| A principled man has spoken! 22:03 - May 26 with 4070 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
https://www.theguardian.com/po
"In a scathing 5,700-word attack on the prime minister and his would-be successors published on Tuesday night, Blair argued that the party’s agenda should move firmly to the right, calling for the government to crack down on welfare spending, abandon net zero goals and support Donald Trump." |  |
| |  |
| A principled man has spoken! on 10:09 - May 28 with 231 views | DJR |
| A principled man has spoken! on 17:04 - May 27 by Ewan_Oozami |
"why does high speed rail track cost $25m per km in france but $260m in the uk?"
citation needed... |
I am not sure a citation is necessary because it is obvious that countries such as France do such things better and cheaper than the UK.
I suspect privatisation and fragmentation plays a large part, because, for example, the nationalised energy system built nuclear power stations at such speed that the UK became the first country with a civil nuclear power programme. |  | | |
| A principled man has spoken! on 10:09 - May 28 with 229 views | leitrimblue |
| A principled man has spoken! on 13:24 - May 27 by lowhouseblue |
the us wasn't my comparison.
why does high speed rail track cost $25m per km in france but $260m in the uk?
why is the neet rate in germany half that in the uk? why in germany, for claimants under the age of 25, if they reject one job offer do they lose their basic benefit completely (only receiving an allowance for housing and heating) and if they reject a second offer they lose all benefits? are the two linked? |
Why high speed track as cost 10 times more in the UK then France is definitely something that needs answering.
There may be genuine reasons such as different geologies, availability of aggregates, environmental and archaeological concerns etc. But I fear its at least partially to do with the government accepting very generous tender proposals during the original tender process.
They should have just returned them all and told all the competing companies to try again. Every company involved with that scheme as made an absolute fortune. |  | | |
| A principled man has spoken! on 10:11 - May 28 with 219 views | nrb1985 |
Joining this one late so no idea if it's been covered but TB was on the News Agents yday and was a lot more balanced and provided the context for his views that's missing from the Guardian piece - quelle surprise (an awful rag, as bad as the Telegraph).
In essence, he's not wrong on many of the points - albeit I don't agree with all of his solutions.
We are now living in completely different times to the harmonised global system most of us were lucky enough to grow up in. It's going to be increasingly fractured as governments scramble for energy and resource security. Whether we like it or not, that is the reality that confronts us.
We are woefully unprepared for that, Blair is right about that. |  | | |
| A principled man has spoken! on 10:24 - May 28 with 170 views | Ewan_Oozami |
| A principled man has spoken! on 10:09 - May 28 by DJR |
I am not sure a citation is necessary because it is obvious that countries such as France do such things better and cheaper than the UK.
I suspect privatisation and fragmentation plays a large part, because, for example, the nationalised energy system built nuclear power stations at such speed that the UK became the first country with a civil nuclear power programme. |
I was thinking about the specific cost comparison that Lowers made - are they comparing the same type of railway build? Or just specifically big projects? In France, big cities already have provision for high speed lines to come in to the centres, England doesn't, Yes, privatisation and operator fragmentation play a part, as does Britain's planning bureaucracy and crazy subcontracting processes - but also land ownership distribution is different, France has more widespread, decentralized private ownership of land than Britain. England specifically has one of the most unequal land distributions in the world, heavily concentrated in the hands of the aristocracy, the Crown, and large corporations.
If Lowers was making the point that Britain is inefficient at doing these thing compared to other countries then you also have to look the reasons, not just quote numbers. Personally, I would rather see more light rail projects around the country commisioned and run by local or regional groups than big flagship projects like HS2.
I can't even remember what the original question was now! |  |
| |
| A principled man has spoken! on 10:35 - May 28 with 148 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| A principled man has spoken! on 10:24 - May 28 by Ewan_Oozami |
I was thinking about the specific cost comparison that Lowers made - are they comparing the same type of railway build? Or just specifically big projects? In France, big cities already have provision for high speed lines to come in to the centres, England doesn't, Yes, privatisation and operator fragmentation play a part, as does Britain's planning bureaucracy and crazy subcontracting processes - but also land ownership distribution is different, France has more widespread, decentralized private ownership of land than Britain. England specifically has one of the most unequal land distributions in the world, heavily concentrated in the hands of the aristocracy, the Crown, and large corporations.
If Lowers was making the point that Britain is inefficient at doing these thing compared to other countries then you also have to look the reasons, not just quote numbers. Personally, I would rather see more light rail projects around the country commisioned and run by local or regional groups than big flagship projects like HS2.
I can't even remember what the original question was now! |
They also have twice as much land so it’s much cheaper, and they don’t have to chop down swathes of ancient woodland. Tbh England is small enough we don’t even need high speed rail (Eurostar aside) you can get London to Edinburgh in only 4 hours. I agree it would have been much more financially viable to upgrade conventional rail and capacity. | | | |
| A principled man has spoken! on 10:50 - May 28 with 102 views | Swansea_Blue |
| A principled man has spoken! on 09:52 - May 28 by DJR |
This from Blunkett, with his background in South Yorkshire, was good.
“We are on the edge of major technological revolution and the last two big ones, which was the 19th century and the 1980s, saw the most enormous number of victims.
The lesson from the 80s, where I was leader of Sheffield at the time, where we lost 50,000 jobs in three years, was that a social democratic government would not block modernisation and change but would be on the side of those navigating their way through it. Make it a positive rather than a negative in their lives.
What was missing from Tony’s essay and his interview was a recognition that government aren’t just there to facilitate the Industrial Revolution, they’re to facilitate people being able to live through it with a degree of dignity and to come out the other end seeing it as a positive gain rather than [being] victims."
And there was nothing in Blair's essay that acknowledged, or had measures to counter, the rise of parties like Reform. [Post edited 28 May 9:53]
|
I agree. You can go back further and look at Maggie’s ‘reforms’ too. It’s not necessarily the changes that are the problem (we’ll always have change), it’s the failure to support people who lose out through those changes. The failure to have a plan for how we can all move forward as a society. We’re very much an ‘I’m alright Jack’ society and people are made to feel they’ve failed and are worthless if they’re not one of the lucky ones. No wonder people start to look to shameless populists who promise easy answers to complex issues. |  |
| |
| A principled man has spoken! on 10:51 - May 28 with 102 views | DJR |
| A principled man has spoken! on 10:24 - May 28 by Ewan_Oozami |
I was thinking about the specific cost comparison that Lowers made - are they comparing the same type of railway build? Or just specifically big projects? In France, big cities already have provision for high speed lines to come in to the centres, England doesn't, Yes, privatisation and operator fragmentation play a part, as does Britain's planning bureaucracy and crazy subcontracting processes - but also land ownership distribution is different, France has more widespread, decentralized private ownership of land than Britain. England specifically has one of the most unequal land distributions in the world, heavily concentrated in the hands of the aristocracy, the Crown, and large corporations.
If Lowers was making the point that Britain is inefficient at doing these thing compared to other countries then you also have to look the reasons, not just quote numbers. Personally, I would rather see more light rail projects around the country commisioned and run by local or regional groups than big flagship projects like HS2.
I can't even remember what the original question was now! |
Fair points, and I didn't support HS2 from the outset.
Having travelled to the north by train for various games, it draws into sharp focus the contrast between the vast amounts of investment in transport in London and the South East.
Indeed, the hybrid (ie. not fully electric) trains to Sheffield haven't replaced all the existing diesel trains but are differently configured which, given the uncertainty of knowing which train will be doing which journey, means that it is no longer possible to reserve a seat.
As you suggest, far better to have spent a fraction of the cost of HS2 on electrifying the line to Sheffield, and replacing the whole fleet with electric trains.
I might add that I had planned to go to the Hull game last season and meet up with my son who is in Leeds. But as he couldn't get a train back to Leeds after the game, I didn't bother going, but that to me sums up all that is wrong with the transport system up north, given the relatively short distance between Hull and Leeds.
EDIT: another galling thing about the trains to Sheffield is that they are only five carriages long, with two of them first class. [Post edited 28 May 10:57]
| | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
