Ally Bongo Posted May 24, 2015 Share Posted May 24, 2015 Remember when we said something like this would happen ? Well it just has Question is how much have we paid or will pay for it http://www.snp.org/media-centre/news/2015/may/snp-comments-hs2-%E2%80%9Coutrageous%E2%80%9D-reports Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exile Posted May 24, 2015 Share Posted May 24, 2015 (edited) The Independent headlines this as "SNP fury" http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/snp-fury-as-hs2-finds-no-business-case-for-taking-fast-train-service-to-scotland-10272342.html There may well not be a good economic case for this, but it's not just about economics but politics. As the article says Lord Adonis proclaimed HS2 as the "union railway". it could have been a symbol of the union - now more like a symbol of a broken union Edited May 24, 2015 by exile Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McDange Posted May 24, 2015 Share Posted May 24, 2015 The only point of this is to increase the commuter catch to London. Equality doesn't suit The Establishment. Wasn't there another study done that this would actually have a detrimental impact on Scotland? What's our "contribution" to this anyway? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harrystarfish Posted May 24, 2015 Share Posted May 24, 2015 The only point of this is to increase the commuter catch to London. Equality doesn't suit The Establishment. Exactly. If they were serious about improving links from scotland & the north of england they'd start the work at that end and work down to london which already has ample connections. They'd soon find funding to finish the whole thing if the London terminal was last. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParisInAKilt Posted May 24, 2015 Share Posted May 24, 2015 In times of "austerity" spending billions on a fast train is ridiculous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bzzzz Posted May 24, 2015 Share Posted May 24, 2015 This what they mean by "Better Together" is it? So continuing and worsening austerity and Westminster government is going to force us to spend billions and billions on hs2 that doesn't serve us and on nuclear weapons we don't want... Well done for voting No,I hope your proud of yourselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alibi Posted May 24, 2015 Share Posted May 24, 2015 High Speed rail is a ludicrous idea for short journeys like London to Birmingham - the potential time saving is minimal over the 100 or so miles. It needs to be a long line to make sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maq Posted May 24, 2015 Share Posted May 24, 2015 What's our "contribution" to this anyway? About £4bn reportedly. For something thats going to have a detrimental effect on our main cities Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biffer Posted May 24, 2015 Share Posted May 24, 2015 First train of the day from Edinburgh to London takes exactly four hours. I don't think you can take much off the Edinburgh to Newcastle service, it's pretty good time wise (just under ninety minutes for around 120 miles). First train takes two and a half hours Newcastle to London - later in the day it can be an hour longer. It's as much to do with congestion as anything else, but it may be possible to take Edinburgh to London down by twenty minutes with some line improvements, which would make the quickest journey around 3h40m with a lot of the others marginally over four hours. I'm unconvinced that there's and economic argument in spending sixty billion quid to take a further half hour off that. What might help instead is more competition on flights to London and better rail links to Northern England. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armchair Bob Posted May 24, 2015 Share Posted May 24, 2015 A fast 20min rail link from Edinburgh to Glasgow would be far more beneficial to the Scottish economy than marginal improvements to the London link. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Col Posted May 24, 2015 Share Posted May 24, 2015 will HS2 not indirectly improve things for us by taking some of the traffic off the WCML? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biffer Posted May 24, 2015 Share Posted May 24, 2015 A fast 20min rail link from Edinburgh to Glasgow would be far more beneficial to the Scottish economy than marginal improvements to the London link. Personally I think improved links to Perth, Dundee, Aberdeen and Inverness from the central belt would be more beneficial. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hertsscot Posted May 24, 2015 Share Posted May 24, 2015 Sod all benefits to Scotland but Scots tax payers will subsidise it. So much for the benefits of better together. Hopefully next time round people won't be taken in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest flumax Posted May 24, 2015 Share Posted May 24, 2015 (edited) To get scots to London quicker, get some railway stations at the international airports. Edited May 24, 2015 by flumax Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larky Masher Posted May 24, 2015 Share Posted May 24, 2015 To get scots to London quicker, get some railway stations at the international airports. When you add in getting to the airport at either end and having to be at the airport at least and hour before check-in there's little difference in the time taken to get from Edinburgh to Glasgow to London. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted May 24, 2015 Share Posted May 24, 2015 The Independent headlines this as "SNP fury" http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/snp-fury-as-hs2-finds-no-business-case-for-taking-fast-train-service-to-scotland-10272342.html There may well not be a good economic case for this, but it's not just about economics but politics. As the article says Lord Adonis proclaimed HS2 as the "union railway". it could have been a symbol of the union - now more like a symbol of a broken union there's zero business sense in the context of the Exchequer for any rail-way anywhere in the world, they need subsidised. However from a profit-making business point of view it's great to get the country to subsidise the mobility of labour. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lamia Posted May 24, 2015 Share Posted May 24, 2015 They can have their HS2 as long as we don't have to pay for it the problem is we are going to have to Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deeklipse Posted May 24, 2015 Share Posted May 24, 2015 Heard that fandan Louise Mensch on the Stephen Nolan show on Five Live last night saying that it was basically our fault it won't come to Scotland because an independent Scotland couldn't expect the UK to stump up for such perks. Sorry Louise, did I miss the second referendum which the PM says we won't have? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haggis_trap Posted May 24, 2015 Share Posted May 24, 2015 the real irony about HS2 is that London was always going to be the main benefactor.... it will just encourage people to commute there form further away ? I cant see any business choosing to be located in the north of england (brmingham / leeds) because of HS2 ? total con - and not just for the people of Scotland either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armchair Bob Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Personally I think improved links to Perth, Dundee, Aberdeen and Inverness from the central belt would be more beneficial. And a tunnel to Belfast! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flure Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckielugger Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 I do recall reading a couple of years ago that high speed rail has economic benefits ONLY over long distances 400km upwards. So London to Carlisle/Newcastle/Edinburgh/Glasgow would be worth it. Also ludicrous in these reports not to link current Channel tunnel to London HS1 to any HS2, would be the laughing stock of Europe yet again. And further, why are the quoted costs so utterly high? ? Im sure the French, Germans and everyone else who has already built extensive high speed networks didn't do so at such extreme costs. Can't we ask the French to project manage it here ?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishcumnock Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 NO ,only current nominated companies with Tory shareholders involved will be allowed to bid as this will maintain the gravy train side of things for several years . Thought you knew that with the private hospital , agency and supply contracts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auld_Reekie Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Take our £3.46 billion share and invest it in the core Scottish network. If this doesn't highlight why we needed independence, nothing will. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flure Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(2).thumb.jpg.0821defdf8c4348e3c831d1a6615c2fc.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.