why all the hate for hs2?
- Thread starter 233
- Start date
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2006
- Posts
- 12,130
I don't think any Government - of any stripe - is going to increase funding of roads, more and more people are recognising that Climate Change is a serious threat.
Public transport is the way to go.
The South West was cut off by rail again this weekend from the rest of the country. This is quite a regular ocurrence, and it wasn't dawlish this time.
Note South West, not south east.
I'm not sure that really supports your point.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-england-50592261
The only part of the North that gets less per head than the southwest is yorks and humber, and that depends where you are starting 'the north' from, which is certainly a debate (my family is originally from North Yorkshire, my wife is from Carlisle).
It does support my point if we take a time machine back to 2016/2017.
Looks like there was some one off spending last year that inflated the North East annual spend according to your more recent article. Either way, I think we can agree that all of the regions get a raw deal in comparison to London? Ironically, investing in large cities and their surrounding towns would actually improve transport in London as businesses\people relocating outside of London would reduce the strain on the existing London network. It's already starting to happen now despite poor investment outside of London.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/feb/14/rising-tide-of-londoners-moving-to-northern-england
It does support my point if we take a time machine back to 2016/2017.
Looks like there was some one off spending last year that inflated the North East annual spend according to your more recent article. Either way, I think we can agree that all of the regions get a raw deal in comparison to London? Ironically, investing in large cities and their surrounding towns would actually improve transport in London as businesses\people relocating outside of London would reduce the strain on the existing London network. It's already starting to happen now despite poor investment outside of London.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/feb/14/rising-tide-of-londoners-moving-to-northern-england
Actually, its the other way around, the numbers you quoted were impacted by the 'investment' to fix and strengthen the railway line at dawlish, which was severed in 2014, cutting nearly the entire south west off from the rail network. This led to a short term (approx 2-3 years) bump in transport spending down here that temporarily lifted the south west from propping up the bottom of the table.
It's not just transport, by the way.
https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN04033
The North, especially the North East, tends to moan a lot, but actually gets a lot per head spent on them by the state compared to other areas... In England, the North East is second only to London in per captia spending.
The figures look rather different on a net basis, by the way.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/gove...arending2019#public-sector-net-fiscal-balance
But the common thing is that the various parts of the North are already more heavily subsidised than the South West. Perhaps we just don't moan enough.
He who shouts loudest?
I don't want to get into a huge debate over this, but we were exclusively talking about transport investment. The North East receives more per capita spending when looking at all public spending as that includes social welfare and health spending and we suffer from higher unemployment and poorer health? I'd rather employment rates and health be better in the North East and us not receive that spending!
Back to transport, do you agree or disagree with my actual point that is the country would be better served as a whole if significant investment was made in all regions outside of London to re-balance the economy and regional investment would be more effective than huge vanity projects that just enable quicker travel to London?
Didn't the Southwest vote for Brexit? Have a word with your friend Boris.
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2006
- Posts
- 12,130
They did; quite bizarre really but then Cornwall and Devon have always been a wee bit "special", they got massive support / investment from the EU.
There is quite a handy website HERE to aid in recognising (but not explaining) lunacy
Since 1999 apparently we received about £1 billion from the EU.They did; quite bizarre really but then Cornwall and Devon have always been a wee bit "special", they got massive support / investment from the EU.
There is quite a handy website HERE to aid in recognising (but not explaining) lunacy
That's ... well, that's not a huge amount, is it. Over 20 years.
True, it's likely to be £1 billion more than we'll get from the UK govt in the next 20 years tho...
Pretty sure HS2 would go ahead even if they had to sacrifice the first born son of every family in the land to do it.
Seems utterly absurd when they should be "levelling up" this country's ****ty broadband instead.
But I dare say Boris will now announce that there's no money left for his "ambitious" broadband promise, for the entire country to have fibre by 3050.
Seems utterly absurd when they should be "levelling up" this country's ****ty broadband instead.
But I dare say Boris will now announce that there's no money left for his "ambitious" broadband promise, for the entire country to have fibre by 3050.
The whole point of the northern powerhouse was to make the North of England as attractive as London.
Building HS2 once again focuses all direction to London. Whenever people talk about HS2 its always "so people can reach London quicker". That is precisely why we shouldn't be building it. Stop relying on London.
If we're going to build a railway then lets build HS3: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Speed_North That links the Northern cities together.
We need to be investing more in to full gigabit broadband for the future. Faster lines, less down time or connection problems.
Building HS2 once again focuses all direction to London. Whenever people talk about HS2 its always "so people can reach London quicker". That is precisely why we shouldn't be building it. Stop relying on London.
If we're going to build a railway then lets build HS3: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Speed_North That links the Northern cities together.
We need to be investing more in to full gigabit broadband for the future. Faster lines, less down time or connection problems.
This post has also not aged terribly well!
Permabanned
- Joined
- 23 Apr 2014
- Posts
- 23,552
- Location
- Hertfordshire
This post has aged badly with Covid forcing everyone to WFH for the foreseeable
lol too true, for the better for me as its actually changed my bosses attitude to home working! He was a bit old fashioned in that respect.
Deleted member 68110
D
Deleted member 68110
It's head-banging stuff.
Here's an article from 18 months ago, long before C-19, saying that electric cars, driverless cars, and disrupters like Uber are set to free up the roads on a near-unimaginable scale.
And that's without taking into account the global testing every single remote-working technology has just been, and continues to get from more beta-testers than in any innovator's wildest dreams.
I suspect quite a few nations are going to transform their economies by reacting smartly to C-19.
The mistake for Govt here is going to be to sit back and do nothing and fail to realise the magnitude of what's transpiring. But then the problem starts to look just like when to call lockdown, so I wouldn't hold your breath.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2008
- Posts
- 25,059
- Location
- Lorville - Hurston
no its not.
wfh is the way to go and also cycling or driving.
publc transport is the cause of the wide spread of covid-19
Funny, the current situation has made many re-evaluate their thoughts/policies on homeworking. If you want to minimise carbon emissions, don't travel at all and work from home. Simple.
That means, those who have mentioned faster internet access are spot on.
That means, those who have mentioned faster internet access are spot on.