[kreuzberger]

They are stopping trains and boats? Cyclists would be right to have at least a copy of Niemöller's work.

[Tubby Isaacs]

A while back I predicted that HS2 wouldn't get much further north than Crewe. At this rate it won't even connect central London with Birmingham.

The government is set to announce that construction of certain sections of HS2 will be delayed to save money, the BBC understands.

It is thought the delay will primarily affect sections from Manchester to Crewe and Birmingham to Crewe.

But sources have also indicated that some of the design teams working on the Euston end of the line may be affected.

Contractors are looking at whether they need to redeploy staff working on that site...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-64901985

Think there’s already assent to Crewe. This looks like it’s happening so that the funding goes into another accounting period. Absolutely ridiculous false economy.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Or rather not happening. Paused.

[Oboogie]

This looks like it’s happening so that the funding goes into another accounting period. Absolutely ridiculous false economy.

An accounting period after Labour have won the next election and then the delays and costs will all be Labour's fault.

[Tubby Isaacs]

I would think this money would have been spent under Labour anyway. More likely it’s been done to make Hunt’s own budget rules.

[mattomac]

Yeah basically to try and win them the next election, though looking at what has been pushed to 2025 and after I’m not sure they plan to do if they somehow won.

I have a feeling they probably are aware of that and it’s more damage limitation.

[Yug]

The infrastructure idiots here being a bunch of NIMBYs who think lower house prices = "severe financial hardship".

Campaigners have called on the Government to drop plans for a restored Ivanhoe Line over fears it will reduce house prices. A petition for the proposed line’s cancellation has now been created in a bid to halt any chance of full steam ahead in Leicestershire.

The line, which ran between Leicester and Burton, has not served passengers since the 1960s, with a series of campaigns to bring it back failing to materialise. The latest effort, from the Campaign to Reopen the Ivanhoe Line group (CRIL), has achieved much backing though. Its plans are in the hands of the Government, which could approve the line's return.


However, a petition against such a move has been set up. It states: “We want the Government to stop the restoration of the Ivanhoe train line from Leicester to Burton-on-Trent, which runs next to new and old housing. Restoring and reopening this passenger line could substantially reduce the value of homes, causing extreme financial hardship to families.”...

https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news ... 416009.amp

There is a sound economic case for reopening this line. Please don't let it be blocked by a bunch of selfish money-grubbing fucktards who wouldn't even notice a change in the price of their houses unless/until they come to sell them.

And, as been shown in other parts of the country, having a railway station open in the vicinity actually pushes house prices up, not down.

Fucking morons. Probably Lib Dem voters, if they actually bother to vote.

[Andy McDandy]

Rural Leicestershire is dyed in the wool Tory. Usually.

It's very NIMBY though. My partner's family hail from between Leicester and Rugby, and around there every lamp post and telegraph pole is covered with posters objecting to any expansion of the various trading estates (some of which are colossal) nearby.

A major issue is lorries using back roads as rat runs to avoid motorway delays. However, suggest that Lutterworth gets a bypass to alleviate artics clogging up the high street, and nobody's interested.

[Watchman]

The line already carries heavy freight traffic, so a few lighter passenger trains aren’t going to make much difference

[Tubby Isaacs]

A- what? single passenger train in each direction per hour? Ludicrous.

Surrey has far more trains than that. It’s not exactly known for cheap house prices.

[Yug]

I would like to reall humiliate these fuckers by inviting them to a TV studio to state their case, and when they get to the low house prices cause financial cancer bollocks, ask them "how?" How would a reduction in the price of your house cause serious financial hardship for families? And every time they try obfuscation or deflection give them the old "just answer the question". It would soon become apparent that their argument has no basis in fact, and is just an attempt to put a thin gloss of 'caring about other people' on their rampant avaricious self-interest.

I've seen this argument used before. I just wish someone would ask them "HOW?"

[davidjay]

I would like to reall humiliate these fuckers by inviting them to a TV studio to state their case, and when they get to the low house prices cause financial cancer bollocks, ask them "how?" How would a reduction in the price of your house cause serious financial hardship for families? And every time they try obfuscation or deflection give them the old "just answer the question". It would soon become apparent that their argument has no basis in fact, and is just an attempt to put a thin gloss of 'caring about other people' on their rampant avaricious self-interest.

I've seen this argument used before. I just wish someone would ask them "HOW?"

As Pinko O'Brien said on the wireless this morning, unless you're moving to a cheaper area, a house is worth the same now as it always has been - it's worth a house.

[MisterMuncher]

I'm in the middle of sorting out my next mortgage "deal" (hah!) at the minute, and was looking into the possibility of borrowing some more for home improvements, extending the repayment period etc.

Bank lad cheerfully informed me that my house has apparently doubled in value in the last eight years. I don't think he liked me making a distinction that it had doubled in nominal price, not value, otherwise I wouldn't be needing to make said improvements

[Bones McCoy]

I would like to reall humiliate these fuckers by inviting them to a TV studio to state their case, and when they get to the low house prices cause financial cancer bollocks, ask them "how?" How would a reduction in the price of your house cause serious financial hardship for families? And every time they try obfuscation or deflection give them the old "just answer the question". It would soon become apparent that their argument has no basis in fact, and is just an attempt to put a thin gloss of 'caring about other people' on their rampant avaricious self-interest.

I've seen this argument used before. I just wish someone would ask them "HOW?"

As Pinko O'Brien said on the wireless this morning, unless you're moving to a cheaper area, a house is worth the same now as it always has been - it's worth a house.

Yebbut dead mum's home in Surrey might be worth a 6 home portfolio in the North East.

[Yug]

A thing which nobody really wanted, and which isn't likely to deliver any significant improvements, is turning out to be rather expensive...

The Department for Transport (DfT) has spent a total of £52.3M setting up Great British Railways (GBR) to absorb power from Network Rail so far, a Freedom of Information request by NCE has revealed.

GBR will be a new government body that will also undertake an organisational role with the operation of train services too. It emerged from the William-Shapps Plan for Rail, published in May 2021, with the purpose of ending fragmentation and integrating the country’s railways.

NCE's Freedom of Information request revealed that from November 2021 to December 2022, The Great British Railways Transition Team (GBRTT) spend was £41.4M. On top of this, from September 2018 to May 2021, a further £10.9M was spend on the commissioning and publication of the Williams-Shapps Plan for Rail...

https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest ... 023/?tkn=1

A DfT spokesperson said: “We remain committed to reforming the rail industry through Great British Railways, which will modernise our network and better deliver for passengers and freight customers, whilst ensuring we deliver value for taxpayers.”

While transport secretary Mark Harper committed to GBR in this year's George Bradshaw address, delivered at the ICE, ministers are still working to get the legislation needed to switch powers over from Network Rail through parliament.

(My bold)

It's cost us over £50 million so far and they haven't even got the legislation to make the changes yet

[Dalem Lake]

A thing which nobody really wanted, and which isn't likely to deliver any significant improvements, is turning out to be rather expensive...

The Department for Transport (DfT) has spent a total of £52.3M setting up Great British Railways (GBR) to absorb power from Network Rail so far, a Freedom of Information request by NCE has revealed.

GBR will be a new government body that will also undertake an organisational role with the operation of train services too. It emerged from the William-Shapps Plan for Rail, published in May 2021, with the purpose of ending fragmentation and integrating the country’s railways.

NCE's Freedom of Information request revealed that from November 2021 to December 2022, The Great British Railways Transition Team (GBRTT) spend was £41.4M. On top of this, from September 2018 to May 2021, a further £10.9M was spend on the commissioning and publication of the Williams-Shapps Plan for Rail...

https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest ... 023/?tkn=1

A DfT spokesperson said: “We remain committed to reforming the rail industry through Great British Railways, which will modernise our network and better deliver for passengers and freight customers, whilst ensuring we deliver value for taxpayers.”

While transport secretary Mark Harper committed to GBR in this year's George Bradshaw address, delivered at the ICE, ministers are still working to get the legislation needed to switch powers over from Network Rail through parliament.

(My bold)

It's cost us over £50 million so far and they haven't even got the legislation to make the changes yet

The Taxpayer's Alliance will be in the case, mark my words

[Andy McDandy]

Butbutbut....

It's got Great British in its name! They did a funny advert with him off the olden days trains thing your nan likes! You just hate Britain!!!

[Tubby Isaacs]

Not sure how much of a story this is. Withing the overall railways budget £50m isn't very much, and I'm sure it's not unusual to spend money on something before the legislation goes through. There's not going to be any problem with getting it through.

[Yug]

Is Johnson's vision of a world-beating railway dead?

The Government is playing down national newspaper reports that the formation of Great British Railways (GBR) could be scrapped - just weeks after Derby was named as the home of the new headquarters of the body. GBR is supposed to be in charge of a restructured railway, replacing Network Rail and overseeing the infrastructure as well as tickets and timetabling.

After a long selection process, Derby beat off competition from five other well-known historic rail centres and a transition team has been starting work to bring the headquarters to the city. It is unlikely that any change of heart will be well-received in Derby.

A report in The Times suggests that the Government has "quietly scrapped" plans for GBR and that it won’t feature in the upcoming King’s Speech in autumn, which means that the all-important legislation needed to transfer control to GBR will potentially not find time to be approved in Parliament before the next General Election, due at the very latest by January 28, 2025...

https://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/news/d ... 452271.amp

They're putting so much stuff off until after the next GE that I don't think they'll actually deliver on any of their promises. Which would be surprising as they're well known for their truthfulness and integri... Oh. Hang on. Sorry. These are the fucking Tories. Everything is promised. Nothing is certain.

[Tubby Isaacs]

They got away with promising a load of rail stuff before the 2015 election and probably picked up a few votes because it dovetailed with real wages rising, and looked like there was indeed a long term plan coming together.

I don't know why they wouldn't do this. Lack of civil servant capacity to set it up? People not fancying moving to Derby? WFM probably means that wouldn't be too much of a problem.