High speed rail – money could be better spent elsewhere

REGARDING High Speed Rail 2, how many people are prepared to pay a significant premium to reduce their journey time by as little as 40 minutes from relatively rapid and frequent schedules that are already available?

Have the “energy costs” been taken into consideration? When considering a relatively short distance/time situation, to achieve significant reductions in times, fierce acceleration and powerful brakes will be necessary – the first demanding huge amounts of power and the second dissipating vast amounts of energy – and we are already short of electricity.

In order that high-speed trains perform to their optimum, high-speed lines need to be more or less straight.

Yet we are talking of deviations to pacify the natives in the Chilterns. Curves present expensive and significant problems for the “hardware” (the trains and the track) while passengers will be unnerved by the excessive super elevation necessary or by the employment of extreme ‘train tilting’ technology.

A high speed train line is unsuitable for any other forms of rail transport. Apart from the extremes in speed differentials between freight and passenger trains, high speed lines have steeper gradients as the weight of the train is not a consideration. The introduction of freight implies a more complicated track layout. It is essential for high-speed trains that turnouts, cross-overs etc are kept to a minimum.

The money that would be consumed by this pointless exercise could be better employed re-opening the Woodhead line – a single line through the tunnel would enable maximum height containers to be transported – and enhancing the existing rail network by reversing many of the ‘rationalisations’ of the track and signalling that have been carried out in recent years.

Relatively inexpensive but effective measures would include the elimination of level crossings on the ECML between London and Leeds. The quadrupling of the ECML as far as Doncaster, the removal of the infamous Morpeth curve and the enhancement of the power supply and the overhead catenaries thus permitting faster and more frequent services north of Doncaster. As there would appear to be increasing anxiety over electricity supplies, electrification of the line from Paddington to South Wales seems a perverse decision.

From: JD Thompson, Leeds.

AS so often in the past, another harebrained scheme has been suggested that, if adopted, will add another burden of expense upon the unfortunate motorist.

While agreeing that all people need to indulge in exercise and healthy eating, the idea that drivers should have more restrictions placed upon them, including additional parking costs, to encourage them to walk or abandon their cars altogether, smacks of the workings of a nanny state.

If this came about thousands of motorists, especially the old and infirm, would find shopping and other necessary journeys almost impossible, particularly those living in rural areas. Encouraging younger folk to walk distances of up to a mile is all well and good for those fit enough to do so, but to abandon their vehicles is not only impractical but a nonsense.

Inside the front cover of a British passport are printed the words: “The Secretary of State requests that in the name of Her Majesty all those whom it may concern to allow the bearer to pass freely without let or hindrance, and afford the bearer such assistance and protection as maybe necessary.”

When one considers the impositions and other restrictions, such as speed humps, bus lanes, traffic calming measures and the way motorists are hounded to distraction, most of them for doing little wrong, why can’t our drivers benefit from the same treatment we expect from other nationals?

From: Shan Oakes, Norwood, Beverley.

YET again, rail users have been hit by inflation-busting fare increases. This is the 10th year in a row that governments, first Labour and now the coalition, have overseen such rises. At a time when people are being hurt by economic mismanagement, public sector cuts and rising bills, I find it exceptionally unfair that people who choose rail instead of car travel are hit by price hikes.

The Government seems happy to allow rail companies to make large profits while doing little to reduce overcrowding, improve the rail network and invest in a public transport system that could be an affordable, more efficient, and greener option for ordinary people.

A quick comparison with other European countries only further highlights how poor our public transport system is. The price of UK rail tickets is extortionate and set to increase by 24 per cent between 2011 and 2015, making them the most expensive in Europe.

As a prospective Green MEP for Yorkshire and the Humber, I’m calling for an end to the failed experiment in privatised rail. This latest round of price rises will only strengthen the growing public support to re-nationalise the railways. Surveys show that three-quarters of British voters want more control over our railways and this is something that the Greens will continue to push for.