Not in Tory manifesto.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...mment-99392666

On Mon, 29 May 2017 23:14:27 +0100
eastender wrote:
Not in Tory manifesto.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...buffers-uncert
inties-brexit-election-london#comment-99392666

I can't see the need for crossrail 2. We already have Thameslink and in
north london there's the moorgate line. If its simply to improve the public
transport in hackney then just build a new tube line or branch off the
victoria line but don't spend billions on another north-south mainline
railway.

--
Spud

In article ,
d wrote:
I can't see the need for crossrail 2. We already have Thameslink and in
north london there's the moorgate line.

I think those lines are pretty full in the peak.

If its simply to improve the public
transport in hackney then just build a new tube line or branch off the
victoria line

The victoria line isn't exactly renowned for half-full trains; and
I don't think there's much scope for increasing the capacity much.

It also doesn't improve public transport in Chelsea.

It also doesn't divert services that currently terminate in Waterloo
and Liverpool Street; by doing that you get to improve those
services (because they're no longer fighting for space in a busy
terminus) but also improve all the other services at that station,
because there are now 10 more paths into and out of e.g. Waterloo
that can be used by e.g. services to Southampton or Putney.

but don't spend billions on another north-south mainline
railway.

How about a SW - NE one?

That's not to say that there's nothing to critise in the plans:
personally, I think the SW section tries to pull in too many branches
and that will badly impact reliability. I think they're planning
on additional tracks so that CR2 will have dedicated running, which
is something, and all the junctions are (currently) flying, so
presumably they'll still have that.

Cheers,
Mike

--
Mike Bristow

On Monday, 29 May 2017 23:14:28 UTC+1, eastender wrote:
Not in Tory manifesto.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...mment-99392666

I think it was in difficulties long before the manifesto emerged. The lack of impetus, delayed consultation stages and Grayling's dislike of devolving anything to City Hall were all clear warning signs. Grayling then said he wanted to "investigate" the use of a land value capture tax as a funding mechanism. That is just another way of delaying the scheme and postponing the funding because I don't think we have such a tax mechanism in law and you'd need a Budget and a finance bill to introduce it. The Tories are not exactly fans of introducing new taxes and the government is pretty incompetent anyway so it would be hard to get through Parliament.

It is quite clear that the enthusiasm for "infrastructure" held by Cameron and Osborne is not evident in May's administration and even if she wins the General Election there are no obvious advocates for such a scheme in Government. The Chancellor is doing everything he can to avoid expensive pledges because the Exchequer needs maximum flexibility to deal with whatever the impact of Brexit will be. At a minimum, uncertainty about the process, timing and outcome of Brexit will damage the economy and even if there is no slump there will be a weakening and that damages tax income. The government are reluctant to borrow to invest so all they have left as a fiscal tool is to cut expenditure regardless of the impact.

I will be astonished if CR2 starts construction within the next 20 years. We will see a repeat of the nonsense that Crossrail had to endure to get to the point of "spades in the ground". This is because politicians are generally pretty stupid when it comes to transport investment.

--
Paul C
via Google

In message , at
04:07:40 on Tue, 30 May 2017, Paul Corfield
remarked:
I will be astonished if CR2 starts construction within the next 20
years. We will see a repeat of the nonsense that Crossrail had to
endure to get to the point of "spades in the ground". This is because
politicians are generally pretty stupid when it comes to transport
investment.

Or perhaps they realise that spending huge sums on something like CR2
brings less kudos than promising the same amount for the NHS, were
everyone in the country, not just a few toffs in Chelsea, can bask in
its alleged benefit.
--
Roland Perry

On Tue, 30 May 2017 11:25:34 +0100
Mike Bristow wrote:
In article ,
d wrote:
I can't see the need for crossrail 2. We already have Thameslink and in
north london there's the moorgate line.

I think those lines are pretty full in the peak.

Are thameslink using ATO in the central section yet? Thats supposed to improve
throughput AFAIK. Yes, the moorgate line is busy (I use it once or twice a
week) but that unfortunately is down to delays almost all the time which
almost always seem to be down to a cockup by the TOC or its staff having a lie
in. On the rare occasions the trains are on time they're busy but not crush
loaded.

If its simply to improve the public
transport in hackney then just build a new tube line or branch off the
victoria line

The victoria line isn't exactly renowned for half-full trains; and
I don't think there's much scope for increasing the capacity much.

That is a fair point.

It also doesn't improve public transport in Chelsea.

Frankly I doubt many of the inhabitants of that area give a monkeys about
public transport.

--
Spud

"Mike Bristow" wrote in message
...
In article ,
d wrote:
I can't see the need for crossrail 2. We already have Thameslink and in
north london there's the moorgate line.

I think those lines are pretty full in the peak.

If its simply to improve the public
transport in hackney then just build a new tube line or branch off the
victoria line

The victoria line isn't exactly renowned for half-full trains; and
I don't think there's much scope for increasing the capacity much.

It also doesn't improve public transport in Chelsea.

according to the article that I read, removal of the station in Chelsea is
being considered in order to keep CR2 on track, and it's something that is
actually welcomed by the residents

tim

On 2017-05-30 11:16:20 +0000, Roland Perry said:

In message , at
04:07:40 on Tue, 30 May 2017, Paul Corfield
remarked:
I will be astonished if CR2 starts construction within the next 20
years. We will see a repeat of the nonsense that Crossrail had to
endure to get to the point of "spades in the ground". This is because
politicians are generally pretty stupid when it comes to transport
investment.

Or perhaps they realise that spending huge sums on something like CR2
brings less kudos than promising the same amount for the NHS, were
everyone in the country, not just a few toffs in Chelsea, can bask in
its alleged benefit.

Except that the toffs in Chelsea really don't want a station on CR2.

eastender wrote:
On 2017-05-30 11:16:20 +0000, Roland Perry said:

In message , at
04:07:40 on Tue, 30 May 2017, Paul Corfield
remarked:
I will be astonished if CR2 starts construction within the next 20
years. We will see a repeat of the nonsense that Crossrail had to
endure to get to the point of "spades in the ground". This is because
politicians are generally pretty stupid when it comes to transport
investment.

Or perhaps they realise that spending huge sums on something like CR2
brings less kudos than promising the same amount for the NHS, were
everyone in the country, not just a few toffs in Chelsea, can bask in
its alleged benefit.

Except that the toffs in Chelsea really don't want a station on CR2.

Correct. They've been campaigning against it. They don't want the
disruption of its construction, nor the subsequent ability of suburban
plebs and lowlife to be whisked to their doorsteps.

In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message ,
at 04:07:40 on Tue, 30 May 2017, Paul Corfield
remarked:
I will be astonished if CR2 starts construction within the next 20
years. We will see a repeat of the nonsense that Crossrail had to
endure to get to the point of "spades in the ground". This is because
politicians are generally pretty stupid when it comes to transport
investment.

Or perhaps they realise that spending huge sums on something like CR2
brings less kudos than promising the same amount for the NHS, were
everyone in the country, not just a few toffs in Chelsea, can bask in
its alleged benefit.

The biggest set of beneficiaries are the 100 million passengers a year using
Waterloo who will either get alternatives or much needed extra capacity.

Paul is right about politicians and transport investment though.

--
Colin Rosenstiel