Stop HS2 is pleased to announce that the written evidence we submitted to the Transport Select Committee inquiry on High Speed Rail has been accepted.
We were told it will be available on their website from the 7th June, but a little bird told us it’s there already – see it here.
You can also download a pdf file of our evidence here.
i spent the day at the Southam roadshow tent yesterday and we were very busy,people coming from the HS2 consultation venue were not impressed and there was only one person for it on both days.The person yesterday though it would begood for him to get to his boat.As he was not young it could be built too late for it to be of use to him.Our M.P. at last went on tv and stated that the business case was flawed and he did not agree with the route.I asked questions and they did not answer any of them to my satisfaction.I asked if they are making jobs how many would go along the track as we would loose about 650 in our small town.they said they did not know. The trains would probably come from france germany japan( or china ,they have been there to look at them).So more imports and the electricity from france.So all that money from our taxes going abroad.
France has been supplying Britain with electricity via underseas cables for decades.
Oh right….wasnt aware of that one. So in actual fact, there is nothing different , its business as usual then….
Electricity from France …..I dont understand that Elaine??? Also, the 650 jobs you quote as being lost in your town, have they been informed by letter from their employers as part of a consultation process?
Evidence needs to ask; why a multi-storey car-park at the proposed Birmingham Airport Station, If people are arriving by train and leaving by plane, why a multi-storey car park? At the same time a point-blank refusal by the high speed train civil servants to plan for a multi-level car park at their two Old Oak Common proposed stations, at this time? One of these stations at Old Oak Common will be below ground level, that will cost lots in lighting. Money seems to be something that needs attention for those who have given written evidence to the Select Committee and may be asked to come to a Transport Select Committee meeting. Please don`t start me on the cost of the third tunnel from Old Oak Common to the high speed train One outside St. Pancras.
Think it would have been worth commenting on the impact on homes (in the environmental section) in the suburbs of London. Over 100 homes are within about 15-40m of the line and the families are expected to continue living there through construction and operation of the line and have been told noise will be less than it is now!!!! HS2 Ltd. have grossly misrepresented noise and underestimated compensation costs. Ruislip and Ickenham are always the forgotten part of the HS2 route. Densely populated and not tunnelled, the impact on families and schools is a travesty.
Not unlike the noise levels at South Ruislip when the line speed is increased to 100 mph as part of Chiltern Railways Evergreen project eh Keri??
As it happens , there is an EU directive about noise levels from railways in general……not sure how far along with it they are, my recollection was that a lot of the background work involved rolling stock manufacturers and how to eliminate or reduce noise at source as opposed to screens of some sort. The aircraft manufacturers developed hush kits , though nowadays engine design leads to a quiter engine anyway.
You’ve answered your own comment and in effect are taking on board one of the Stop HS2 bones of contention. Chiltern Rail and HS2 noise levels are poles apart.
Noise levels at the speed they propose for HS2 are twice that of std, high speed (ie Europe, HS1 etc.) At HS2 speeds much of it comes from the pantograph and they can’t mitigate that high, especially on viaducts. In the words of HS2 Ltd ‘it could blow over’.
And of course Chiltern Rail doesnt have electric traction ……. the services run with noisy diesel trains, which with the advent of higher linespeeds and increase frequencies as part of the Evergreen Project, will have a noticable impact on residents living close by. And yet stopHS2 makes no mention of that fact…..I wonder why !!!
On subject of noise , what is dishonest is the reference to average noise levels in the consultation paperwork . We aren’t talking about tolerance levels for industrial workers here ! That’s why HS2 Ltd claim only a handful of households would be effected by noise . In other words a Concorde sonic boom would be OK as long as it only happens a few times a day .
Gary, Why would they, when Stop HS2 are about Stopping HS2 and not Evergreen? I don’t think Evergreen will cause the same environmental devastation that HS2 will or cost the same amount of money.
PS – can we get a copy of your dissertation on HS2 when you’ve finished. It must be the most one sided piece that a student has ever written given your comments on this site!
And of course Missy….you wouldnt be involved at all if HS2 was a new rail line from Edinburgh to Aberdeen instead of what is planned now. The reality is that stopHS2 simply dont want it slicing through the Chilterns, any arguement you present for Cost, Enviromental or Business Case is simply trampled on by those who are a bit more clued in and can see the overall picture. Which unfortunately is what will happen with the document you have sent to the Transport Select Committee……I managed to pull holes in it myself after looking at it for about 30 seconds. Sorry ……. but your campaign is poor.
Excellent document.but a VERY VERY poor arguments for not building a new railway which we need. The whole of your argument is “nimby”. Let hope this railway is built and will cut the time from birmingham to london and save me a lot of time. I am so infavor of HS2 we should just build in now.
I ve just took some time to download the PDF version of this……..if I look at this objectively, I found it somewhat easy to pull apart. To give you an example, on page 5 you state the fact that “85% of domestic flights are over water”.
This is totally irrelevant to High Speed rail in the UK …..as there is obviously no water ( apart from the odd lake and river ) inbetween UK airports.
You also say on page 7 that ” at the moment there are no flights between Birmingham and London”.
There never has been , and never will be flights between Birmingham and London, or indeed Birmingham and Manchester, Birmingham and Leeds, Manchester and Leeds etc. Again it is a totally irrelevant comment.
You also choose to make no comment on the question on page 13 ” What would be the impact on freight services on the classic network “. I find it somewhat odd that when I challenged you guys on this, it was generally agreed that we need to remove HGVs from our motorway network, and that railfreight was ideal for this.
The impact for freight services on the rail network has been somewhat understated by HS2…….having said that, the trade in general is banging on the door big style for HS2 to happen, which stopHS2 seem oblivious to. This is a very big selling point as far as I m concerned, and deep down you guys probably realise this as well.
On a technical matter I would say that there did used to be flights between Birmingham and London but it was a very long time ago . There haven’t been any for a long time because the rail service between the 2 cities is very good . That is kind of the point .
If / when HS2 goes ahead ( and I still say Hammond absolutely has made his mind up — the only thing that could change it is political pressure as with woodlands / health service ) the only impact on air travel will be a few more Brummies taking their Paris weekends by train . Can’t see it significantly impacting the half full flight of business people to Frankfurt each day . If / when the Y network gets to Manchester then maybe flights between Manchester and Heathrow go and a few more Mancunians take their Paris weekends by train .
In the unlikely event that the network ever gets as far as Scotland then there will be fewer flights to London .
That’s it .
Gary, what an insular viewpoint you have! Domestic flights include those to and from Northern Ireland, the Outer Hebrides, the Channel Islands …
So 85% of domestic flights are from N Ireland, The Channel Islands and the Hebrides are they Joanne???? Dear me lol………do some research. What percentage of domestic flights in the USA, France, Germany, Spain and Japan are over water?
I should imagine nothing for Germany and very little in France and the USA ( leaving aside the curve of the Eastern seaboard ) . More for Spain ( Canaries and Balearics ) . Glad you mentioned Spain because the current journey time from Manchester to Euston is over half an hour faster than the “fast” journey from Madrid to Barcelona . That in a nutshell is the main reason we don’t need “High Speed” Rail .
Of course Madrid to Barcelona is about 320 miles in distance……which is some 130 more than manchester to London
In fact the actual rail distance between Madrid and Barcelona is 384 miles…..as the track does not go as the crow flies.
Thank you Gary for making my point again . Madrid to Barcelona is a lot further than Manchester to London . We live in a geographically small , densely populated , country . Therefore we don’t need “High Speed” rail . Spain and France are much larger countries . Germany and China are much larger and have a lot of money . Even Lord Adonis now is pulling back from the speed angle and concentrating on capacity . Changing arguments .
FD…..London to Glasgow is 402 miles, and is quoted as being a beneficiary of HS2 …..as well as Edinburgh.
Gary , I know exactly where Edinburgh and Glasgow are . As you know there is minimal time benefit from the current proposals for these 2 cities and , in any case , by the time the line was built they might not even be in our country . I’m sure Mr Salmond would like the plans to proceed as long as it is paid for by English taxpayers ( and they would in the end ) .
Vast majority of people live in a very tight area between Liverpool , Hull , London , Bristol . Completely different to Spain , France , Germany , China , USA .
There is a discussion to be had about capacity but financially and environmentally costly 250 mph trains don’t have any particular relevance for this country ( whether England or Britain ) .
Excellent document. Would have like to have seen a bit more on the environmental damage/impact but can understand that may leave the arguments open to being as “nimby”
Let’s hope it makes the difference!
Why wouldnt it be accepted?????? We live in a democracy ….anyone can submit views without fear of reprisal.
Some democracy when you are insulted and your views dismissed by someone you pay for because you dare to disagree with him
John….you can always vote them out at an election…..
And if you have been personally insulted by an MP, why not write to him or her asking for an apology?.
And as Penny has just pointed out…..the stopHS2 views have been accepted as part of a select commitee inquiry. In fact , I dont know why a full public inquiry hasnt been called for……I would advocate that for sure. But in any event, the views of stopHS2 are getting aired at the decision making level, so not much more you can ask for tbh..
I think we’re going down a blind alley here Gary
I agree that there should have been a public enquiry and that should have examined the shape of our future transport infrastucture long before whole areas were blighted so I guess we have to try and work out for ourselves why that didn’t happen and why there is no public enquiry planned
Blind alley ?
Our transport infrastructure is very mature already , we have a extensive rail and road network. Of course some of it is at or above capacity now, but decisions on improving capacity are made locally nowadays …..HS2 is an exception to that of course.