we do need jobs. And investment.

In my town, with it's rail making plant and rod mill, they SHOULD get contracts, but elsewhere?

[woodenhead]

I think the UK is fairly safe in winning the contract for the track itself, like to see that arrive via the Chunnel.

 

Hitachi will be building the trains in County Durham along with Alstom in Derby so that's more continued employment for the North.

[lmsforever]

Lucky for people in the Aylesbury Thame area we have the Chiltern line to Brum a good fast service  in comfortable stock and its reliable, Haddenham can be reached by bus easily and the good thing is a short walk and you are in New St and trains everywhere.We watch the HS2 works with interest but I think that not many will use it as we wont want to go into London only to pass where we started from but if the cuts to services on the southern WCML take place we will be inconvienced ,Now we can  join a fast express to the north at Milton Keynes  Central and enjoy a comfortable journey without the hassles of London ,stopping these trains will be a backward step.Extending a high speeed line beyond Brum is a debatable thing as will the money be available for this work, any govt will be short of cash and have to make hard decisions on what to spend available moneys on plus the actions of a certain group of people are making rail travel impossible and putting people off for good.The works around here dont seem to be changing much and we await the start of bridge work and tunnelling plus a very long viaduct behind Aylesbury.

[woodenhead]

5 minutes ago, lmsforever said:

Lucky for people in the Aylesbury Thame area we have the Chiltern line to Brum a good fast service  in comfortable stock and its reliable.

But for how long I wonder - those trains are ageing Mk3s with a brute of a loco up front or BR era units.

 

Got to wonder how long before IEPs make an entrance with batteries for the start and end of the journies to reduce emissions and noise at the terminii

[lmsforever]

Still think Chiltern will offer good trains they are already looking at battery units and you never know we might get wires up!

[woodenhead]

The cover might be the same, but they've altered the terms of the contract - it now a management contract operated on behalf of the UK Government by Arriva.  The focus on hybrid remains, the aim to make all the units hybrid and no replacement trains in that period.  I think that leaves a big hole when it comes to the locomotive hauled trains which are not popular with locals nor with Westminster City Council around Marylebone.  Chiltern Trains did commit to removing the highest polluting trains when they have the capacity to do so, which may indicate a plan to remove loco hauled trains once they have achieved their aims on the units perhaps.

 

https://www.railjournal.com/passenger/main-line/chiltern-railways-contract-extended-by-six-years/

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/marylebone-station-toxic-train-fuels-government-london-b964118.html

Edited December 7, 2022 by woodenhead

[icn]

On 06/12/2022 at 06:22, martin_wynne said:

My question is why these arguments hardly ever mention the effect of the construction itself on the economy? Thousands of workers with money in their pockets and spending it. Thousands of sub-contracting firms thriving. Thousands of young engineers gaining new skills. Thousands of problems solved with innovative ideas which can be used again elsewhere.

 

Opponents invariably refer to the cost as if the money disappears into a hole in the ground, never to be seen again. But a large proportion of it will end up going round and round in the economy for years to come. And a good proportion of that will end up back in the nation's coffers as tax.

Ah but you see, you didn't tell us: where does that money come from in the first place? Taxes you say? If you'd charged lower taxes, then the citizens would've had more money, and spent it on other things, hence pumping the same money back into the economy (and back into those cycles you reference, and taxes too), just via a different path.

 

I suspect that this is all a bit beyond the scope of the HS2 discussions though. But lest I be derided as one of those free market extremists, let me say that I do think that public infrastructure like this is precisely one of those things where spending our money is a good idea - the results tend to help both the people and the economy after all. Infrastructure that is actually going to be used is quite different to certain projects that follow "paint it purple policy" which also generates lots of employment and economic cycles but without any real output (or what's worse, output that only benefits one person).

Edited December 8, 2022 by icn

[martin_wynne]

34 minutes ago, icn said:

Ah but you see, you didn't tell us: where does that money come from in the first place? Taxes you say? If you'd charged lower taxes, then the citizens would've had more money, and spent it on other things,

 

What other things? A larger house? A bigger car? An extra holiday? Or maybe they would all agree to club together and build a new railway or a new hospital? Fat chance, despite moaning about not having one.

 

Martin.

[lmsforever]

On 07/12/2022 at 16:12, woodenhead said:

But for how long I wonder - those trains are ageing Mk3s with a brute of a loco up front or BR era units.

 

Got to wonder how long before IEPs make an entrance with batteries for the start and end of the journies to reduce emissions and noise at the terminii

 Chiltern are a franchise that provides its passengers an excellent service and will move with the times when required and the passenger demand will rise\ If we get IEP,s  so be it at least the service will remain.

[woodenhead]

11 minutes ago, lmsforever said:

 Chiltern are a franchise that provides its passengers an excellent service and will move with the times when required and the passenger demand will rise\ If we get IEP,s  so be it at least the service will remain.

Chiltern operate a management contract on behalf of HM Governement for a fixed fee, all revenue goes now to the exchequer.

 

They will provide the service deemed suitable by the Government.

[boxbrownie]

17 hours ago, woodenhead said:

 

 

They will provide the service deemed suitable by the Government.

Or……attempt to 😉

[Bernard Lamb]

On 07/12/2022 at 15:26, JeffP said:

Pete: I think you misunderstood me.

I do both understand and accept the reasoning for the line as it being constructed.

My comment was referring to the fact that the construction is putting money into businesses as far afield as Telford, but can't see that aspect benefitting the north at present...or ever, the way things are going.

And we do need jobs. And investment.

In my town, with it's rail making plant and rod mill, they SHOULD get contracts, but elsewhere?

But HS2 is also about training people for the future. We have yet to see the benefit of that.

Young folk from your area and all points further north are welcome to apply for jobs.

Some of these jobs are not what people would think are directly rail related.

We do Airbnb and it is surprising to find just what jobs people actually do when subcontracting to HS2 and other railway schems. They come from all over the country and presumably take most of their salary home to spend in the local economy.

Bernard 

[62613]

On 07/12/2022 at 16:03, lmsforever said:

Lucky for people in the Aylesbury Thame area we have the Chiltern line to Brum a good fast service  in comfortable stock and its reliable, Haddenham can be reached by bus easily and the good thing is a short walk and you are in New St and trains everywhere.We watch the HS2 works with interest but I think that not many will use it as we wont want to go into London only to pass where we started from but if the cuts to services on the southern WCML take place we will be inconvienced ,Now we can  join a fast express to the north at Milton Keynes  Central and enjoy a comfortable journey without the hassles of London ,stopping these trains will be a backward step.Extending a high speeed line beyond Brum is a debatable thing as will the money be available for this work, any govt will be short of cash and have to make hard decisions on what to spend available moneys on plus the actions of a certain group of people are making rail travel impossible and putting people off for good.The works around here dont seem to be changing much and we await the start of bridge work and tunnelling plus a very long viaduct behind Aylesbury.

Which cuts? The idea is to take trains which don't at the moment stop anywhere south of Birmingham/Crewe/Stoke, except MK, off the existing lines and  allow more services which DO stop south of there, e.g., to/from Trent Valley stations, to be expanded; the existing all stations Brum - Euston trains would also continue, I would think. There would also be more room for freight services. Expanding services from say, hourly to half - hourly is not a cut, in anyone's language!

[62613]

18 hours ago, icn said:

Ah but you see, you didn't tell us: where does that money come from in the first place? Taxes you say? If you'd charged lower taxes, then the citizens would've had more money, and spent it on other things, hence pumping the same money back into the economy (and back into those cycles you reference, and taxes too), just via a different path.

 

I suspect that this is all a bit beyond the scope of the HS2 discussions though. But lest I be derided as one of those free market extremists, let me say that I do think that public infrastructure like this is precisely one of those things where spending our money is a good idea - the results tend to help both the people and the economy after all. Infrastructure that is actually going to be used is quite different to certain projects that follow "paint it purple policy" which also generates lots of employment and economic cycles but without any real output (or what's worse, output that only benefits one person).

There's the fallacy. It's not coming from taxes, which don't actually pay for anything except the interest on government borrowing, and the loan premiums when they become due. See my comment from about three days ago.

[boxbrownie]

24 minutes ago, Bernard Lamb said:

But HS2 is also about training people for the future. We have yet to see the benefit of that.

Young folk from your area and all points further north are welcome to apply for jobs.

Some of these jobs are not what people would think are directly rail related.

We do Airbnb and it is surprising to find just what jobs people actually do when subcontracting to HS2 and other railway schems. They come from all over the country and presumably take most of their salary home to spend in the local economy.

Bernard 

That’s one hell’ava YTS scheme 😁

[martin_wynne]

HS2 is big, but so is this:

 

 

 

[icn]

On 09/12/2022 at 11:24, 62613 said:

There's the fallacy. It's not coming from taxes, which don't actually pay for anything except the interest on government borrowing, and the loan premiums when they become due. See my comment from about three days ago.

Ah this one:

Fair enough, so it's a standalone company. No direct payments. That doesn't mean there's no cost - a loan guarantee is a risk, and one that the market should price in to the cost of loans to the government. To be fair such costs are unlikely to make themselves particularly visible (relatively speaking), but that doesn't mean they don't exist.

 

Oh, but apparently that's not the whole story: the government tells me HS2 Ltd. is funded by grant aid, and HS2 themselves suggest there's a lot of government money being paid. Whether the money is coming directly from taxes, or loans whose interest is being paid by taxes, is not particularly important (more loans means more interest) - either way it's taxes at the end of it.

 

[martin_wynne]

4 hours ago, icn said:

either way it's taxes at the end of it.

 

Are taxes a bad thing?

 

[Mark Saunders]

19 minutes ago, martin_wynne said:

 

Are taxes a bad thing?

 

They must be really terrible as the numbers of really wealthy people avoid paying them or find ways to avoid and some even claim to live somewhere else!

 

Taxes are only really paid in full by little people!