Could Cancelling HS2 Work for Sunak?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 27 вер 2023
- The first 1,000 people to use my link will get a 1 month free trial of Skillshare: skl.sh/tldrnewseu09231
The High Speed 2 rail project, over-budget and plagued by delays, faces yet another cancellation. But, now that the entire project is projected to cost more than £100bn, is there even any point in cancelling? What would cancelling HS2 do for Rishi Sunak and the Conservative Party?
🎞 TikTok: / tldrnews
💡 Got a Topic Suggestion? - forms.gle/mahEFmsW1yGTNEYXA
Support TLDR on Patreon: / tldrnews
Donate by PayPal: tldrnews.co.uk/funding
Our mission is to explain news and politics in an impartial, efficient, and accessible way, balancing import and interest while fostering independent thought.
TLDR is a completely independent & privately owned media company that's not afraid to tackle the issues we think are most important. The channel is run by a small group of young people, with us hoping to pass on our enthusiasm for politics to other young people. We are primarily fan sourced with most of our funding coming from donations and ad revenue. No shady corporations, no one telling us what to say. We can't wait to grow further and help more people get informed. Help support us by subscribing, engaging and sharing. Thanks!
Having lived in the Netherlands, it's shameful how the UK treats public transport investment!
I just travelled back from working and travelling around Netherlands, Luxembourg and Germany.
Local and national transport here in the UK is truly am embarrassment compared to our neighbours.
Seems to be an anglosphere thing.
It’s mostly due to the cost and how long the construction is taking. It is an obscene amount of money that won’t see anywhere near the kind of economic benefits it cost to build
Cost sunk fallacy, ever heard about it?
I visited my cousin in Amsterdam last year, she was telling me how a new line in Amsterdam was very controversial because of its price tag at $2bil and I told her that the Elizabeth line cost $25bil and she was shocked saying I wouldn’t support a line that expensive.
I say that because most European countries have smaller scale transport carrying a much smaller commute population while also having relatively easier to meet safety and environmental (as in protections of the environment and historical sites) compared to the uk.
HS2 is still a great idea and it baffles me that so many voters continue to buy into the “investment is too expensive” nonsense that’s got us into the mess we’re in today.
Yeah, and also it's "funny" how nodoby ever watched how much car infrastructure costs us, but the moment a train project goes slightly over budget, everyone start hating on it.
More so when it's up ere in the north that NEEDS it.
@@no_name4796 Slightly over budget ? 32bn to may 100 bn may even more is a 300% increase 😂
@@blablup1214 all of which is quite insignificant given the length of time it’s displaced over. We’re talking a minimum of 25 years for construction completion. £4billion a year, which for an economy the size of the UK’s is pretty small (just look at the covid PPE losses ~£15 billion at the last count). The savings should then pay for it surprisingly quickly too.
@@blablup1214it would have cost 32 bn it had been built between 2010 and 2017. That it wasn't is a governmental decision, because from an engineering and construction perspective the project's not exactly groundbreaking.
That would sum up 13 years of Tory governance pretty well.
Yeah keep siphoning the money and keep it going indefinitely, rhe golden goose of hot potatoes going forward
tory and labour
@@xelthiavice4276 If you think Labour is responsible for the past 13 years of government, I have a bridge to sell you
I don't think this is necessarily the Tories' fault completely.
Inflation in the construction industry has gone up a lot after the pandemic. Furthermore, I think part of the problem with HS2 is that there is just way too many red tape and regulations which make the construction more costly.
A whole chunk of the money includes environmental mitigation schemes like forest replanting or needing to tunnel through the Chilterns to keep the nimbys happy.
And yes, nimbyism is a problem in the UK that is starting to really cost economic progress in this country.
DUP helped
As Spain extends its magnificent high speed rail system, it is also winning export contracts to build high speed lines in the middle east and elsewhere. Imagine ANY British engineering company trying to bid for high speed rail contracts overseas? British manufacturing and infrastructure projects have become an absolute joke.
Tbf we do have companies that have won infrastructure projects outside the UK. IIRC a couple of years ago Bombardier in the UK won a contract for the monorail in Cairo. Though I've not kept tabs on it since.
Bombardier is not British@@Wozza365
We actually export a lot of related tech and equipment and skills, we just don't use it all properly ourselves.
Theres actually quite a few companies especially in Egypt and Turkey, as well as the city's renown for consultancy/finance
@@BesthinktwiceFrench here, between Brexit and the lack of connections from London, the tunnel is pretty widely seen as a failure. Ticket prices are through the roof, for an admitted good service... but just way too expensive.
Also, eurotunnel bonds are a financial failure for everybody who invested in them x). Either ways, compared to the other french international rail connexions, it's already not the best one, and it's not looking like it will improve anywhere...
Glad to see "Levelling up" is going so well.
They can’t without cheat codes, it seems.
Should have just called it levelling, flattened
Another major positive for HS2 is it would help increase the industrial cargo capacity via rail reducing the number of trucks needed on the road between select sites. It's not just Passenger rail lines that it would improve.
A number of MPs are pushing for HS2 to be completed but also to be reduced to only a freight line thus saving a lot of money because you only need to build the tracks for a much lower train speed and thus safety
That's even mor idiotic. High speed lines are expensive because they need to be build well enough to support well high speeds.
Freight does not need that and the extra cost would be completely wasted on them
@@QALibrary The problem is that just pushes the problem further down the line, as each lines would eventually hit the bottleneck of both sets of rails full of trains. Remember there's a high cost to building rail today due to the cost of land, compared to when rails were much cheaper 100 years ago, imagine the cost to buy out property owner in another 50 years when we run out of rail.
If you have faster trains, then the old rails can be changed to freight and put more trains on the fast rail. Which will move the bottleneck further down the line. Even Japan, one of the countries most well known for trains, are over budget 2 - 4x the price when it comes to new lines, it's just that the public are happier about trains than we are. I do think there's too much London centric trains though, more lines being built in the north UK should be cheaper to make as the land cost is probably less, not sure that land owners would be cheap to buy out though. Remember part of why the London Underground exists is because it was too expensive to buy property from the owners.
@@sirati9770 Freight would be used on the old lines not the high speed rails. The issue is current high speed and freight use the same lines. Having high speed on their own would increase the capacity on the older lines. No one is proposing using the high speed lines for freight.
Nonsense
Britain needs better, faster and CHEAPER trains.
A project that would reshape the nation like this isn’t something you can be stingy about. It’s a matter of state and should be independent of who’s in power.
The reason I'm against this, is because of the cost to benefit ratio. It will cost a LOT, but only provide a little benefit to ordinary people. Mostly it will benefit rich Tories, which is why the conservative wanted it so much.
Don't have to be stingy but don't have to be dumb. As some have said, remaining costs could be cut in half if it was just "very fast" not "super fast", and if the main aim is to free capacity, the 10mins difference is immaterial.
An estimated 100bn that can potentially still rise is really a huge sum for this few lines.
The benifit of beeing a little faster AFTER 2040 is also not that huge.
Imagine what you could do with this huge amount of money....
I also doubt that trainline will get cheaper because of this construction project.
@@blablup1214 Tell me you didn’t watch the video without telling me you didn’t watch the video. Also stop buying into the false dichotomy that it’s HS2 or something else. We’re underinvesting *everywhere* and there’s no need for it.
By nation ,you just mean England, yes?
Cancelling it will be a disaster for the country and add massive costs to the project when it gets reinstated by any future pm.
Why would it be a disaster, please tell me how huge swathes of the UK would have benefited, such as Wales, the South, the South East, the South West, East Anglia, Lincolnshire and all the East Coast, and Scotland seeing as all our taxes are paying for it?
@@oorya1780 YOU HAVE TO INVEST AND DO IT BIT BY BIT YOU MORON, HOW IS CONNECTING THE 3 BIGGEST CITIES NOT IMPORTANT?
and sunak couldn't give a toss about future PMs struggling, he won't be around
how much of that 100 billion max is already spend? :)
we had the covid crisis, sudden rise of material cost,
ukraine war with sudden spikes in energy costs..
en the followed inflating, pushing everything up 10%, or even more in about a year..
Inflation is about the calm down,
we reorganised our gas to be less dependent on russian gas.. so there should be calmer economic water ahead now to continue big infrastructure projects..
the main issue now is that the higher intrest rates make gov debt also more expensive, especially if it grows instead of falls.. since old debt is for big part an fixed long term low interest rate, while new debt of course is payed in full actual interest rates..
i wonder why he need to actually totally cancel the leg, instead of just saying, we limit first to the part from london... once that is finished, you can still continue as planned or not, what do i miss? why would he need to totally decide to really cancel it NOW?
@@oorya1780 Because the plans are that, eventually, HS2 would be expanded further into northern England and into Scotland, and likely at a future date also into wales. For high speed rail to connect the UK in the future the heart of said high speed rail needs to… you know… actually be built
I was against HS2 in the first place but to scrap it now would be crazy, there are so many people and companies tied up in the work, you'd have to pay all of their contracts off. The whole thing would have been for nothing and it would serve as a warning to investors going forward that the UK can't be trusted to complete its infrastructure projects.
Far better now to learn from the experience for future endeavours imo.
Learn? Finished or not, I doubt many lessons will be learned considering big infrastructure projects in the UK.
The biggest expense in large scale rail construction is always land acquisition, especially in built up areas. Selling off the land after you have bulldozed all the expensive buildings previously stood thereupon does not make financial sense. Pausing the project to rethink from where to where exactly the line should run could make sense, but scrapping HS2 entirely does not.
Maybe redesign to optimize reduce cost and lower the speed to 300-250 kmp/h will be beneficial
Luddites from the UK have observed HS2 is getting built successfully. This is disturbing them and causing a mental breakdown.
It has taken 4 of the biggest main contractors in the UK working together to do this so far. Stage 1 of the project is split into 4400 parts, each with separate models and contracts with multiple suppliers and designers. We are talking about over 10 thousand contracts in each leg of HS2.
Then we have the billions invested in expectation of HS2 coming to these cities.
Cancelling it will waste so much money and screw over so many people that it should be political suicide to suggest it.
British project: HS2, 225 km, 2017-> 2029-2033? £100bn ? Nobody knows.. Meanwhile in neighbour France, HST TGV Paris-Bordeaux, last leg Poitiers-Bordeaux, 340 km: January 2012: start of work.
July 6, 2015: end of civil engineering works, *3.5 years: ahead of schedule.* (500 heavy works (24 viaducts), 3 million tons ballast, 1.1million tons of concrete sleepers, 13,000 catenary supports)
July 25, 2016: first circulation tests of a TGV train.
July 2, 2017: commissioning, *ahead of schedule.* (planned : December 2017)
Cost 7.8 Billion euros, 22.9million per km.
- TGV travel Paris-Bordeaux (575 km), 3 October 2023, departure Paris 9:04am - arrival Bordeaux 11:14am, travel time 2hr10 mins. Best price at 25 euros.
- French TGV: 1st HST line in Europe Paris-Lyon (427 km) opened 1981 + world speed records on rails 1981: 380 kph. 1990: 515 kph. 2007: 574 kph.
Why is the French project so much more efficient than the English one? Is the geography more favorable? Hard to imagine the contractors are that much better...
@@mmmhorsesteaks red tape restrictions and all the other useless things projects have to go though tones of paper work no one reads
@@azeria1 as opposed to France?? They are renowned for their bureaucracy...
@@mmmhorsesteaks The French are probably used to the bureaucracy by now, the English built most of their rails when there was fewer laws. Also the French keep things in the country, ever since Thatcher there's been a mass engineer exodus of the UK since we have moved to a service country where people are held to higher esteem if you're a banker than an engineer. Just look at the disdain people have on electricians, plumbers and mechanics, a far cry from when the UK were engineers of the world like Brunel (just try to find a living engineer whose a knight or dame). The problem is to gain back all that talent will probably require a few decades, conservatives solution is to outsource the problem to another company and sometimes not even british companies so that even failures can be learnt, but by multinational companies that don't benefit the UK.
@@mmmhorsesteaks French built in 1981 the true first HST line in Europe (world speed records on rails 1981: 380 kph.) Since they have piled up a high know-how in building HSTs. UK has zero knowledge in building HSTs (300 kph+). In 1998 HS1 line was built using French LGV high-speed line technology, and HS1 trains were built using proven technology from French TGV trains.
Thats not zero risk, it is shared risk contracts. On a project this big, that is a smart move and generally works to keep cost down.
HS2 is now designed to be mostly underground for environmental reasons as well as land buying struggles. HS2 is also being used as a flagship project for digital construction in the UK. Cancelling HS2 will just make us look incompetent in the world today.
Yeah we may as well have band aid in africa for money for England at this point🤣
Lol...Risk mitigation is the number one driver of costs...this is pretty clear to me working at a large private company. Basically every decision made is designed to minimize risk no matter the cost. It basically freezes the company in place.
With brexit the world already is
@@DanielBrotherston Risk management is a big part of what contractors do. As a public civil work project this should be on shared risk NEC contracts. 60% shared risk on the contractor sounds good when putting the project forward, but never works out better as the government keep making changes, which means the 60% of the risk resets all the time and they don't actually lower any risk.
No, Brexit pretty much did that already.
Britain could afford HS2 when it began, now that they imposed economic santions on themselves they can't. The Tories will make every excuse as to why it's cancelled, except admitting tthey've broke the country
Wild to think they sold this project so confidently in 2012 just to be the ones criticising it a decade later. Hell will freeze over before the Conservatives follow through on something meaningful.
I was just thinking the trains in the UK are TOO reliable, cheap and helpful! Thank you Sunak!
💀💀
Why do other places in Europe and most of China have high speed rail, but we can't finish one project? Just get on with it, it's been ages already.
Got Brexit done 🤣
a joke of a country
maybe to ambitious at first?
@@michan542Connecting three major cities that are less than 200 miles apart is not overly ambitious. You have to be very incompetent, or very corrupt, to make such a feasible project fail AFTER you spend billions in public funds.
To be fair, to be fair, while incompetence and corruption have played a part, High Speed Rail is /not/that easy to create in the first place especialy in a small dansely packed coutry. And a country that has little experience with such project. The economy going down the toilet due to badly handled Brexit and two to three years COVID simulatenously haven't helped either
*sigh* I've said this before. Back in the 60's, Japan started the Shinkansen, a high speed rail that is still world leading. The UK at the same time, rather than building a new rail, decided to build something that would go faster on the existing track, the APT or Advanced Passenger Train. The success of this is seen in a bad light, but the reality the findings were passed onto the Italians and actually made the system work. Meanwhile, as a stopgap, we had the HST 125. (look up Age of the Train for the wonderful figurehead of the advertisement) This arguably was a success, except in retrospect. It was meant to be a stopgap, a 50yr stopgap. The APT project was brushed away due to a bad launch.
Cancelling the rest of HS2 is just passing the buck again for another generation. We tried to have short term savings with the APT running on existing track, and now we're cancelling HS2 as its costing too much and taking too long to even make plans, let alone building, when we all know, in the next 50yrs, we'll be upset with the existing system and complaining about the last generation not looking ahead
APT by the time it left service was working well. If anything it was held back by the lack of funds needed to upgrade the signalling to an in-cab system that would allow the APTs to go as fast as they were capable of going (From what I understand, UK railways are STILL waiting for that technology upgrade). The initial technical kinks of the APT were ironed out and remaining issues would be eliminated in any future "APT2".
In the end it was another example of just how much the Tories hated the railways. In 1988 British Rail emerged into profitability for the first time since its inception, and instead of consolidating its success, the Tories set in motion plans to privatise it for a quick buck.
TLDR: Kicking the can
and the Japanese had even worse terrain to work with
@@CountScarlioni APT was late and over budget. At a time when the public was tired of writing blank cheques to failing industries when the economy was struggling, it’s common sense to cut your losses
And thats why HS2 is so much over budget. The UK cancels these projects constantly. And as such never allows for the industry and instutions to dveelop and learn the necessary skills. France, Japan, Italy. These nations are not magically better at rail projects. They are good because they have actually build rail for the past couple decades.
I feel like it should be mentioned that the Crossrail project is soon predicted to breakeven (late 2023-2024), and the core section only opened last year. That was a costly rail project as well. It's proof that investing in these high value rail projects actually will be profitable and grow the economy.
The core Anglosphere's incapability to make HSR is fascinating, bar HS1, no English super dominant country has currently functioning HSR
That is surprisingly true.
The UK's case is somewhat unique based on its own history. Britain had more route miles of Railway by 1850 than most of the rest of the world put together. By 1900 the network was so dense that there was barely a village left in the country that wasn't within a couple of miles of a station, and the whole system was highly effective. Trunk routes were optimised for speed and the UK had more high speed services than any other developed nation.
Roll on 1950 and the situation was very different. The system was run ragged by war, undercut by road transport and chronically underfunded. Britain found it had too much rail, not too little. About the only part of the system that did perform well at the time were the express routes. It was all the branches and secondary lines that were insatiable money pits. The national sense was one of being embarrassed by the railways. They looked like Victorian dinosaurs whilst cars and planes were the future. All the major infrastructure projects were in new road building. British Rail did what it could with modernisation on relatively meagre finances but the government and public alike pretty much saw the railways as doomed relics of a passed era that were not worth investment. The idea of building new lines when already choked by useless old ones was unthinkable.
So for the rest of the 20th century whilst other nations turned their eye to optimisation of the railways, the British became preoccupied with managed decline and downsizing. As said, the express routes were good enough already with 125mph line speeds and decent rolling stock. Britain's a relatively small place so that means most of the population lived within a few travel hours of London. Nothing could keep up with a TGV, but there was no commercial demand for a train to do so (as the unfair failure of the APT helped demonstrate).
To this day, HS2 critics say the current system is good enough (it isn't) and high speed rail is a pointless vanity project (it isn't). There's still a deep seated pessimism over Rail in the UK that we developed generations ago and has not dispersed. It's got a cultural identity as third class form of transportation and its situation seems to be permanently desperate. To build a great high speed network you need a degree of pride and belief in Rail...and the UK has neither. A successful HS2 _might_ give us that, and a spur to build even more - but if the Tories get their way, it's going to end up a joke train.
@@Besthinktwice True enough, but HS2 is a product of neoliberalism. Back in the 20th century when the UK was still a social democracy, it wouldn't touch HSR with a barge pole.
Because us Anglosphere nations only like cars
@@kiwikemistyep, don't know about NZ or Australia but the UK and US is filled with individualistic, selfish, short-sighted, f-u-got-mine NIMBYs
Scapping it for inheritance tax.
which there isn't really a point in scrapping for what i can see.
Theres a massive loophole that anyone can use.
Just give ya money to ya kids before you die.
The short-sightedness of governments is infuriating. Then I remember that if governments weren't, they'd be voted out. So people have really only got themselves to blame
The media, which informs 'the public', can be considered to be (at least partly) to blame due to hiding and/or bending important information. They at least do so in Turkey, USA, Russia etc.
@@Apollorion They really don't. They are telling everything about HS2 but people really try not the hear the capacity improvement reason so they can shit on HS2.
@@Mgameing123 ? Who's the "they" that "really don't" and what do they not?
And my comment wasn't HS2 specific. I just wanted to attend people to not too blindly trust their media when judging their governments; be more critical.
after living in Asia and seeing how amazing their trains are across entire countries, it would be very upsetting if we give up on connecting ours. mobility would be a great way to decentralize the UK economy from London and spread it around the entire nation making people actually want to move to other more affordable parts of the country.
Surely better train links is more beneficial to the economy than letting all the money already spent go down the drain? As someone who reasonably frequently travels from Manchester to Cambridge, I see HS2 as potentially making the via London route faster and more amenable. I know it'll be a while before it can be used, but I think it's the right option for long-term growth.
That would make me so happy that my taxes will go to help you get to London a few minutes quicker, however the time it takes me to get from Cleethorpes to London will not change unless LNER put in a direct service that we used to have years ago. In fact sometimes it is almost impossible to get to London by train as Transpennine Express are so sh!t and cancel many trains.
Personally as a mancunian hs2 needs to happen if the north south divide is to be solved (at least to begin solving it), anyone against hs2 being completed at this stage is simply a supporter of abandoning the parts of the uk that arent london
I live in the East of England and pay my taxes, please tell me how any part of HS2 even to Manchester will benefit me. Our rail services are crap so why should my taxes go to help you get to London a few minutes quicker.
@@oorya1780this is clearly satire as no one surely has this dumb individualist thinking and yet I’m replying. Your taxes go to the treasury to fund public services/investments. HS2 will benefit millions of people and free up capacity on so many lines. I don’t know where in the east of England you live but surely you’re not suggesting that because a project may not directly affect some people’s train timetables it should be abandoned? I assume you invest in a pension, how do you expect that to increase if as a country we don’t invest in projects which return an economic output? If people like you made decisions we’d had no hope competing in a globalised world and all be living in medieval villages
@@oorya1780 first of all it'd hardly be a few minutes, HS2 is cutting travel times by nearly an hour. Secondly considering that HS2 being completed is the base line needed for improved rail service being delivered to the east of England with northern powerhouse rail, it would undoubtedly help you too
@@koyba3747 Firstly the section to Leeds has been scrapped and re-instating it would likely take decades so unlikely to be built in my time. Secondly powerhouse rail has been just about shelved and that was never planned to get to the East of England let alone the rest of the UK such as Wales, the South East, The South, The South West, East Anglia.
As for cutting times by nearly an hour, it might have been done for a trip from Leeds to Kings Cross but you will have to add about another half hour to get from Old Oak Common.
You can't expect major infrastructure projects like this to be cheap. Crossrail, a line that just serves London and the surrounding area (although with the obvious caveat that a greater proportion of it is underground than HS2) cost £19 bn. I was originally against HS2, but now that construction has started and billions of pounds have been spent, I hope we get some sort of railway at the end of it.
Yes, and remember how everyone said Crossrail was a shambles and should be cancelled. Where are all those people now? Do they still think it was a failure and not worth doing? The line is incredibly popular and everyone I've spoken to (including myself) loves it.
Majority of Crossrail's cost is the central london tunnels
The outside tunnels like the redding section is using existing local tracks (hence requirement for trains to use 3 types of signal systems)
Crossrail had a ridiculous cost because of how deep the tunnels were and the topography, but it was done relatively quickly even though it cost a ridiculous amount of money. And it also benefitted the country’s economic base-London. HS2 is going to go from the economic center in London, to areas that haven’t seen economic development since the Industrial Revolution. It just doesn’t make economic sense to spend $140 bn that will never be recovered.
@@Da__goat Hang on bruv. You know what kicked off the industrial revolution in these areas? Railways. When a railway was built economic investment happened, Look at my town hartlepool for example, Before the railways, small fishing village, once they turned up boomed into a industrial hub untill steam died...
Sunak just wants to maintain the north-south wealth gap.
He just desperate to free up some money to take cut taxes for the wealthy. Anything that can be cut to do that over the next 6 months is going to be cut.
The north doesn’t need new trains to London. They need better connections with other cities in the region and cancelling HS2 will free capital to upgrade regional railways
@@chrisj9700 Try need both. I travel from London to NorthWest England a lot. There are not enough trains on this route.
@@chrisj9700It wouldn't free up money as they wouldn't invest in any trains if they can't finish HS2
On the other hand he's closing the gap between the global north and global south 🤣
Scrap this would be a massive mistake that will only be felt in coming decades. There should have been a line like this since the late 90s connecting London, Birmingham, Manchester, Newcastle and Glasgow. It would be the backbone of transportation for the island for a century or more.
How many billionaires have been created during its construction. How many mps relatives have shares in the companies building it . We will never know.
Scrapping the hs2 will be a great threat for public transportation. Which technically cause £ to fall off in the long run. If you analysis properly..!!
This mostly slower the development of Scots. If we need to see equal development over-all uk. Scrapping hs2 will make round tripping to scot will be a time consuming. Scot is having most income by a family holiday visits or tourists. I surely oppos the scrapping of hs2 by sunak. Peps/lads have to oppose this as well.
Having worked on HS2 the gross incompetance and waste of money at every level above the site workers was shocking. Our work could have been done for a quarter of the cost without needless requests and constraints placed on us. It was a feeding frenzy for public money.
As I suspected
This entire project was sold to the public on the principle of 'leveling up the north'. But notice how the only bits being cancelled are those in the north. Policy in the UK is so London centric its ridiculous. If they had started building the northern portion first, you can sure as hell bet they wouldn't be considering cancelling the London leg to save on costs. And all of this to save 20 minutes on a journey. Scrap the whole damn thing, modernize the Manchester to Leeds line, and give Leeds a tram/light rail system. Way better use of the money.
No, it is not "all to save 20 minutes". You clearly didn't listen to the introduction of this video where he talked about freeing up capacity. Watch it again.
@@mdhazeldine Watched it. Having travelled on the West Coast mainline many many times, I can say it's fine. Busy at rush hour but so is every line. Only gets that busy when you hit Milton Keynes too. Mostly with London commuters. Just because I don't accept his premise, doesn't mean I didn't listen.
The explanation for why HS2 was planned at the beginning of this video is probably the clearest and easily understandable explanation I have seen on the matter. It shows exactly why the line is in theory a good idea. I think one of HS2's biggest issues is it's name, because everyone gets so fixated on the speed aspect, and it is therefore understandable why so many people have the opinion of 'why should we spend all these billions of pounds just so we can get from London to Birmingham 20 minutes quicker' without really understanding what the project is about.
I don't often use the trains, but when I do I'm always surprised by how busy they are, and my biggest gear grind is that in the evenings and on Sundays those 'express' trains suddenly take twice as long (eg London to MK that normally takes 35 minutes suddenly takes 70).
That millions of people are still going to vote Tory is utterly baffling to me.
You know Labour also voted massively in favour for this… more than the conservatives
@@9n3- Maybe, but they're still a better choice than what we've had for the last 14 years. Even if they're not great, I'd rather have Labour than another 5 years of Tory rule.
@@Pemmont107 personally, I like reforms economics so they’ll be getting my vote. I don’t care for social ideas at all if you get me (idc what they say about x group or y group). Voted Tory last time but they’re not even conservatives anymore. They’re globalists
@@Pemmont107 I'm no fan of the Tories but do you mean the Labour Party whose leader lied and took us into an illegal war causing the deaths of hundreds of British soldiers and hundreds of thousands of innocent people and also led to the rise of the Islamic State that went around cutting the heads off innocent people plus opening our doors to millions of Eastern Europeans whilst other EU countries delayed their free movement, or the one eyed leader that srapped the 10% tax rate doubling the tax paid by the lowest paid, robbed our pensions and sold our gold off at its lowest rate?
Eh, the Tories will just continue demonising Albanians in dinghys and whatever "wokeism" is meant to be today, and they'll mobilise the gammon just fine.
Cancelling H2 won't be a popular move as everyone will look at it as 'All that wasted money, thanks for nothing' continue to build it and you will get 'Look at how much it's costing' its a no win scenario. It's worth building it purely for the fast connecting service from South to Midlands to North.
Just burn that H2 & create H2O i.e. water: the most important molecule for life on Earth.
"It's worth building it purely for the fast connecting service from South to Midlands to North."
And how does that benefit people living in Wales, the South, the South East, the South West, East Anglia, the East of England?
@@oorya1780 That's a bit like saying curing one disease is unfair to people with other diseases.
HS2 is just the perfect symbol of the UK now. Completely behind, a funding disaster and will ultimately collapse.
They keep cutting, the price still keeps going up. Almost like there's something else going on making it so expensive.....
UK is overly centralised, everything is in London and nothing outside.
South East-ised
It’s a bit crazy how high speed rail projects in the English speaking world balloon out of control whereas comparable projects in places such as France or Japan don’t seem to have that problem. Why is that?
Our privatised model is the problem. I have family that work on government construction contracts and they basically pay the tea boy 30k. These companies pull an absolute blinder and rip the piss.
Because of the chronic short term decision making that's baked into our system...
You cannot plan infra when the gov changes it's mind continuously
The Tory Chums factor.
While Italy is planning the longest suspended bridge in the world to link an island with a 8 line wide road and dual railway, the UK is thinking about cancelling a train line on land....
tbf, that bridge in Italy has been in a similar political spiral for decades and has never broken ground on the project.
@@Wozza365 The big difference is that they do not plan to stop at the middle of the project, they have also built tunnels much more complex and expensive and know that in the end the benefits vastly outweigh the costs.
Bad example. The Messina straights bridge keeps on getting deferred..
HSR and rail infra in Italy would be a good example to follow. They have built a core spine route similar to HS2 and it's a roaring success and also over last 40 years has been slowly upgrading existing lines putting in diversions etc
The UK is really collapsing since Brexit. Team Nigel/Boris/Putin/Trump should be really happy
It's been collapsing since red tory blair decided to continue were Margaret Thatcher left off. So come next election we have red tory or blue tory 🤔 I'll be voting green for change.
Im happy... who even cares,
ahhh yes here we have the "mah brxit" tard lol
@@Brazen1234🛎 end
@@Brazen1234 those with jobs and wanting a future I would suppose
I supported HS2 in its original form, and I thought it was still worth it even after the Leeds cancellation. But if they cancel the Manchester section too then I honestly don't see the benefit of continuing with it in such a watered-down, largely pointless form. All the more a slap to the face for the North since a big part of the sales pitch for the project was to help the North. To supposedly improve connections in the north and to "level up" the north of the country. If it does go ahead in its current shambolic form (without anything past Birmingham), it will simply be another monument to northern neglect and government indifference (or rather disdain).
Edit: I also doubt that the cost savings will be that significant in the larger picture of the project. Once all of the logistics, personnel, equipment, and what have you have been assembled and are operating, a significant amount of the cost has already been committed. Setting up and shutting down said projects/operations is where a significant amount of time, effort, and of course, money, is spent. This is why it's almost always better to just complete a large infrastructure project in one continuous process, with one step leading directly on from another, rather than stopping and starting. So even from a purely financial perspective, would it be worth it to save some money on the northern leg of the line, making the entire project all but impotent, whilst simultaneously still having to fork out a lion's share of the cost?
the supposed "Cost savings" from the cutbacks don't exist.
Heck they just make it MORE expensive since every extra year of construction is an extra year of prices going up atleast 2%.
It would be even more useless if the rumoured cancellation of the parts into central London and into central Birmingham actually happened. Then it would literally just be a train outside of London to outside of Birmingham, and you'd have to jump on a regular commuter train at both ends to get anywhere, basically making any speed benefits redundant.
The contracts for the section being considered for cancellation have not been given yet, so what you describe would not be an issue. For Euston though, it absolutely would.
My guess is they will do the same thing they did to the Leeds leg. They will indefinitely pause construction, but keep the land purchases so that when in future another government can fairly easily restart the project.
Maybe they should have started at the northern end if they truly cared about the north
@@jasongarfitt1147 It would have been far cheaper too. Much of the insane cost overruns have been incurred just getting the line through the home counties - having to pay off nimby councils and landlords whose land is stupidly overinflated in price. By comparison the Northern end is relatively cheap. Cancelling the Leeds section potentially saved as little as 10 billion (although the government claimed it'd be 40 billion but most economists find that estimate to be fanciful).
So they're gonna make sure to waste all the time, money & effort that's been spent rather than just do what needs to get the shit finally done and get something back at least?
Sounds like a great plan 🙄
Correct if I'm wrong, but wasn't it the Propaganda of those who wanted to leave the European Union to be able to invest in the UK and the EU took all the money?
That's probably due to Remainers not psychically projecting enough positive vibes and leading to bad voodoo. /brexiteer
Its far, far too far through, canceling it now is very short term thinking. Not investing in national infrastructure is what got us into this mess.
No, please don't cancel HS2, I like the idea of a shorter trip from where I live to London.
0:55 HS1 does not go to Dover. It goes from Ashford to Canterbury to Margate
Northerners would much prefer better and faster connectivity between major cities.
From Leeds’s for example:
Nottingham is basically impossible.
Birmingham is out of the question
Manchester should take 30 mins with high speed rail but best case is 60mins…there are so many commuters on the Leeds:Manchester line there isn’t space on the train for you until the next one comes!
In France Spain and Italy they have a large hsr network but in Britain we can't even connect 2 cities together. They should not have contracted out everything and should have done it internally
"the investment is too high !" So instead of pouring £100 billion into a rail line, they want to pour £100 billion into nothing ? Weird.
The Government showing once again that the UK isn't a serious country anymore 🙄
I have never wanted HS2 in its current form, but cancelling the London to Birmingham will be an environmental disaster. The amount of work completed has already caused irreparable damage, so it needs to be completed in order that some good may be gained.
In my opinion, the biggest failure of HS2 is, and always was, the failure to create a direct link to HS1 and, therefore, a link to Europe.
I would suggest the environmental disaster has already happened.
@@Beorn. That's what he said. So take your racist flag and disperse.
Agree
@@sueyourself5413 concern for the environment is racist? How, I would love to know how you arrived at that one?do tell..I wait ready to be enlightened
@@sueyourself5413 racist flag….? Wtf?
This is the only Infrastructure project that has run throughout the tories time in power over the last 13 years, it's about 5 times more than a french line (with more of it's length in tunnels) and they are thinking of cancelling it.
Not really no. The modernisation plan of 1955 was also a major infrastructure project started by the tories.
The shit managment of that (with many cutbacks including not electrifying the ECML becaues "kInGs CrOsS rOoF iS tO eXpEnSivE") that eventually lead to the beaching cuts.
@@davidty2006 I was talking about the current tory government as in the last 13 years
A lot of people have got paid millions just in the discussion and ‘planning’ phases. Corrupt to the core. And knew from the track record. This would never be done as originally intended
The tories also have to remember how much money the construction industry has pumped into HS2, new machinery, massively increased hiring, our company build a whole new department just to run HS2 jobs! I don't think they understand what this will do if they start cancelling work... there will be alot of layoffs 😢
The problem is that Britain doesn't have the industry developed for large scale infrastructure projects like some other countries do. So it's taking much longer to organise than normal. But also low level corruption is a problem
We used to have such industry
Guess who killed it? the tories.
@@davidty2006 yep
Yup. Like making thousands unemployed and destroying local economies on the back of those worker redundancies and supply chain deals will naturally make these peopke vote tory.
Or will it ... 🤔
I'm proud to be French today and to share that our SEA high-speed line (HSL) was successfully completed in 2017. This remarkable project began in 2012, concurrently with the HSL BPL, which was also completed in 2017. It's a testament to our commitment and efficiency in infrastructure development. Moreover, we have numerous other projects signed off by the government, either under construction or about to start. In contrast, it's amusing to see the situation in the UK, where the rail system is notably inferior with no high-speed lines. And even when there's an attempt to develop one, it's baffling to see 70% of the project getting canceled. It's quite a stark difference in progress!
Moreover, implementing a high-speed rail system could be immensely beneficial for England, both economically and social development.
even Laos and Indonesia has better trains....what a joke UK is now
The rail fares are insane and the timetable is unreliable already... I have moved on to National Express for intercity trips.
Even if they finish HS2, I wonder how much they will price the ride.
i said this too. £500 a return ticket by the time HS2 is done. Only a rail service to transport the rich. Everyone else will need cars.
Simple: the more the supply, the cheaper the price.
Freight is much more profitable and capacity will be increased
@@MrStruggle0 If ya want cheap trains just go trainhopping on freight wagons.
So does that happen for HSR across rest of Europe? Nope, introducing HSR has massively added capacity and lowered prices in places like Spain and Italy
funny how china can build up infrastructure across a massive country and connect it with high speed rail in a matter of 10 years, but we havent been able to connect 4 cities in the same time. We are a joke of a country
In China, where infrastructure is falling apart often less than a decade after being built (china's tofu dreg projects) and where over saturated high-speed rail lunes have Bankrupted local governments adding to china's current financial problems.
Lines not lunes
Chinese don't get a choice in the decision. The boomers are mad their house prices will drop 30% after rising 1000% over the period they have had it.
they are running well and smooth. you have no idea what you talk about and shows why the west is losing...people of the west suffer
@@olivergould5428
It helps when you're building it across vast stretches of nothing, and that when you do come across someone's property, you can just tell them to fuck off and pay them pennies for it.
It says everything about the state of this country that we can't even build a bloody train line without squabbling.
Maybe get the project drawn up by engineers and people that understand rails, rather than office bureaucrats that know nothing
They should not cancel it, the rail network needs it & it will benifit the country & environment, capitalism is the problem, rail projects potentially while pricey dont get as much criticism as road projects, if you want model shift & support the whole country it should be done (the spiraling costs are unavoidable because capitalism 😅, but once rail projects are done people turn arround on them pretty quick look at Elizabeth line) they are just getting desperate for votes😅
^ The ramblings of a maniac.
Why does everyone have to commute to London? Isn't it much easier and cheaper to create jobs elsewhere?
London is convenient to get to as there is always an express train to there. This makes it a convenient place to have a central office.
Maybe if we had infrastructure to go north maybe
Because UK has one of the most income disparity in the developed world. Remove London and UK would be more comparable to poor US states like Alabama and Mississippi.
London has turned into a giant money sink.
There used to be jobs elsewhere.
Then someone took em all. (Hint she's a tory).
@@arpandas2243 That claim was largely disputed and is a huge twisting of the reality. Most of UK is well above those states you mentioned.
The UK and California battling it out to see who can have the longer and more expensive HSR construction plan.
Ridiculous cost for knocking only 40 minutes off London-Birmingham.
Did you watch the video
@@isnitjustkit still ridiculous.
It was always just another massive infrastructure project only designed to help London. If they actually wanted to invest in the North they would improve the transport links between Leeds, Manchester and Liverpool. It currently takes over an hour to go from Leeds to Manchester despite them only being 40 miles apart. Being able to move easily between the big cities in the North would boost the economy massively but it wont help London so they'll never do it.
But it’s the north! It’s a backwater, move south for a good job
@@ugiswrongas a Londoner. You’re dead wrong and can piss off
@@ugiswrongthe north is not a backwater and most problems it has are as a result of neglect from the southern government. The south is no paradise. What a stupid thing to say
Exactly.
@@Max-ts5mw He was just being sarcastic.
Compare the HS2 Project to the world's first underground public railway, called the Metropolitan Railway. It was built in 1865 and now forms part of London's yellow "Circle Line", an essential part of how the city functions today. At the time of construction, it was woefully overbudget with extensive delays, costing £1 million in 1865 to build. However in 2023 Westminster is contemplating cancelling the whole HS2 railway? Imagine if London didn't build the Underground?
Unfortunately, politicians nowadays only see short term profits because that's what benefits their next election campaign. It's a sad reality that will ruin this country in the long term.
It doesn't help that Sunak is Americanising transport discourse by claiming that the UK is a motorist nation...
Part of the problem is that media focus on faster between London to Birmingham. Very few actually point out about more local services and freight.
Favourite one was a fellow citizen of Birmingham who was against HS2 as didn’t need faster link to London but needed more commuter services in Birmingham.
Had to point out that New Street is full capacity wise and restricted by the tunnels (adding more tunnels would be eye watering) and that by taking the Birmingham to London and future other west coast services from Manchester and North etc out of New Street would free up the needed capacity in New Street for more commuter services.
It is that sort of lack of joined up thinking that is half the problem with the perception of HS2.
I mean, it would be the British thing to do. Cancelling and stepping out of things is kinda you guy’s thing, right?
Time to give another Party a chance instead of the same old Tories or Labour. Please wake up for God's sake.
Sound like a Tory spy to me. Trying to divide the vote.
Kind of a damning indictment of the so-called British Empire that it can't even build a train... like damn.
Thanks for taking to time to explain the actual reason why HS2 is required, it was never about saving journey times but people still think that is the case. We need the Leeds branch added back in and then a "HS3" that then goes East to West and a Branch to the North East and up to Scotland.
Just push the decision back to after the election, let Labour make the choice
That won't work as it would just make business more skeptical about investing in Britain due to flip flopping.
@@inbb510 i agree, but why is a short term PM making long term choices is my point
No point in cancelling when they've spent so much money and time already, plus it will just screw over the north (and Scotland and Wales) by destroying the chances of high speed trains to Glasgow, Edinburgh and Cardiff.
I’ve visited about 20 countries in Europe, and the UK is so far behind most of them. It’s embarrassing.
What an absolute joke we have become, I remember this being talked about years ago and it's still not built... Pathetic.
Beeching did for the Railways back in the '60's.
It's crazy how the government can spunk the money away so easily without ever being held accountable, jail the lot of them and let them rot
I worked on various projects on HS2 sections....loads of H&S bullshit , overstaffed with useless birocracy and supervision...more bosses than actual workers
Hmmm yep sounds like tory managment.
It just baffles me that merely 140 miles of railroad would take ten years to complete.
A lot of British voters will oppose almost any infrastructure project that costs a large amount of money. It seems a lot of the electorate cannot wrap their heads around investing big for long term benefits.
"A lot of British voters will oppose almost any infrastructure project that costs a large amount of money. It seems a lot of the electorate cannot wrap their heads around investing big for long term benefits"
Probably because a lot of the electorate will never see any benefit despite their paying taxes to build it.
absolute eyesore around fradley and lichfield. what a mess...and for what?
The problem is the not in my back yards putting as many road blocks in place they can
We need a Reform UK and Conservative alliance 🇬🇧
Honestly as a northerner its infuriating. And i thibk we cynically saw it coming when the project started in london that it wasnt going to get to manchester or leeds. Should have started connecting leeds and manchester to each other. I travel west-east over the penines and it takes so long that i dont do it as often as I would like
They say that they *may* fund other projects in the the north. I wonder what *MAY* means huh
Cancelling HS2 will just contribute to Britain’s reputation as the basket case of Europe. While other European countries have high speed rail networks that are decades old, Britain can’t even build its first without failure. My assessment of all of this is the utterly disgraceful mismanagement of government funds to a company which is not respecting the mission it was tasked with. With unrealistic expectations set and a nation where innovation is stunted at best, perhaps the best basket case Britain will ever have to be proud of are the Victorian ancestors who demonstrated what innovative engineering is. What a disgrace.
JUST BUILD IT!!!!
This is embarrassing
Victorians: fill the entire country and most of the empire with railways built entirely with spit and chewing gum and act as if its no big deal
Modern UK: Digs a ditch and gives up
Tories were built different back then..
"Hey lets build a railway to this small village and make it economically boom" "Hell yeah"
Scrap it and throw a par-tay with the money saved 👍👍👍
London needs to stop thinking Manchester is 'The North'
Maybe instead of huge vanity projects with grand names, just build a fast line between two closer stations say Manchester to Leeds.
Maybe when that's done you can plan Manchester to Liverpool. Heck in 20 years time you may even decide to connect this high speed network all the way to London.
HS2 is demonstrative of what's wrong with our current politics: large promises with piss poor planning.
Considering that the UK invented trains, the railway system over here is a bit of a joke.
HS2 is a great project replacing a insanely busy rail (the West Coast Main Line) corridor but there needs to better realisation of cost in urban areas with cut and cover, and elevated track.
So that's what the mayoral candidate was refering to when she said nipple high. I didn't understand the expression.
I thought they would have plenty of cash lying around for everything they wanted with all those savings they made by leaving the EU.
Like the NHS, we need an NIS - National Infrastructure Service; a public building service to deliver power, water, internet, roads, rail, air travel, etc infrastructure.
What about all the land that's been grabbed, brought, and stolen!
Explaining the capacity benefit with moving express trains to the high speed line, you completely overlooked the main economical benefit. You can put more freight on the traditional lines. Freight moves at a higher average speed than the local trains but fight for space with the intercity trains.
If our government and country keep pulling out of investments we are going to be screwed and become so much poorer then we already are now. that thought alone scares me.