HS2 - knife edge of continuation or not.. but still countryside torn up

[Top_gun]

I do wonder how much information about HS2's viability is hidden from the public. Time will tell.

I'm not against spending on infrastructure outside London as long it is a self-financing project.

[Top_gun]

So... lets not destroy the natural habitat that makes GB so beautiful, until we actually have to.
If those trees and hedges DO need removing in the next few years, because HS2 gets re approved, then crack on.

But until then, don't spend the money or the resources, the fossil fuels of the diggers and the chainsaws, doing something that might never need doing.

So many people seem to underestimate the importance of trees. They provide us with oxygen, help to remove air pollution, have a cooling effect in urban areas (very important due to climate change), and oter eco considerations such as wildlife.

[Top_gun]

Given you just ignore anything serious, why bother?

Face saving fighting talk. The reality is you never had anything serious to contribute.

[spacein_vader]

I do wonder how much information about HS2's viability is hidden from the public. Time will tell.

I'm not against spending on infrastructure outside London as long it is a self-financing project.

Very little infrastructure is self financing. A motorway doesn't pay for itself (unless a toll road,) but its presence may result in money making its way to the treasury through improved growth in an area for example.

On the other hand not all infrastructure benefits are financial. If that was the only criteria we'd never build hospitals. They don't make money but the improvements to healthcare, longevity and living standards aren't measured on a balance sheet.

[Top_gun]

On the other hand not all infrastructure benefits are financial. If that was the only criteria we'd never build hospitals. They don't make money but the improvements to healthcare, longevity and living standards aren't measured on a balance sheet.

I would imagine spending on building new hospitals would be dependent on KPIs and strong business cases. I've seen situations where hospitals have sold some of their land to rebuild hospitals in the London area , again at no expense to the Treasury.

[spacein_vader]

I would imagine spending on building new hospitals would be dependent on KPIs and strong business cases. I've seen situations where hospitals have sold some of their land to rebuild hospitals in the London area , again at no expense to the Treasury.

Indeed. But those KPIs only concern financial performance in the sense of staying within budget allocated by the department of health. All other KPIs don't have anything to do with money.

They don't make money. Neither do roads, courts, police stations, fire stations or bridges. But we still make more of them.

[Top_gun]

Indeed. But those KPIs only concern financial performance in the sense of staying within budget allocated by the department of health. All other KPIs don't have anything to do with money.

They don't make money. Neither do roads, courts, police stations, fire stations or bridges. But we still make more of them.

KPIs can be anything. For example, there is an indicator to reduce the amount of obesity in a specified area. Or, to reduce the amount of CO2 emissions.

[spacein_vader]

KPIs can be anything. For example, there is an indicator to reduce the amount of obesity in a specified area. Or, to reduce the amount of CO2 emissions.

That's what I said. I'm countering your point that infrastructure projects need to break even at least financially. They aren't judged purely or often even mainly on financial ROI.

[Top_gun]

That's what I said. I'm countering your point that infrastructure projects need to break even at least financially. They aren't judged purely or often even mainly on financial ROI.

Transport infrastructure projects in London are judge mostly on financial indicators. They have to be financially viable due to the amount of required infrastructure in a period of expanding population and finite resources.

[TooNice]

Didnt the Japanese go through all this with the bullet train in the 60's massively overly expensive and controversial. Now it is their crown jewel

I haven't looked into the history, cost etc., but from a passenger perspective, Japan really get their trains service right. They aren't cheap, but neither are trains in the UK, yet they are cleaner, more comfortable, faster, and punctual. And they are also currently expanding it so that it would be possible to go from Tokyo all the way to Sapporo without changing service. It would be the equivalent of having a line that goes from London all the way to Orkney (distance wise, and the fact that they had to build an undersea tunnel since it is on a separate island).

The service won't start before 2030, so it is a long way in the making (in that sense, it is also similar to HS2), but I actually have faith that they won't stray from the deadline by much (based on construction projects that I know of).

Now there may be good reasons why the UK train service is rather lacklustre and you can't seem to trust any deadlines.. but I've often wondered if it wouldn't be better to just outsource rail project management / constructions to Japanese contractors.

[Top_gun]

Now there may be good reasons why the UK train service is rather lacklustre and you can't seem to trust any deadlines.. but I've often wondered if it wouldn't be better to just outsource rail project management / constructions to Japanese contractors.

I think this video tells you all you need to know about HS2.



"Professor Lord May of Oxford is so appalled by the behaviour of HS2 Ltd that he says he would trust few people involved with HS2 to mow his lawn. Then, giving evidence, respected Mancunian economist and chair of the Cities Growth Commission, Jim O’Neill, reveals that the leaders of northern cities are unwilling to listen to the strong evidence that shows it would be far preferable for northern cities to be better connected to each other rather than connected by HS2 to London. House of Lords Ecomonics Affairs Committee: Economic Case for HS2, 13th January 2015"