To think we are one of the only countries in Europe without a high speed rail link..........

[Ilovemyself]

....... and that the Nimbys should shut up. It will create vast employment and will bring us in line with the rest of Europe's rail network.

After all, everyone complained about the M1 or HS1 and they are now classed as vital infrastructure!

There is one thing I guess we can agree on and that is the compensation available to people like miaow should be suitable.

You right i love Myself. People like Miaow have worked hard saved hard and chosen to buy their first house in a location,its not just the cost of housing but the emotional effects of having your first house taken off you and no doubt having years of arguments about land values. In a idea world, it would be great to have a fantastic train and cheap and efficent public transport network,but the costs to the taxpayer enviroment and time taken for the project make this project (A MONEY PIT) with no bottom and no growth or benefits for the people and regions that are desperate for a bit of goverment help.

Are we not also one of the only countries with a piss poor train structure and train service that treat customers like cattle fodder and charge them royally for it?

It seems to me that there are two separate questions here:

A. Do we believe that a well developed train network including high speed links is a desirable thing in theory?

B. Do we believe that this particular plan is going to deliver?

B does not follow logically from A.

(And for the record, I do not live anywhere near the proposed railway and have no personal stake whatsoever.)

I can't help feeling the government know something we don't (e.g future cost of motoring pushing more out of cars??) and that's why they are pushing it through regardless of what good reasons not to have it.

Personally I'm against it as I feel we are at a tipping point with our wildlife and this level of development (with the inevitable houses etc popping up round it) will only have a detrimental affect on our Eco system.
I also don't feel there's a need for it, we will end up with a 2 tier system, invest in what we have not leave one to rot whilst still in use. Open old lines, even look at canals. We have all these links abandoned when a shiny new one comes along.

Damnautocorrect, I had decided to 'hold back' mentioning the environmental impact of HS2 for fear that it might brand me as one of those damn NIMBY's (actually I live far away from the blighted area!). But your point about the environment is critical, because what HS2 proposes to do will depriving our children of the legacy that we need to leave for future generations to enjoy. We should not be associating the ripping to shreds of the UK with "progress" as if they are inextricably linked. We should take a responsible approach whereby we upgrade infrastructure so as to mitigate again environmental damage.

The government has, as Miaow stated, just taken their ruler and drawn a line which becomes HS2. High Speed Rail needs straight lines .. But we dont necessarily need high speed rail to progress. We need to use creative thinking!

Just an example of the arrogance of the MPs we are dealing with, Justine Greening until a year ago the Transport Minister, was asked to comment on the irreplaceable 200 year old woodlands that would either be ploughed down or else severed in half, thereby creating an environmental prison isolation for local wildlife. Ms Greening's solution? Why dont we just transplant the 200 year old woodland to a different location. They really do think they are God! Btw, Greening was reshuffled shortly after that statement. Says a lot!

I travel on the train several times a week as I have no car, both for work and leisure. I generally find the service excellent. Where I live (West Yorkshire), you can get local trains to almost every town, carry your bicycle and luggage free of charge and as I have a rail card the price is not too bad at all. I much prefer train travel to driving and this, in my opinion, is where money should be invested. If roads are widened/increased, traffic will just expand to fill it.

Instead, we need to invest money in decent rail infrastructures to entice drivers off the roads and also re-educate them to stop expecting door to door service. Yes, if you get the train you have to factor in walking a short distance, getting between stations etc but for most people these are not insurmountable obstacles and just require extra time. The more decent rail networks we have the better, imho.

Likewise, chrome100 I have great experiences of travelling by train for work and leisure.

Your positive experience matches mine (I have often used the Chiltern Line between Marylebone and Birmingham and it is reliable, reasonably priced and clean - and the staff are well motivated and friendly). These should be the standards to attain, when specifying the future of rail networks. Increasing train lengths and train frequencies are techniques that have been suggested to handle future capacity, so more people can sit down - however, the Government stat's of some services being at "full capacity" need to be challenged - on further enquiry they are only 50% utilised!

The Chiltern Line runs through the very heartland where HS2 is intended to plough through. I have used it for many years and there is only one occasion in all that time when a train was delayed/cancelled (December last year), and the passengers were given timely information.

Something very noticeable is the degree to which technology (laptops, iPads, tablets, phones) are used on the train - the government assumption is that it is 'empty' time. Most people I see doing 1-2 hours undisturbed work. Agreed, getting a seat means you need to reserve it in advance (which costs money), but if future capacity is expanded as part of upgrading existing infrastructure, this can be addressed.

High speed rail works for Europe and Japan because there are a large number of cities (and hence routes) distributed around the sweetspot for optimal high speed rail operation (200-600 miles).

Population distribution in the UK is not arranged in a way which makes HSR favorable.

Therefore there is a very simple argument for just not bothering.

Why not just make trains longer ?