123456Next
Back New
Author: fluxo

Why is the taxpayer paying for HS2?

[Copy link]

11610K

Threads

12810K

Posts

37310K

Credits

Administrators

Rank: 9Rank: 9Rank: 9

Credits
3732793
26-11-2019 01:59:47 Mobile | Show all posts
Really?

All the equipment required for the construction will be made in government owned factories, and operated by government employed engineers?

As per a previous post, a big chunk of this money will go to various suppliers in the wider economy.
Reply Support Not support

Use magic Report

11610K

Threads

12810K

Posts

37310K

Credits

Administrators

Rank: 9Rank: 9Rank: 9

Credits
3732793
26-11-2019 01:59:48 Mobile | Show all posts
It's obviously good that money is going into suppliers and the economy, but if that is the sole purpose why not build something that would actually be worthwhile, rather that an countryside destroying new train line?
Reply Support Not support

Use magic Report

11610K

Threads

12810K

Posts

37310K

Credits

Administrators

Rank: 9Rank: 9Rank: 9

Credits
3732793
26-11-2019 01:59:49 Mobile | Show all posts
Who said that was the sole purpose?

As the government have repeatedly said, this is not just about the journey times - it adds much needed capacity.

I'm not saying I support it, I don't know enough about the current line and the amount of passengers (and freight) projected to be required in the future.  But nobody in government has said it is just for journey times.
Reply Support Not support

Use magic Report

11610K

Threads

12810K

Posts

37310K

Credits

Administrators

Rank: 9Rank: 9Rank: 9

Credits
3732793
26-11-2019 01:59:50 Mobile | Show all posts
Nobody in government has said anything, except how it decreases journey times.

The government has not told the true reason behind HS2. It has no business case, no environmental case, nobody wants it and it is a total waste of money.
Reply Support Not support

Use magic Report

11610K

Threads

12810K

Posts

37310K

Credits

Administrators

Rank: 9Rank: 9Rank: 9

Credits
3732793
26-11-2019 01:59:51 Mobile | Show all posts
Well these guys (the government) seem to think otherwise HS2: strategic case - Publications - GOV.UK
Reply Support Not support

Use magic Report

11610K

Threads

12810K

Posts

37310K

Credits

Administrators

Rank: 9Rank: 9Rank: 9

Credits
3732793
26-11-2019 01:59:52 Mobile | Show all posts
I've not seen any member of the government saying this is the sole (or even primary) reason for HS2. They have consistently said it is about capacity.
Reply Support Not support

Use magic Report

11610K

Threads

12810K

Posts

37310K

Credits

Administrators

Rank: 9Rank: 9Rank: 9

Credits
3732793
26-11-2019 01:59:53 Mobile | Show all posts
This topic fells like it is going in circles.
Reply Support Not support

Use magic Report

11610K

Threads

12810K

Posts

37310K

Credits

Administrators

Rank: 9Rank: 9Rank: 9

Credits
3732793
26-11-2019 01:59:54 Mobile | Show all posts
If that is the case then why call it high speed? It is called high speed because that is what it is - going from A to B faster.

If high speed is not the most important factor it would not be called high speed.

Bloody hell!!
Reply Support Not support

Use magic Report

11610K

Threads

12810K

Posts

37310K

Credits

Administrators

Rank: 9Rank: 9Rank: 9

Credits
3732793
26-11-2019 01:59:54 Mobile | Show all posts
Thanks, read that and it tells me nothing new. It tells me not a thing about why the HS2 project is necessary and for the greater good of the British general public or business.
Reply Support Not support

Use magic Report

11610K

Threads

12810K

Posts

37310K

Credits

Administrators

Rank: 9Rank: 9Rank: 9

Credits
3732793
26-11-2019 01:59:56 Mobile | Show all posts
Having extra capacity is one thing, how much use it is rather depends on whether you can afford to run any trains on it
Reply Support Not support

Use magic Report

123456Next
Back New
You have to log in before you can reply Login | register

Points Rules

返回顶部