On a railway line to further confusion

THE proponents of HS2 seem to be more than a little confused as to the reason for committing £40/50bn of our money to this scheme.

Firstly it was to cut 20 minutes off the journey from Leeds to London in a mere 20 years’ time, then when that proposal was attacked as being a waste of money, it was to provide much needed extra capacity, again taking 20 years to tackle an imminent problem.

When it was pointed out that the beneficiaries of HS2 in the North would be Leeds, Sheffield and Manchester whereas many other major towns and cities in the region would see the deterioration of their existing services, the Transport Secretary suddenly suggested that monies would be found to improve on these regional areas.

We really need to look at the bigger picture and acknowledge that the UK, with a population of 60 million, and rising fast, has half the land mass of France (with a similar population).

We have therefore much less room for major new railways. Although we are desperately short of reliable energy supplies and are a long way short of being self-sufficient in food, we have plenty of regional ports and airports which need developing for our benefit, without digging up thousands of acres of prime agricultural land for HS2 and for on-shore wind turbines.

The existing East Coast main line provides an excellent service for travellers.

From: Dr Alastair Cook, Austwick, North Yorkshire.

I ADMIT that I am no great fan of the HS2 project – I can imagine no one actually wanting to go to London, never mind ever more rapidly. In the continuing debate, however, it is quite clear that very many people do want to see radical improvement in the overloaded rail system and most, even those of us of a sceptical disposition, can see the need for more railway lines.

If you are to build new lines presumably you should build to the highest possible standard – so HS2 ....

Before we start, however, perhaps we should consider that other major present cause for concern: the energy crisis.

You may read that either as a customer, financial or a supply crisis.

This is, in some measure, to be ameliorated by the much trumpeted creation of a new nuclear station.

Sadly this is to be foreign designed, financed, built and ultimately controlled.

It seems to me that if we have £50bn to spend – which I seriously doubt, we would be better spending it on three more nuclear plants and retaining ownership and control.

From: Brian Appleby, Sutton In Craven, Keighley.

I AM against the HS2, this expensive project, for the following reasons: it will not create jobs in the long term; the building of the infrastructure will result in importing more foreign labour; most of the train carriages and technology will be imported; the investment will result in more debt.

The benefits will only be for the few who can afford the tickets. Some time in the future it will be another candidate for privatisation. The money would be better spent building our own atomic power stations.

I cannot trust the politicians – they just find it impossible to be honest. Our Government is useless. Its economic growth plan is to build houses, import people, export jobs, privatise everything and let every country in the world own us, take all the profits and evade taxes.

From: Tony Young, Cross Bank, Skipton.

OF course Yorkshire needs HS2, even if it is three or four decades late. The alternative of 14 years of weekend closures, replacement buses and general disruption doesn’t bear thinking about (Yorkshire Post, October 29).

The West Coast Main Line has already been through that once and it wasn’t much fun. But perhaps somebody should ask why the French can build high speed lines at a quarter the cost and in a third of the time that is planned for HS2? Maybe we should let them build it!

From: Simon Barber, Digley Road, Holmbridge, Holmfirth.

PAUL Salveson, ex-Northern Rail, waxes lyrical over the possibilities of a new rail franchise for the North saying this will not be the “discredited, centralised British Rail” (Yorkshire Post, October 24).

Well, he would say this wouldn’t he, as his former outfit has done very nicely out of the fat subsidies poured into rail franchises investing little or nothing in return.

British Rail received a pittance in comparison.

Furthermore if BR was so bad how come Northern Rail is still running BR rolling stock including the dangerous Pacers?

If privatisation was supposed to free the railways from the dead hand of state control why are foreign state owned bodies such as Dutch Railways and Keolis, a subsidiary of SNCF, allowed to run our railways?

We hear the East Coast is to be handed over to the vultures on the grounds that this will improve services and bring in private sector investment. This is rubbish.

Private sector investment in terms of shareholders’ funds is minimal.

These outfits borrow money which publicly-owned companies could do just as well and more cheaply.