Return to HS2: The Art of Compromise

[@samsam21amb]

The selling of the land for the northern section (phase 2) is a mistake, safeguarding should have continued so in maybe 10-15 years the gov. doesn’t have buy land again and the project can run more smoothly.

[@nevreiha]

had to make the balance sheets look more appealing seeing as they're the main source of discontent among its detractors

[@hens0w]

Its not a mistake its corruption and therefore I have no objection to the labour government offering no compensation or better yet raiding the bank account of Rishi Sunak for said compensation.

[@vylbird8014]

It's not a mistake. It's deliberate. Simple political calculus: The government needs all the money it can get right now so it can postpone tax rises, thus increasing their chance of reelection, and selling off the land also ensures that if they do lose than a future Labour government can't reverse the decision.

[@nevreiha]

@@vylbird8014 one of my relative's council which is in heavy debt has taken to (between cancellation of transport options for the disabled and elderly) reimposing outdated fire legislation on council tenants including not allowing them use of their sheds or lofts, benches in communal areas, doormats or parking mobility scooters by their door at the threat of hefty fines. They will not do what is good, only what fixes the balance sheets and that is the way things are run right now.

[@TalesOfWar]

@@nevreiha The state of local council finances is also a massive failure of the Tories. They've consistently reduced budgets over and over again yet expect them to do more with less. So the only recourse for the councils is to raise council tax or find other creative ways of generating money. They've totally destroyed this country, it'll take a good 20 years to recover from this last 13 years of epic mismanagement and callous, brazen contempt they have for the people. Unless they're rich of course, then they'll bend over backwards for your "donations".

[@lohphat]

Everyone complains about rail construction costs but ignore the costs of road construction costs.

[@Skorpychan]

I don't even want road construction, at this point. I just want them patched, cleaned of fallen leaves, hedges trimmed with the chunks of tree picked up, and resurfaced when they're worn out. Is it too much to ask for the roads to not destroy my vehicles? To not have to avoid certain roads because I'll get a puncture? To not go sliding around on junctions because they're coated in rotten leaves?

[@caramelldansen2204]

It's almost like cost isn't an issue, just an excuse.

[@SeverityOne]

It's a remark I made below a video about the impact of HS2, and how some houses will be demolished. This was from a car enthusiast, who had a six lane motorway in the same shot as the HS2 construction site.

[@GryphLane]

@@Skorpychan It's clearly too much to ask central government to fund highways maintenance teams properly, especially when they happen to be run by the opposition

[@eldrago19]

​@@GryphLanelocally to me the government is going to use some of the HS2 money spending £100 million+ to build a dual carriageway bypass around Norwich because a few hundred villagers were complaining about having a few trucks through their villages. They could probably give £100,000 to each of the complaining villagers and still have cash to spare.

[@richardcrossley5581]

Good to see a positive commentary on this project. Building infrastructure is expensive and few people see the value until it stops working properly. I’m unlikely to be a regular user, but what surprises me is it wasn’t started in the north to ensure that part was built first, so the whole project was built, rather than just building the London bit.

[@SEAWORRIER]

It's as if the Government never wanted to bring it to the North in the first place...

[@memyself1566]

@@SEAWORRIER It is more than obvious that they are not interested in the north to the Midlands line.

[@Inkyminkyzizwoz]

Even as a Northerner I recognise that the southern end of the WCML is the busiest, so it makes sense to start with that end. No point in freeing up capacity at the northern end if trains are still going to run into congestion further south!

[@hairyairey]

@@SEAWORRIER Unfortunately HS2 hasn't had a Government supporter of the project since Boris Johnson was PM. Although to be fair, a few other Tories did object to the cancellation.

[@DavidKnowles0]

@@hairyairey One thing about Boris Johnson I actually liked was that he wasn't afraid to look at and back big ideas. It was nice having a PM that believe in big engineering projects. Unfortunately he just wasn't that great at running the country.

[@CharlesTysonYerkesOfficial]

HS2 Ltd should have hired myself, I would have built HS2 in full, extremely efficiently and cheaply.

[@clickrick]

And gone bankrupt three more times in the process?

[@CharlesTysonYerkesOfficial]

At least we would have a proper HS line. Also, I'll just give out UERL shares! ​@@clickrick

[@Jasper_4444]

Heyyy Charlie, wazzup?

[@TalesOfWar]

@@clickrick Then conveniently died before the bill came his way? lol

[@clickrick]

@@TalesOfWar Details, details!

[@GryphLane]

As a highways designer working in structural maintenance I find things like this fascinating. HS2 actually *is* a good thing but it needs to be built properly and fully for it to have the full benefits.

[@gombles]

Ridiculously expensive project to save 15 minutes to London, from a city already haemorraging businesses? sounds great.

[@GryphLane]

@@gombles Except that it was never just about saving 15 minutes to London. It was about taking high speed traffic off the existing network, which has the effect of being able to close everything else up, adding capacity and providing extra resilience - benefits that would be felt across the entire country.

[@gombles]

@@GryphLane £100 billion of benefit? Don't think so. Absolute joke of a project.

[@GryphLane]

@@gombles Any benefit at all is going to be a good thing. Even things like not having to wait so long at your local level crossing. It all mounts up. The only joke here is having to rely on a Tory government to get it built.

[@Munkenba]

@@gombles As said above, it's a capacity argument, not a matter of speed, you can google those details in your own time. The thing that really does make the project a waste of time is that it'll only ever be half built, it should go all the way to Inverness if we want to claim we're still a serious country.

[@dukenukem5768]

I recently made a long car journey that I last made 10 years ago (all while the HS2 controversy has gone) and was astonished at the number of new roads and by-passes have sprung up in the meantime, carving ruthlessly through woods, hills and hamlets, yet I have never heard a murmur of protest about them. I'm sure some of those hamlet dwellers did say something, but nothing that got beyond a few inches in a local paper.

[@paulsengupta971]

It was good for the hamlet dwellers as it bypasses their hamlets. Haven't you heard of the protests around both the M3 extension and the Newbury Bypass?

[@dukenukem5768]

@@paulsengupta971 Not if it brings the main road nearer to their hamlet than it was before. Not every hamlet or lone house is on an existing main road (often why people choose to live there), but they can find itself right next to a new by-pass route (or even be demolished). That's why you see some very high fences in places along new by-passes - they are [not very effective] appeasement for the affected owners.

[@lon3don]

The big difference is that a road provides local benefit to the area it passes through. Car owners can use it at will. HS2 goes from city centre to city centre and has little connection with the places on its route.

[@DeathInTheSnow]

I'm surprised you didn't mention the absolute hatred that Rishi and co. have for public transport in general being a factor. It's incredibly shameful knowing that they're in positions of power, especially as _we didn't bloody vote them in._ Imagine if we behaved like France. Now imagine having the TGV for 40 years instead of the Pacers.

[@andrewclarke6899]

The French used to run small, light, diesel railcars a bit like Pacers only with proper bogies. Meanwhile, the concentration on LGVs has led to the voies classiques that the French Pacers ran upon being run down or closed altogether. Meanwhile, internal airlines in France are enjoying a bit of a revival, so maybe the LGVs aren't as popular - or profitable - as was originally planned.

[@zetectic7968]

This goes back to Thatcher & Co., only losers used public transport winners had bought a bright, shiny new car to enjoy the freedom of the open road devoid of unions.

[@michaelkitchin9665]

@@andrewclarke6899 Haven't they introduced a ban on some short-haul internal flights?

[@TalesOfWar]

What's even more disgraceful is that the PM apparently has the power to overturn the decisions of Parliament. This is the most scrutinised rail project in British history, probably world history. It had many consultations and debates and Parliament still voted for it because they knew it needed to be done. Then Rishi comes along and is like nah. All because he thought it would get a few more votes. Disgusting.

[@SynchroScore]

Conservatives have been against public transport since Harold Macmillan decided that the best person to be Minister of Transport should be the owner of a road-building firm who later fled the country to avoid prosecution.

[@TheWolfHowling]

Building a highway: "It's an Investment in to the Transportation Network" Building a Railway: "It's a massive waste of resources that will never be profitable or well used" It infuriates me that Rail Project are always needing to justify themselves whereas politicians, especially right leaning "conservatives", have a much more "Buils it, and they will come" approach to roads

[@tedcopple101]

But the cost has to be divided over it's life span. The current rail system was started in earnest in the 1840's. Nearly 200 years ago. So divide the cost of HS rail over 200 years and it doesn't seem too bad. It will never be cheaper to build than it is today!! Crack on, build it all, right up to Scotland and into Wales too!

[@stevieinselby]

Also note that when looking at international comparisons, costs are often higher in the UK because they include a much wider scope ... eg, including the cost of buying the trains and expanding capacity in city centre locations, where other countries would account for the trains separately and don't need major new works in city centres because they weren't already pared down to the bare minimum.

[@ronniewilliams9884]

Also if it was to cost 100billion that was to be averaged over the remaining 15yrs of contruction which equates to about 6billion per year out of an annual UK spend of 3000billion per year

[@lon3don]

And link it to HS1.

[@dougmorris2134]

Hello Jago, thank you for this video on HS2. Back in 2011, I travelled from London to Wuppertal, in Germany, by HS1, Thalys and DB Regional Express on all electriclly powered trains. I had the pleasure of seeing the countryside all along the route except in the Channel Tunnel obviously. Travelling by train is great because it is city centre to city centre without messing about with travelling to airports and no aviation fuel pollution involved. Do you remember the London UndergrounD poster “Fly the Tube” for the Heathrow extension? Looking at the railway maps of of how connecting the cities of Great Britain (HS1, 2, 3, 4 etc) and across Europe was a positive environmental aim. The scrapping the further extensions of HS2 is a lost opportunity for improvements to the British rail infrastructure and its benefits to travellers. Best wishes from Oxfordshire.

[@iankemp1131]

The frustrating thing, as Jago hints, is that Whitehall gave in to Nimbys in the Chilterns and escalated the cost of the southern leg so much that they ran out of money for the northern leg. Whereas motorways and dual carriageways run through most of the Chiltern valleys and are far more noisy and intrusive than trains. Compare the impact of HS1 and the M20 in Kent. But it also highlights a problem with our systems nowadays that overpriced lawyers can delay and block all sorts of projects with public benefit - railways, roads, housing, power stations etc. While China can get a high speed railway designed and built in 4 years by limiting local objections for the national good.

[@DavidKnowles0]

Those motorways wasn't built by the coward that is David Cameron, zero leadership skills, zero vision, zero capability.

[@hx0d]

Effing NIMYS man, they'll shout and wail while they drive their 4 family SUVs everywhere

[@archstanton6102]

It is a sad iexample of modern Britain that because you like something, that somebody else hates, you are then accused of being a shill, taking bribes etc

[@SynchroScore]

It's not just Britain, but here in the States, too. Perhaps it's a combination of psychological projection and unconscious acknowledgement of cynical marketing strategies, but it seems that anybody advocating for something that could be generally beneficial to people (especially if it's advocating the government do something) is inevitably accused of being a paid agent of some nefarious conspiracy.

[@isashax]

I'm in Spain and I really enjoy our high speed trains. I use a lot the Valencia to Madrid line and that has been a game changer to the route. Also the Valencia to Seville one, but that's quite a distance. I really hope that we can have Valencia to Barcelona connected in the same way and that other regions can enjoy these. Problem is that many areas have old and slow trains that fail often. So both things have to be attended, regular regional trains (and commuter ones) and high speed.

[@markfarebrother8389]

Railways in the 19th century "Look at this amazing viaduct, isnt it amazing" Railways in the 21st century, "Oh we're very sorry, if you wouldn't mind us putting in this little peice of infrastructure please, it'll make you're life easier we promise"

[@stevieinselby]

People objected to railway infrastructure in the 19th century too, especially in the early days. But poor people were of no consequence and could easily be ignored. Structures that we admire in wonderment now were often seen as monstrosities scarring the landscape when they were built.

[@SampleTracks2224]

​@@stevieinselbythe answer to that is never build anything, ever again. Your country is living proof of the validity of this.

[@hairyairey]

Harringworth Viaduct has over 30 million bricks. They were manufacturing and laying I think around 50,000 bricks a day during it's construction. That's extraordinary.

[@DavidJBradshaw]

It’s crazy they didn’t keep the line to Crewe. It was the cheapest bit of the entire project. Brum to Crewe was under 10% of the cost of London to Brum.

[@ADAMEDWARDS17]

Indeed the major problem cutting the line short at Litchfield creates is there is no bypass for the 2 track bottleneck through the tunnel at Shugborough. That's also why phase 2 was split into a and b, as the planners realised it was dead easy to build 2a on to Crewe and create a massively better line more rapidly, leaving the harder bit to Manchester for later.

[@CheshireTomcat68]

Ha ha. Bit far away from the Southern profits. No London politicians having shares in projects above Watford junction.

[@iankemp1131]

@@ADAMEDWARDS17 Although a localised Stafford bypass could improve that quite cheaply. Other than Shugborough the current WCML alignment seems pretty good?

[@TheRip72]

The most congested section is London-Rugby. Costs have been cut because there will be a general election some time in the next year. The plans will be re-instated at some point, but maybe not until the first part of the line is running.

[@DavidKnowles0]

@@TheRip72 I suspect Labour will almost immediately freeze the sale of land assets. An protect it for 30 years, if they get elected.

[@markcooper6042]

Great video and I'm glad you got a free Danish Pastry. What a magnificent railway; I'm just sorry I'll never see it reach the far north. Spent a few happy hours in Lille recently; a beautiful, historic town which has something special i.e. a direct high speed rail connection from the cobbled town centre to everywhere in Europe that matters. I swear you can see it in the faces of the people.

[@Bunter.948]

Hearty congratulations, Mr H for a well reasoned and superbly presented piece. I worked with the public sector on many projects and there was always a tendency to over egg (or 'gold plate') such that the initial business case became flawed. We really must build the rest of HS2 to achieve the planned benefits. And there's a further problem - calling it HS2 when the whole point was extra capacity (primarily for freight). So X-Cap would have been a better title (which you are welcome to use). Thanks, Mr H. Simon T

[@PokhrajRoy.]

Nice to hear how you’ve given us the itemised list of bribes 😂

[@clickrick]

And the subtle way that he discreetly hinted as to his price for saying nice things in future 😉

[@robfenwitch7403]

Since retirement, I miss "corporate" danish pastries :(

[@thomasburke2683]

But he omitted the big one; access to the worksite with permission to record. Worth rather more than coffee and danish pastry, but of no monetary value. A pearl of great price perhaps?

[@libshastra]

I find it bonkers that Griders had to be imported from Northern Ireland. No wonder costs are high!

[@paulsengupta971]

I wonder what you could get him to say for an apple turnover.

[@datguy6101]

KZbinr and railway engineer Gareth Dennis really changed my mind about HS2, I recommend his videos to those that want to learn more

[@paulsengupta971]

What was your opinion before and what is it now?

[@frederickcstacey.7520]

@@paulsengupta971 I had my mind on HS2 changed as well by Gareth Dennis from being unfavorable to being quite supportive minus quite a few issues that I have with the station designs (the reliance on terminus stations instead of through stations and the fundamental constraints on capacity and future operations that these have.)

[@datguy6101]

@@paulsengupta971 I knew little about the point of the project, just the negative press about the excessive £100 billion figure and how it would destroy towns and the environment. Gareth talks about the benefits that come with HS2, why its so expensive and debunks claims about the environmental impact of its construction.

[@stevieinselby]

@@datguy6101 Another point that Gareth has been good at pushing - and which most of the press pay no attention to - is that the benefits of HS2 are for wider than just those cities directly served by HS2. For example, Northampton is set to have huge gains, because Hs2 will free up capacity on the WCML to run intercity trains from Northampton to points north, which the current network can't accommodate.

[@kaitlyn__L]

@@stevieinselbybut “the WCML has no capacity problem, it’s currently running just fine” 🙄 these are the same type of people who think y2k was never a problem instead of just fixed on time at immense effort and cost.

[@hughs591]

Good work, and thank you for “tunnels ain’t cheap,” it caused me to lol on a gloomy afternoon . . .

[@lavadude360]

Good video but one minor addition to note is that the majority (maybe all) of the tunnels are in the non-cancelled leg of HS2 so there’s more than a little obvious pro-London bias in the decision to cut the cheaper northern leg

[@Croz89]

To be fair, the most expensive tunnel (and the longest I think) would have been under the Manchester suburbs. Not a particularly difficult tunnel to bore as it's through sandstone, just have to be careful where to site the ventilation shafts as it would have run under a floodplain, but still. The rest would have been pretty short, though I don't know what was supposed to happen in Leeds.

[@highpath4776]

@@Croz89 Leeds would have been better if Leeds had been built in a better location

[@highpath4776]

They should have built from Manchester south at the same time and met in Birmingham

[@TalesOfWar]

@@highpath4776 We don't have enough engineers in the UK to do that. But I agree it should have started in the north.

[@TalesOfWar]

They built the tunnels because of NIMBY's. Those NIMBY's also happen to be living in Tory strongholds and are quite affluent parts of the country. So they pandered to them so it didn't "ruin their view". So the rich Tory voting areas get the thing put in expensive tunnels, while the poor Tory hating parts of the country don't get a railway at all.

[@PokhrajRoy.]

Haha you should’ve included the camera person squabble.

[@acm_1985]

All these details - local politicians, residents who not directly benefit (not in my backyard!) , enviroment protection overkill and stealth design requirements are the reasons for huge costs - rendering infrastructure projects almost impossible in Europe. And the United Kingdom. Thank You for the video!

[@spencerhardy8667]

It's not the "high speed" of HS2 that's most important. It's relieving the congestion on the WCML that's the most important. If you watch KZbinrs like traindriver brian, you realise just how much time freight gets held up, how much time is wasted. The freight may appear to be moving fast when it's moving, but it can average 20mph over the course of a day between all the stops and starts and red lights and delays. HS2 will mean higher average speed on all tracks, not just the fancy new one.

[@DavidMartin-ym2te]

But it didn't need to be high speed then, did it? We could have upgraded old disused lines for a lot less cash and still got the same congestion relieving effect.

[@Jasper_4444]

@@DavidMartin-ym2teNo, because such a low tier line wouldn't attract any traffic and thus the WCML would stay as congested as it is today.

[@spencerhardy8667]

@@DavidMartin-ym2te The new alignment uses far less energy per ton per mile. That alone will probably pay for the outlay over a century, which is the kind of timescale these projects are based on.

[@TalesOfWar]

@@DavidMartin-ym2teNo. The upgrade to the network is a new line called HS2. Most of the old alignments aren't enough and just feed directly into the existing main lines meaning it would actually make things worse in most cases. Some branch lines should be re-established, but it needs to be done in an intelligent way. There's a point where the only upgrade is to start over because you get to the point of diminishing returns. That's what HS2 was.

[@1fourcore]

Hs2 would increase capacity for freight on the existing lines which is at capacity at the moment and mostly run at night .

[@roderickmain9697]

Fascinating. I'm also fond of rail travel. However, HS2 suffers from the most loathsome of failings - it started from London. Now, after its cut backs, its just another fast link between (almost) London to (almost) Birmingham. Given the existence of the Euston to New Street service (and beyond) it now seems like a redundant white elephant. Politically, the full project made sense to equip northern cities (the Northern Powerhouse) with faster links to the south. The very essence of "leveling-up". Indeed, one could argue that faster east-west links connecting Liverpool, Manchester, to Leeds (& Sheffield), and on to Hull and Middlesbrough would have been even more beneficial. Theres a certain irony to the fact that the political right have been bleating about not wanting it near them, forcing costs up by requiring tunnels and viaducts to be built and they have the line while the more politically left leaning northern towns which wanted better links now get nothing. HS2 has become a very symbol of what is wrong in Britain. Its starts nowhere, its going nowhere but its doing it very fast. (apologies for being cynical)

[@rockerjim8045]

why not connect the two largest conurbationsbations in the UK first

[@Vonononie]

I think you’ve hit the nail on the head. Great idea ruined by politicians, project changes, and budget blowout. It’s not worth the money now

[@roderickmain9697]

@@rockerjim8045 because they are already connected?

[@peterwilliamallen1063]

Well you haven't done much reserch then have you, HS2 will run from London Euston terminus which is not exactly Central London( OOC is just temporary as it is not desighned as a terminus station) and terminate in the heart of Birmingham City Center at Birmingham Curzon Street Station whose main entrancw will be on Moor Street Queensway in Birmingham City Centre and these services will replace London Avanti Services from Birmingham New Street Station, it s centerd on Birmingham and I am not sure why the Northern Power House has so much importance over other areas.

[@roderickmain9697]

@@peterwilliamallen1063 Have they given the go-ahead for it to get into Euston? Last I heard that bit of it wasn't funded.

[@Evergreensands]

I stumbled on this channel, not into trains, but your dry sense of humour had me captured! Well done 👏 ✔️ 👍

[@zetectic7968]

Amazing seeing what is involved in building these viaducts. Thanks for the video

[@PaulSmith-pl7fo]

Hi Jago. I agree with your comments on HS2. The viaducts promise to be elegant and discreet - let's wait and see. I'm disappointed that the government has decided to cut two arms of the planned route to the north. What public building project *hasn't* overrun the original budget by two or three times the original figure - this shouldn't be news to anyone!

[@richieixtar5849]

Very interesting as always and just for the record, I never doubted your integrity for a moment dear fellow :)

[@teecefamilykent]

Brilliant video sir, your humour is fantastic, keep up the brilliant work.

[@PtolemyJones]

So neat that Jago has gotten prominent enough to get invites to things like this...

[@stevieinselby]

I reckon it's just people who want to know what he looks like offering him bribes to turn up in person 🕵🏻‍♂

[@pb4rton]

Thank you for this informative video! Well done with the graphics!

[@andrewclarke6899]

This is because a motor car in the UK is an important status symbol, as well as a usually necessary means of transport. The days when travelling first class on the Cornish Riviera Limited or the Brighton Belle (plus secretary) or the Royal Scot conferred similar status are long gone.

[@andrewclarke6899]

Sorry, this comment is in the wrong place. It should be in the thread about why people complain about the cost of railway construction but not about the costs of road construction. Senior moment.

[@paultidd9332]

When I saw the quality of the Elizabeth Line build it gave me great hope as to what HS2 would look like and if you want the best you have to pay for it. The controversy now is the fact that it is not achieving its goal of reaching Leeds and Manchester and dealing with the capacity issues and overloading of the existing rail network north of Birmingham.

[@DuffValley]

The main key for me why we need HS2 is for freight. By having passengers move onto HS2 we can free up pathing space for freight traffic, this in turn takes hundreds of Trucks off the road. Taking more and more Trucks off the road will aid in maintenance costs on the roads as less heavy trucks will be using it.

[@michaelimbesi2314]

Thanks for the clarification. Looking at Small Dean, I was wondering why it wasn’t just built on a fill.

[@Clavichordist]

It seems like the north of any place is forgotten. The same occurs over here across the pond. When there are rail commuter projects, new equipment, electrification, or other extensions, we're forgotten or only get a new station or two while the south gets all the new stuff. The same with new routes as well. We're always left out and have to deal with the onslaught of traffic from outside the region and backed up roads while the South Shore recently got more improvements including on those lines that see very little traffic to start with.

[@bettyswallocks6411]

As if we didn’t expect something like it, the tories have announced that they are taking a huge chunk of HS2 funds, which were also so-called ‘levelling up’ funds, earmarked for the North, and reallocated it to road repairs in London.

[@iqbang9236]

The best way to build HS2 is to buy some TBMs and dig underground between the two cities. In this way, there will be no more environmental complaints, no more land expropriation at exorbitant prices, and no more noise complaints. The only downside might be that there's not much to see along the way for travelers. But then you can make the train go as fast as possible. There's 600km/h technology there. And the price would not be more dear than that of now.

[@ShedTV]

From £55m to £106bn? That's a serious increase!

[@clickrick]

Not even double. Many major infrastructure projects in the UK have risen by far more than that.

[@BCrossing]

Cost estimates are just that. Estimates. If you knew how much of a complete guess those numbers were, you would be shocked. Anyway it's still economically worth it by far.

[@hellojasonsuresh]

£55bn to £106bn, not million

[@sonorioftrill]

The channel practical engineering has a nice video on why those budgets tend to get bigger over time, but that basic part is that there are a lot of unknowns factors that you can’t know about until you do it, and very few of them make things cheaper.

[@memyself1566]

A few incentivising golden handshakes were probably to blame.

[@martindeane9631]

When you have decisions about long term strategic transport infrastructure projects being made by governments who are preoccupied with short term vote chasing, you are bound to end up with spiralling costs and project cancellations. I am not sure what the answer is other than to look at how other countries managed their HSR projects.

[@ADAMEDWARDS17]

Other countries have government systems based on consensus and long term planning usually because they use a form of proportional representation rather than first past the post. In Spain the aim is that high speed rail will put all regional capaitals within 3 hours of Madrid and in Madrid there is a tunnel to enable the trains to run through region to region. HS2 would have put Edinburgh and Glasgow 3.5 hours from London and freed up the exisitng lines for other regional servies and freight. Sad that the supposed party of business can't see how that's good for trade.

[@railwayjade]

While not a high-speed train, the Gautrain Rapid Rail system does use "modern concepts" similar to these projects. Let me tell you the people making the most noise about viaducts, et al going through their town are the BIGGEST users of the system.

[@Brentwoodmartin]

Thank you TGW for another great video... and for pronouncing “controversy” correctly! 😏

[@sterlinghartley2165]

HS2 would be great if it was for non-Anglosphere price, like French or Spanish price tags. The WCML is at capacity and HS2 was the fix, the UK just bottled it like normal.

[@johnjephcote7636]

I am surprised the 'Government' did not convert the marked-out trackbed and even what has so far been built into a three-times as wide and fully lit motorway since the Ministry of Roads has pots of money. As far as rail is concerned the so-called 'savings'. from cancelling the Northern Leg and spending that on smaller rail projects all seem still-born under the words of local MPs as 'We cannot afford it'.

[@jamesbedford7327]

It's more complicated than that. The price includes all the stations trains and track etc. French/Spanish HSR generally doesn't include this in the price as they are separate projects, whereas we have to do it in 1 go, as there isn't the capacity at existing stations to do this

[@Badger13x]

@@johnjephcote7636 Living in the Southwest of the country our local news has stated that the savings are being spent on repairing potholes so the 'savings' from the rail network are being siphoned away for the road network, all hail king car.

[@highpath4776]

@@jamesbedford7327 Be interesting the full report on differences of prices/costs that is promised (there must be old TRRL reports on this somewhere ?)

[@TalesOfWar]

If you break it down the prices aren't much different. The problem is they did it as one massive mega project rather than a bunch of connected smaller ones. In France they split them up more, so the actual track to the outskirts of a city or town will be one project, the station upgrades or total new builds will be another, the lines to connect from the high speed track to the station will be another etc. This makes it more efficient to manage and also makes it harder to cancel. You can't just cancel the station build if the line is already built etc. Having it as a single project like HS2 means you can just cancel the whole thing, which is pretty much what they did.

[@thesudricmerman3318]

It shame how badly hs2 been handled could off been game changer for railway but now looks like to be repeat off great central railway over promised under delivered which only benefit the south and leaves north high and dry

[@andrewdolinskiatcarpathian]

Comic genius 👍😂 Thank you for a well balanced view on such a divisive subject. 👍😀

[@PenryMMJ]

Looking at the original planned route for HS2 the main problem with escalating costs seems to have arisen from connecting it to London. A Y shaped line connecting Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds, with a northern spur from Manchester back to the west coast main line heading towards Scotland would have been far cheaper and benefited far more people. Instead we're getting a new terminus station at old oak common (eventually also an upgrade to Euston) and what is essentially just a high speed commuter line from the Chilterns into London. And they expect us to believe that wasn't the plan all along.

[@hairyairey]

It was Y shaped the way it was for a geographic reason, to connect major cities in England together. Then the cold feet came along. I am still hopeful for a high speed line from Liverpool to Hull!

[@huggleton]

The whole ‘building the viaduct on the ground then sliding it over completed piers’ thing is super cool and strikes me as a very Thunderbirds solution

[@johnkeepin7527]

A good site survey! Nothing new about having to appease the landlord, with the route design or the odd tunnel (such as Alderton to keep Badminton happy), on the Badminton route from Wootton Bassett to Stoke Gifford. Perhaps the odd station here and there and so on.

[@hywelmorris1778]

Brilliant. Your best one yet I think. Succinct and well argued.

[@RitaFarrow]

thanks for this great content, my issue with hs2 is ,[1] it should have started nearer to heathrow airport as ther is a rail to the city in place,[2] as for doing a tunnel under the chiltons thats where most of the money is going,as u have shown ,the line could have built on viaducts,up in the air and out of the way,everytime i watch hs2 video,nothing seems to get done[3] as for old oak common its the biggest waste of time again refer to number 1, end of rant

[@Croz89]

I've heard excessive consultancy costs and revision have also driven the price up. Sometimes more money has been spent on value engineering than was saved. At some point you have to pry the design out of their fingers and just build it!

[@DavidKnowles0]

Euston station has been redesign 3 or 4 times, each design cost tens of millions of pounds.

[@kaitlyn__L]

Tories are great at that, they cost Crossrail more with their “just use multiple signalling systems” ‘cost saving’ plans than just upgrading the signalling along the whole length would’ve cost.

[@SD-iv4sz]

Nimbys

[@TrevorWilliams-fq8mg]

True value engineering cost comparisons include the consultancy re-design costs. So a value engineered cost comparison is an exact like for like cost comparison against the original solution.

[@californiadreamin8423]

Very interesting video from a civil/structural point of view. Politically it is also interesting in that the project costs have escalated so much in order to keep the residents between Birmingham and London happy , that the “master plan” has been castrated, leaving everything north of Birmingham-Manchester- Leeds reliant upon the canals, as an alternative to the road congestion between Birmingham Manchester and Leeds. So much for the “Northern Powerhouse “ which has as expected, turned into a meaningless PR headline, because a significant part of what is the industrial heartland of the U.K. lies between….Birmingham Manchester and Leeds.

[@hairyairey]

Part of Northern Powerhouse relied on the HS2 tracks into Manchester. Which doesn't make a lot of sense if the HS2 lines terminated in Manchester. Manchester needs an underground station so that the line can be extended.

[@thefareplayer2254]

That Wendover Dean was quite a production!

[@lightningwingdragon]

I find it very humorous that I watch a naval historian and a railway enthusiast, who sound almost EXACTLY the same.

[@Skorpychan]

Drachwhatsisface is probably also from the London area. However, they're a dying breed; rents and house prices are shooting up faster than wages, so nobody else has free time to youtube.

[@BibTheBoulderTheOriginalOne]

Forgetting the politics of it all, I pass the Curzon St site (just outside Birmingham New Street) most weekdays and it has been fascinating watching it develop.

[@casperbacon1423]

the only way HS2 would have got built entirely was if they had started in Leeds and Manchester first. No way they would have cancelled it if London missed out.

[@tamara3984]

My thoughts exactly and that line would have been and still is very much needed.

[@peterwilliamallen1063]

And it would not of got any where at that rate, it is being built from Birmingham North to Lichfield and South to London and North from London and sites in between, this way 100% of the line is being constructed.

[@casperbacon1423]

Nope. The massive overspend was for purchasing land and construction in london and the pandering to middle England with the tunnels in the chilterns. Look at crossrail or any construction project in london for that matter

[@michaelwright2986]

Those viaducts really are elegant. Nowadays, no one thinks of the Victorian brick viaducts as a blot on the landscape. But a truncated HS line does seem a bit pointless: how much difference is a faster route between London and Birmingham going to make, in total travel times?

[@playwithmeinsecondlife6129]

As an American I wish I could get a slice of that high speed rail. We think what few trains we have are fast if they go highway speeds. Our passenger rail must share with freight so slow as a freight train is top speed.

[@eddiewillers1]

And to think that, had it not been for Beeching, they could have used the Great Central as far as Rugby before diving off for Brummagem.

[@ADAMEDWARDS17]

Its a myth: the GC line at Rugby was at righangles to the WCML, so you'd have had a sharp curve to make this work. But also note much of it has been built on e.g at Daventry. The one section where the route is being folowed is near Aylesbury where HS2 crosses the East West line at Calvert.

[@iankemp1131]

The GC route was well aligned, easily graded and built to Continental loading gauge. A great pity that the route was not safeguarded after closure. An extra mile or two round Rugby to give a gentle curve would have been far cheaper than HS2. An alternative would have been to use it as the main freight route and leave passenger trains to the WCML, solving capacity problems though not giving full high-speed rail.

[@TheRip72]

@@iankemp1131 Freight trains co-exist quite nicely with local passenger trains so moving them off would achieve little. It is the long distance services which are the odd ones out.

[@peterwilliamallen1063]

The Great Central line at Rugby is no where near Birmingham and this would not work

[@iankemp1131]

@@peterwilliamallen1063 It would put in a dogleg with a few extra miles, but the same is true of the deviation via Old Oak Common. Also it feeds directly into the West Coast Main Line at Rugby for Manchester/Liverpool, and would serve Coventry. The real snag is that the Rugby-Coventry section in particular is a long-term bottleneck because it is only 2 tracks. So you would need a new parallel line as far as Coventry anyway. Logically that would come off the GC line some way south of Rugby (round Catesby?) to reduce the extra mileage. But it's all academic anyway as that route wasn't chosen.

[@temy4895]

Have you covered HS1 before? It could offer some interesting comparisons to HS2.

[@hairyairey]

HS1 - finished under budget apparently because the budget was never published!

[@digitalcasio2704]

I'm looking forward to your videos about HS74.

[@andrewreynolds4949]

I think the Crewe segment would be best restored to the plan if they are building HS2. It seems about the right balance to me, the plan around Manchester always seemed suboptimal. One point in favor of HS2 is construction is moving reasonably quickly, despite the price tag; California High Speed Rail has been spending money at absurd rates and hasn’t been getting much done

[@TalesOfWar]

The original plan with Manchester was to put it in a tunnel into Piccadilly then leave a stub end at the terminus so it could be built out to continue on for when HS3 was built (which is more or less confirmed as dead at this point). They changed that to having a new viaduct and then a full on terminus, meaning any future expansion would be extremely expensive and difficult. They even screwed over any future expansion of Euston by selling off all the land around it to property developers. Euston is already a massively over burdened station. It's maddening just how shortsighted and callous they are with their "plans". It's like they've doubled down on doing the worst possible thing for the country since 2010.

[@DavidKnowles0]

I don't believe they have sold it off yet. I read no one is really prepared talk about investing until after the elections. If Labour wins I suspect they reinstate the 12 platform design with HS1 extension a possibility and tell HS2 they a few years to get shovels into the ground before the general election. @@TalesOfWar

[@SampleTracks2224]

The whole HS2 story, the manner in which it was treated by the country, the way it was managed, and the comments to this video, all strongly suggest that any railway engineer involved in the design and construction of this railway will be much better off plying their trades in any of the other countries in the world that want to build modern high-speed rail, and above all, don't _hate_ themselves like Britain does.

[@sauce2kgod193]

I truly feel like the days when steam was king you had railway networks that although was built for competition from a business standpoint but for future reference it would be helpful for commuters. HS1 and HS2 in my opinion are trying to bring back those connections that the beeching axe had done for the network even though at the time the railway was losing money, money can be regained over time especially in different areas. I surely hope that these massive construction projects to bring back lost railway connections pays out in the long run if not then let’s say people will be pissed off

[@lassepeterson2740]

I must say as much as i like trains and railways , i do side with nimbys more than commuters . Many tunnels on the legacy railways of England were built due to nimbys in the 1800's .

[@rachelcarre9468]

Thank you Jago. Many countries around the World including even the USA have invested in high speed rail. In this country we compromise our own future for the sake of shorttermism. If only our petulant, politically naive Prime Minister favoured rail travel over helicopter travel for short journeys.

[@warmstrong5612]

NIMBY's never appreciate all the hard work that goes into making projects like HS2 as unobtrusive as possible.

[@d33w]

A chocolate eclair will definitely buy my goodwill too. Great video, cheers.

[@davidbarrass]

HS rail should be easy in the UK, we're in a long thin island. All you need is a north-south line; London - Birmingham - Glasgow. With 2 spurs; one towards Bristol the other towards York. I recon that would be within 45 minutes by local rail of 90% of the population. Then you can ban internal flights like France (with dispensations for the Higlands and Islands).

[@vylbird8014]

Should be easy. But politically, not so much. A lot of it is the old NIMBY problem: A lot of communities and councils oppose the rail going through their area because of the disruption that a major construction project causes and fears that noise and loss of unspoiled natural views will lower property values. The endpoints are also ridiculously expensive because it means buying up land and demolishing buildings in major cities - thus the jokes about connecting almost-London to almost-Birmingham. Neither end actually goes up to the city center, you have to get off at the fringe of the city and change to a local train, which defeats the purpose of high speed rail.

[@Croz89]

Bristol would probably be better connected up to Paddington than Euston mind you.

[@davidbarrass]

@@Croz89 That may be true, but on the other hand is everyting centered on London a good idea? Currently yes, but that does draw people and ideas away from the regions. Could a Bristol - Birmingham link stimulate both?

[@Croz89]

@@davidbarrass Maybe in the future, but there isn't the demand at the moment. London has to be linked up to any HSR network to make any economic sense, especially as it has the HS1 link too.

[@iankemp1131]

@davidbarrass That's not too far off the original concept; London to Manchester with a spur to East Midlands/Sheffield/Leeds. Bristol has adequate service already, while population density drops off sharply north of Lancashire. The 1970s West Coast electrification to Glasgow was far less profitable than the original legs to Birmingham and Manchester/Liverpool. Also, it is still pretty quick with the existing trains (likewise London-York-Edinburgh).

[@6brman224]

I live near Hinkley Point, 18 months behind at a cost of £3m a day. HP 1&2 are being decommissioned, HP3 is well behind and the Chinese have pulled out. My daughter lives near Wendover. Ask the locals what they think about HS2. As usual, no say in it. And documented whistleblower information about compulsory purchase skullduggery. Corruption, as always with high value infrastructure. Government contracts during c vid is another example.

[@johnledingham852]

Fantastic concept, and looking so good thus far. But it must go through to Manchester and Glasgow. The cost will be greater in the future, Bite the bullet and construct right through now. Future generations will have to dig deep to help in paying it off. Future construction will be much higher and the high speed concept is a must for the long term efficiency of rail travel. The roads will be getting more choked, and rail is the answer.

[@nawbus]

The cancellation of the Birmingham Manchester section is utter stupidity. The problem is, as usual, politicians. From creating the extra cost of having to use tunnels, to the moving of the "saved" money to the roads. It also doesn't help that the DfT has something against that major conurbation in the middle of the route between Manchester and Birmingham, North Staffordshire! I fail to see why politicians of both sides dislike rail so much 😢

[@HarryLovesRuth]

If any of you rail nerds can stomach watching a documentary series on highway construction, I recommend the GBH Big Dig podcast series about the tunnels that restored Boston, Massachusetts to a reasonable place to walk around in. It's got it all: cost overruns, state and national politics, schemes, obfuscations, shenanigans. Well worth a listen and available tlon these here Tubes of You.

[@TheRip72]

Same for the rail link to the old Bangkok airport. Politics stopped the project then a new airport was built over 10 years later. Off/on projects are a by-product of a democracy.

[@garrymartin6474]

Small Dean should also not be confused with Little Dean , which is in the Forest of Dean !

[@andrewclarke6899]

Or Torvilland Dean which is somewhere near Bournemouth.

[@LeoStarrenburg]

What would an HS2 return London~Birmingham set you back once all is up and running ? Mind you , the last time I took a train in the UK it was BR-only country with blue loco's coupled to Mk2 and -3 rolling stock, so I have absolutely no idea if the figure you would give me is outrageous or not. For me personally, the best thing about HS2 is at the Birmingham end: the old L&B terminus still stands proud, showing London how it should have been done.

[@peterwilliamallen1063]

The same as it would on the present day pendolino service operated by Avanti West Coast trains

[@iankemp1131]

Not so good is that anyone wanting to connect anywhere else in the West Midlands will need to get a tram from Curzon Street to New Street or walk to Moor Street with luggage. When the Birmingham Bull Ring was redeveloped it wouldn't have taken much foresight to safeguard space for a couple of extra running lines from the east to let HS2 trains run into New Street.

[@peterwilliamallen1063]

@@iankemp1131 It won't make any difference to local services as Birmingham Curzon Street and HS2 is desighned for long distance tain services from Birmingham, people from Wolverhampton and Coventry will have Pendolino services from there by passing Birmingham and if they did want to use the HS2 route from these places they would not change at Birmingham New Street but change trains at Birmingham International/Birmingham Interchange and if any thing else a lot of places in the West Midlands you have to get off at New Street and get the Tram/ Bus or Taxi, so whats the problem

[@iankemp1131]

@@peterwilliamallen1063 Will be interesting to see how many Pendolino services actually remain after HS2 opens (especially the Euston leg) and whether they get extra stops (eg Milton Keynes, Watford, Rugby). Hadn't thought about it, but Coventry could lose out significantly. Cross City line passengers will need an extra change. But I guess for the Kidderminster line it's no worse than now, and you make an interesting point that for a lot of the West Midlands, bus and taxi is the way to get to New Street as there are few local train routes - quite different to London (or indeed Leeds, Manchester and Glasgow) but similar to Edinburgh, Sheffield, Bristol etc.

[@iankemp1131]

I have to admit also that I am out of date on how slow and infrequent the West Coast service to the West Midlands is nowadays. 40 years ago I remember it as a half hourly service, first stop Coventry. I thought it had then gone up to every 15 minutes pre-pandemic. Having just checked, it now seems to be 2 an hour, of which only one goes through to Wolverhampton and already has all the extra stops en route!

[@lefthandedspanner]

the Tame Valley near Birmingham is also not to be confused with the Tame Valley east of Manchester, on the historic Cheshire/Lancashire border (which gives its name to the metropolitan borough of Tameside)

[@peterwilliamallen1063]

There is no Tame Valley Route in Birminham there is the Stour Valley route from Birmingham to Wolverhampton, but HS2 does not follow any valley called the Tame Valley as there is no such thing although there is a small river called the River Tame in the vacinity but the HS2 line tunnels under it and goes no where near it.

[@liveevil6386]

HS2 should be in full swing. Being this far behind on rail has become normal in the uk

[@luisstransport]

Great video Jago

[@pvuccino]

So basically, it'll be a revival of the London & Birmingham Railway from 1838! From London Euston to Curzon Street in Birmingham, with Curzon Street station including the original station building and Euston rebuilding the original arch!

[@Maxime_K-G]

Personally I'm not a big fan of the sound barriers. They make the railway look bulkier than it needs to even when those trains aren't very loud at all. In the end it will just be hamper visibility of the train, both for passengers and passers-by. Like everywhere else, once people get used to the new line, public opinion will shift to be positive. It's always fun to spot a train go by and the infrastructure will just makes the region look more modern and attractive.

[@carguyuk7525]

Great video and detail. Shame our government prefers infighting rather than investment for the long term. The price is big but we are spending a relatively small amount each year aligned with what can be afforded. There is no 100 billion pot of money for spending elsewhere.

[@herseem]

I hope your cold gets better soon

[@-Benedict]

A chocolate eclair? You're cheap, Jago. I would insist on a bag of chips and a four pack of beer.

[@Vonononie]

Four-pack???!! Inflation is getting bad

[@loddude5706]

'Welcome to Britain's high speed rail network . . . Please mind the gaps . . .' : )

[@cyberwomble7524]

Now, if a certain infamous ex NY mayor could just defame HS2 a few times, they might just get enough moolah to start on the northern bit.

[@elnesti1890]

Bravo very good video and true normally everything in UK and US cost more but anw Britain i think need HS2 cause it opens the way for high-speed rail in the UK. So UK gov needs to be persistent for continuing the Hs2 till the end and immediately when its finished start some HS3 and 4 cause those things make strong economy 😤 and it pays back the money believe it.

[@tonywise198]

I would imagine that the same controversies arose in the 1840s. When the Victorian railway builders descended on the countryside, it must have been even more unnerving and annoying to landowners and the peasants alike.

[@TheEulerID]

Nothing like as controversial, except with some major land owners. Communities positively clamoured for railway services for the very good reason that the transport alternatives where very slow, horse-drawn and, for people, expensive. That is no longer the situation. There is also the issue that, with HS2, there is very little obviously of benefit to the communities it's passing through and its construction has been very disruptive to local transport (certainly is where my mother lives).

[@fisk0]

@@TheEulerID well, there were those who claimed that travelling faster than 20 km/h would kill you.

[@Vonononie]

Some of the books from the time mention how locals felt the railway was a scar on the landscape. Larkrise to Candleford has a whole section about the positives and negatives of the railway coming to their town. Many hated the look of riveted iron for the bridges as it looked ‘unfinished’, we hear the same thing about concrete now. Strange that we now value the look of iron bridges

[@TheEulerID]

​@@fisk0 In the first instance, that has precisely nothing to do with current objections, and it appears that those who have researched the issue have not found any credible justification for claims that asphyxiation would occur above 20 km/h. Among other things, some human beings can run faster than that, and a rider on a horse at galloping speed can reach about 50 km/h. The Victorians would have known about that through horse racing. Dionysius Lardner, an Irish philosopher, engaged in an unwise debate with Isimbard Kingdom Brunel on the dangers of high speed travel and his claims were thoroughly debunked. Now I have no doubt the Victorians had their fair share of the type of people that claim Covid was caused by 5G mobile phone transmissions, but it seems to have played no real part in slowing the expansion of the railway system. Indeed, the Victorian era was characterised by what is known as railway mania which saw huge numbers of highly speculative projects for new railways, often with incredibly optimistic claims for traffic which were never met. The UK countryside is littered with the remnants of these failed projects.

[@barvdw]

@@TheEulerID yes, HS2 bisects communities who won't benefit from it, but that's why the current route was chosen, to minimise built-up areas as much as possible. There are still a few villages, but that's better than the larger towns and cities the ECML bisects, and the destruction adding more tracks to that line would bring.

[@peterjohnson1739]

The cost calculations, and those who say it’s too much, ignore the simple fact that most of the cost goes on wages and salaries. HS2 employs a huge number of people either directly or in their supply chain. These people pay their taxes and spend money in the wider economy. The alternative (including cancelling parts) means people lose their jobs, firms go bankrupt. The government then both loses tax income and has to pay Social Security to the unemployed (a double loss to the government). The question is simply do we invest in our future and keep the economy moving … or … do we avoid spending, have a stagnating economy and people out of work? The answer should be obvious! Projects like HS2 (in full) and the tunnel to bypass Stonehenge are must do projects.

[@itsjohndell]

Happy Christmas Jago!

[@JagoHazzard]

And to yourself!

[@frasermitchell9183]

So all it takes is a City spiv, (Goldman Sachs aka Gold in Sacks, then hedge-funder, the WORST kind of parasites we have to suffer), and only an MP since 2015 to declare he doesn't like it, and it's cancelled. Whilst one can argue about the choice of route between Crewe and Manchester, the line between Birmingham and Crewe was all ready to start construction. All the worksites had been established and property purchased. The length of this section, is only about 35 miles, and was crucial to the success of the whole line. Now all set at nought. Well done the spivs !

[@johnhood3172]

The viaduct, the slowest bridge build in history.

[@roblyndon5267]

Thanks for not shying away from politics in these videos. You don't wear your affiliations on your sleeve, but transport is inherently political, and it serves no one to pretend it doesn't exist. My own take on HS2 is that the other sections will be built in short order once the first section starts running. The mere existence of the Chanel Tunnel made HS1 politically inevitable, once the reality of Eurostars trundling through the Kent countryside on Victorian cart tracks became apparent.

[@grahamstubbs4962]

The southern section to Rwanda may be first if Suella Braverman gets her way. 🙂

[@hairyairey]

@@grahamstubbs4962 It's building that bridge from Gibraltar to Morocco that's going to be tricky! On second thoughts, a tunnel would be easier, it's only about 11 miles I think.

[@derekparsons4]

I wonder if it was short-sighted to cancel the northern leg. If the project was to cost (say) £150 Billion over thirty years, that it only £5 Billion a year. For comparison, the interest on the National Debt is around £100 Billion a year. What will future generations think, when the UK population reaches a hundred million, as it surely will? We are still benefiting from the tunnels, bridges and cuttings, carved out by our ancestors 150 years ago. Might our descendants criticize our parsimony and lack of vision?

[@mdhazeldine]

Yes

[@DavidKnowles0]

Precisely.

[@jahnahjarvis2963]

I wouldnt worry about the Uk pop ever reaching 100mil considering the birthrates for the entire population and the rates of childlessness.

[@francesconicoletti2547]

@@jahnahjarvis2963you seem to have a decent rate of immigration to make up the deficit, despite government policies to the contrary.

[@29brendus]

I am enthusiastic about high speed rail, but as most major cities in the UK are within 200 miles of London, or each other even, the time benefits are not very good and probably not worth the expense. Yes, there are capacity issues with the WCML, but I can't help feeling that it would have been much more sensible and cheaper, to 6 track the WCML to The North and to straighten out the line so as to accomodate (say) 186MPH HS trains. Simialrly, the Glasgow and Edinburgh line could have been easily 4 tracked through its sparsly populated route. All the electrical substations are already in place along these routes. Some extra line capacity could have been accomodated in tunnels at the London and Birmingham stations, or into any city, but in actual fact, Euston should not have been chosen, because a tunnel to St. Pancras would have been much more sensible and useful with better connectivity to Eurostar. Estimated cost including Scotland, 30% of what has been spent already.

[@anthonykeefe971]

The so-called northern leg of HS2 would have benefited Manchester and Liverpool but would it have done anything for the actual North ( North Lancashire, Cumbria, most of Yorkshire, the North East)? When politicians talk about "the North" they tend to mean nothing beyond Manc, Liverpool, Leeds.

[@darmtb]

Hi to Big Dean 😂 Great work on this and those viaducts look amazing. On them artists impressions there seems to be a multi purpose trail under them too. Will that be full length trail or just sections?

[@markdickson3820]

This feels like a poisoned chalice middle finger to the next gov’t from a current gov’t, that knows it’s out of office in a matter of months now. The selling of land is irresponsible, you are driving the costs further up if the next gov’t decides it is a priority. I will say that I am confused why this type of project always seems to cost far more to build in uk than other countries, the cost projections, if accurate, are unjustifiable. HS2 is obviously needed however, and not just to Manchester but up the coast to the northern cities. I would prefer them to switch the way they talk about these things - it should be a straight 5 billion (or whatever) a year, every year for building out the network protected from ongoing maintenance costs, forever. We have built almost nothing for 2 generations now, and our infrastructure, both rail and road, is in a desperate situation now and it affects our economic growth disproportionately. We have over protected our greenfield land and made it so bureaucratic, time consuming and expensive that the only things worth the effect are huge, identical looking developments of houses that are tiny and poorly designed/built. HS2 clearly needs built, I just hope we’re not waiting another few decades for it to continue on from Birmingham, because a system linking just those 2 cities changes the cost/benefit equation.

[@DavidKnowles0]

That was how they were originally talking about it. One of the reasons construction didn't really start until 2020 was that per year expenditure for crossrail was to be switch to HS2, so the same amount of money per year would be exiting the treasury.

[@peterjohnson1739]

Too many Public Enquiries and planning appeals where the only winners are lawyers with their huge fees. These result in delays and redesigns both of which push the costs up.

[@ghamerons6287]

Gosh I wish we had a functional government

[@marthaanderson2656]

Always missing in discussions like this is the benefit of solid jobs, both on site and , by extension , in the factories where the parts are made. Did they mention the money value of these jobs at all. Was there any talk of the byproduct of passive recreation space won or lost by the footprint?