Scrutable

El Pollo Diablo wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 05, 2023 3:30 am

What remains of interest is what Labour say they'll do. But they're scared of their own shadows, so f.ck knows

One problem is that a massive long term infrastructure project needs to be supported by a cross-party consensus. It’s going to be a nightmare if Starmer announces that the government will build the line to Manchester and Tory party policy is to cancel it as soon as they get back in.

Woodchopper wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 05, 2023 5:51 pm

El Pollo Diablo wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 05, 2023 3:30 am

What remains of interest is what Labour say they'll do. But they're scared of their own shadows, so f.ck knows

One problem is that a massive long term infrastructure project needs to be supported by a cross-party consensus. It’s going to be a nightmare if Starmer announces that the government will build the line to Manchester and Tory party policy is to cancel it as soon as they get back in.

Not really, because the Tories won't get back in until they start advocating for a aspirational vision for the future.

El Pollo Diablo wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 05, 2023 2:41 pm

Occasional nuggets of optimism keep creeping into my head. The Government's plan is to lift safeguarding and try to sell off the land by next summer - i.e. before any election. However, the DfT is an absolute pit of chaos in the best of times, which this is not. It is very, very good at taking absolutely f.cking ages to do anything, so there's similarly a very, very good chance that this will not have happened by the next election.

Sunak is said to have ordered a quick sale.

Presumably to sabotage future governments. I'm thinking that a lot of his policies make most sense if one regards them as aiming to make the next government unpopular.

I saw the Express went with "Labour REFUSES TO COMMIT to restarting HS2 DESPITE STARMER CRITICISING SUNAK for cancelling it"

Yeah, the refusal to commit is understandable at this point. We'll have to see whether the DfT's trademark incapability once again comes to the fore. If the land isn't sold, or much of it anyway, then it's not the end of the world.

Technically, it isn't anyway. Even with all the land sold, at the next election we'd still be further along than we were in 2019. It can just be bought again.

It's one thing to decide that you aren't going to fund something, just now, that you've been planning to build for 20 years, because you would like to spend the money somewhere else for greater political advantage, so you think.

But to take about 10 minutes to decide so suddenly that Britain never needs a railway along that alignment, after over decade of supporting it, and so damage its future prospects, is something quite else.

What exactly is the political advantage that the Tories gain by damaging the potential for a future government to turn HS2 Phase 2 back on again? It must be something large, for them to do this, but I don't see it. What votes does this win? Even in a Trumpish conflict-is-politically-helpful analysis of politics, I don't see the usefully located crack that such a wedge would help. It makes me wonder if there is someone quietly dobbing the Tories £10m so that HS2 doesn't go past their castle.

IvanV wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 06, 2023 11:01 am

It's one thing to decide that you aren't going to fund something, just now, that you've been planning to build for 20 years, because you would like to spend the money somewhere else for greater political advantage, so you think.

But to take about 10 minutes to decide so suddenly that Britain never needs a railway along that alignment, after over decade of supporting it, and so damage its future prospects, is something quite else.

What exactly is the political advantage that the Tories gain by damaging the potential for a future government to turn HS2 Phase 2 back on again? It must be something large, for them to do this, but I don't see it. What votes does this win? Even in a Trumpish conflict-is-politically-helpful analysis of politics, I don't see the usefully located crack that such a wedge would help. It makes me wonder if there is someone quietly dobbing the Tories £10m so that HS2 doesn't go past their castle.

There's also the question of who will be bidding to buy that land and how the process for acquiring it can be tweaked to favor certain people.

dyqik wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 06, 2023 11:07 am

IvanV wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 06, 2023 11:01 am

It's one thing to decide that you aren't going to fund something, just now, that you've been planning to build for 20 years, because you would like to spend the money somewhere else for greater political advantage, so you think.

But to take about 10 minutes to decide so suddenly that Britain never needs a railway along that alignment, after over decade of supporting it, and so damage its future prospects, is something quite else.

What exactly is the political advantage that the Tories gain by damaging the potential for a future government to turn HS2 Phase 2 back on again? It must be something large, for them to do this, but I don't see it. What votes does this win? Even in a Trumpish conflict-is-politically-helpful analysis of politics, I don't see the usefully located crack that such a wedge would help. It makes me wonder if there is someone quietly dobbing the Tories £10m so that HS2 doesn't go past their castle.

There's also the question of who will be bidding to buy that land and how the process for acquiring it can be tweaked to favor certain people.

There’s a reason the M6 doesn’t go too close to Tatton Hall, I fully expect HS2 to follow the same considerations

IvanV wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 06, 2023 11:01 am

It's one thing to decide that you aren't going to fund something, just now, that you've been planning to build for 20 years, because you would like to spend the money somewhere else for greater political advantage, so you think.

But to take about 10 minutes to decide so suddenly that Britain never needs a railway along that alignment, after over decade of supporting it, and so damage its future prospects, is something quite else.

What exactly is the political advantage that the Tories gain by damaging the potential for a future government to turn HS2 Phase 2 back on again? It must be something large, for them to do this, but I don't see it. What votes does this win? Even in a Trumpish conflict-is-politically-helpful analysis of politics, I don't see the usefully located crack that such a wedge would help. It makes me wonder if there is someone quietly dobbing the Tories £10m so that HS2 doesn't go past their castle.

If you think you are doing to be in opposition, and have no principles, you might set off as many slow burning dumpster fires as you can - especially if they are fires that provide some immediate short term benefits with the downsides only becoming apparent for a new government, and can be semi-plausibly blamed on the future government.

IvanV wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 06, 2023 11:01 am

What exactly is the political advantage that the Tories gain by damaging the potential for a future government to turn HS2 Phase 2 back on again? It must be something large, for them to do this, but I don't see it. What votes does this win? Even in a Trumpish conflict-is-politically-helpful analysis of politics, I don't see the usefully located crack that such a wedge would help. It makes me wonder if there is someone quietly dobbing the Tories £10m so that HS2 doesn't go past their castle.

A bit of that, probs, but I reckon it's damage control.

They seem to be realising that they are not going to be in charge after next year. The red wall seats are a lost cause for them* because their incompetence made them fail at any significant "levelling up". Meanwhile, they are losing support in their own strongholds. By cancelling HS2, I reckon they're sacrificing northern town votes in the hope they can keep Midlands voters on side.


*Always were going to be, imo.

Grumble wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 06, 2023 11:28 am

There’s a reason the M6 doesn’t go too close to Tatton Hall, I fully expect HS2 to follow the same considerations

Whatever do you mean?

Sciolus wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 06, 2023 7:47 pm

Grumble wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 06, 2023 11:28 am

There’s a reason the M6 doesn’t go too close to Tatton Hall, I fully expect HS2 to follow the same considerations

Whatever do you mean?

Ha! I didn’t actually know that, but maybe I just know how these things work

“I’m making £36 billion of changes to rail infrastructure spending plans!”

“You’ve consulted the organisation responsible for rail infrastructure, right?”

“…”

“You’ve consulted the organisation responsible for rail infrastructure, right?”

They didn't consult with anyone. A secretive band of DfT civil servants showed them a chart that showed that by 2038 passenger numbers on the WCML would be back up to full capacity again, but that was about it. They didn't speak to HS2 Ltd, wider DfT, Network Rail, TOCs or anyone else.

Delicious news out of DfT.

A colleague of mine is chummy with people at parliament, and apparently the rail minister, Huw Merriman, has a spad who gets very chatty when she's had a few G&Ts.

Turns out Harper and Merriman haven't a clue how to stop Phase 2a - they don't know whether they need to repeal the Act or not.

The Permanent Secretary, Dame Bernadette Kelly, has told Harper that safeguarding is irrelevant to the land sale - whilst the Act exists, the land is blighted, because the compulsory purchase powers exist until 2026, and can be extended to 2031. Whilst that remains the case, the land could sell for as little as 10% of its value, which doesn't therefore represent value for money, and so is against the civil service code. As such, she has said she cannot sell it without a direct ministerial instruction.

Which may well not happen due to the "he's the one who f.cked it" factor, and a repeal bill may or may not happen, as the potential for splitting the tories is enormous. We need to wait for the king's speech to find out.

Meanwhile, HS2 Phase 2a land people are advising that the preparation of the land for sale will take 2 years and cost £50m.

Lol.

Indeed - very interesting. Almost as though there wasn't proper analysis before the decision was made.

I usually say that building railways here, in particular HS2, costs 3 times what it costs on the continent, a number which comes from some benchmarking HS2 itself published a few years ago on its website, with some laudable transparency. Not sure it's still there, mind.

But perhaps things have moved on. In this week's Economist, they suggest that what is left of HS2 costs 8 times what it costs to build something like that on the continent. Though where they got that number from is unclear. They just throw it out while talking in general about the mess that infrastructure building in this country is in, as a preface to talking about the mess that is building the additional electricity transmission lines that we need for all the windfarms, etc, being built.

IvanV wrote: ↑

Tue Oct 31, 2023 10:24 pm

I usually say that building railways here, in particular HS2, costs 3 times what it costs on the continent, a number which comes from some benchmarking HS2 itself published a few years ago on its website, with some laudable transparency. Not sure it's still there, mind.

But perhaps things have moved on. In this week's Economist, they suggest that what is left of HS2 costs 8 times what it costs to build something like that on the continent. Though where they got that number from is unclear. They just throw it out while talking in general about the mess that infrastructure building in this country is in, as a preface to talking about the mess that is building the additional electricity transmission lines that we need for all the windfarms, etc, being built.

The extra electric infrastructure is a problem the world over, to be fair