Why is the taxpayer paying for HS2?

pragmatic

Apparently 50% of UK exports by value are sent by air, getting them to the airport and having the capacity for flights is also important, but also the ecological aspect of having freight trains transporting goods rather than lorries across the country is also important.

In Taiwan domestic air travel no longer exists since their high speed rail has bedded in, although tellingly they have similar area's like the UK that aren't covered by decent or any rail (the entire west and extreme south respectively).  They also have vending machines in the vestibules which I've never seen on UK transport, but maybe we can't be trusted not to smash them up over here.  They also run a number of different slower train services and are priced accordingly.

I'm not sure HS2 is the best solution but it pains me that its almost impossible to do in the country that invented the railway, not for any technical or even financial reason but greed and self interest and over investment in housing stock is legion in our country.  We have a sickness when it comes to bricks and mortar and its the one huge cultural issue that is preventing the UK from flourishing* (railway, airports, huge amounts of capital and investment is unnecessarily focused here rather than true entrepreneurship).  Our saving grace I can see from travelling and working with people internationally, is that every other country have their own cultural issues which retards their growth equally or even more so then our own.

*The first segment on lastnights newsnight is worth a watch http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04pvk01 the smarmy John Redwood was there being little more than a naysayer and contributing nothing to the argument, the other guy had a lot of points and looks like he barely got a chance to scratch the surface.

DPinBucks

Exactly.

Which is why, although I'm fully supportive of HS2, I think it's crazy that it isn't properly integrated with Heathrow.

And also why I think that all the proposals for new airport capacity in the SE are wrong. It clearly should be somewhere in Oxfordshire or Bucks to integrate with the HS rail network. And, as you say, domestic air travel, within England anyway, should be heavily taxed, except where it provides a clear public service.

pragmatic

I don;t think it should be taxed, I think it should be rendered uncompetitive due to high speed rail being quick enough and significantly cheaper.

Philly112

Do you have a link for that? I'm not disputing it, but it seems very high!

Edit. Just been having a look, and I could find a figure of 40% from a few years ago. So it might well be correct. However, the devil is in the detail. 95% of UK trade (volume, not value) is conducted by sea. So for that 1 tonne of caviar we send out by air, there are an awful lot of spuds going by boat.

Cheers
Phil

pragmatic

House of Commons - Transport Committee - Written Evidence

Rasczak

Just to be clear then this is subtly different from originally posted:

When actually its:
As UK/EU trade is so significant, exclusion of this fact alters the implication somewhat!

fluxo

‘Leaked HS2 report reveals scheme is ‘fundamentally flawed’

[...]

The December 2016 document, marked “sensitive” and “not for publication”, said Europe’s biggest infrastructure project was in a “precarious position” and would be “classified as ‘failed’ by any internationally recognised definition”.

It added that HS2 was “highly likely to significantly overspend, 20 to 60 per cent”, which would increase the cost to as much as £90bn.’

Source: Subscribe to read | Financial Times