H S 2 much hassle

HS2 Construction set to commence

The current coalition government wants a new high-speed railway line built between London, Manchester and Leeds in an attempt to increase the output of the economy. The thought process behind it being that in giving businesses the means to commute to various locations in lesser time, more meetings will be able to take place and in turn more deals will be finalised.

 

On October 29th there was a business showcase for the project in which the railway's name was revealed as HS2. The Conservatives were predicted to vote against the blueprint in a parliamentary plebiscite held in the House of Commons. The Labour Party are continually moving back and forth in regards to making a decision about whether they support the project and their uncertainty might be the calling of common sense.

 

Initially, around two years ago when the idea was first proposed, the estimated cost of building the HS2 railway line was quoted at £32 billion which we must agree is too much to spend on one railway line. Furthermore, the coalition have not done themselves any good in trying to secure extra support when it was revealed at the latest event that the new total cost would be a startling £42 billion... plus the additional expense of trains!

 

The argument made by the government is that in introducing more efficient links to areas other than London, it would balance the economy away from capital and the southern-east region of the country. New trains would cater to the needs of the growing capacity of commuters and deter the load on other major stations such as Euston. The main selling point of HS2 is that it is appealingly high-tech showing that the economy is growing with the times and it promises to rejuvenate particular areas of the UK where the economy has weakened over the past 50 years, in particular the north.

 

Yes, other countries have it and we should be on par with the rest of Europe but a new high-speed railway line will mean even higher prices for tickets with many already fed up with the constant yearly inflation induced by rail companies. A report on infrastructure spending in 2006 claimed that arid projects brought in higher revenue than big ones in most cases.

Will building the railway line prove worthwhile if only a small amount of the population can actually afford to use it?

 

Can't money be spent on enhancing the railway system presently in place?

We can tackle the congestion on trains by simply making them longer by adding more carriages. We can use expenditure on signalling so the efficiency of the rail network across the nation will improve, thus trains will be able to run faster and more frequently. Pricing could also be adjusted more so that the cost of travelling in any part of the UK is nearer to equilibrium.