COMMENT
John Morris, despite his job at Birmingham Airport as head of government & industry affairs and the occasional rivalry between the two transport modes, has joined the campaign for high-speed rail. Here, he explains why.
I
have a vested interest. I have over 30 years’ experience in rail and aviation. I
am also from Birmingham, so I talk with a strong desire to reverse the industrial de- cline that the city has suffered, under vari- ous governments, for over 30 years.
However, I am not wedded to one mode of transport. Just as rail is not the complete answer, neither is road – or air. Each mode should be used to best advantage. The al- ternative to HS2 would appear to be very significant increases in the UK motorway network, with consequent land take – per- haps three times that of HS2.
Adding additional tracks alongside the existing Victorian
infrastructure would
destroy the heart of many towns that owe their existence or expansion to the rail- ways. It would also cost nearly as much money and yet it would not deliver a high- speed railway. There are some luddites who say that we don’t need to go so fast – their predecessors said the same about the Liverpool to Manchester Railway in 1829, when the average speed was a reck- less 10mph. History will prove them wrong again, but let’s hope that the rest of us don’t suffer as a result.
Other visionaries talk of replacing HSR with video conferencing or even Soviet- style restrictions on travel – all under a convenient blanket of environmental ne- cessity. Those of us in the real world are aware of a lot of mischief talked over cost for the scheme. Consider this; Crossrail is spending about £2bn per year on a railway through central London. As the project is completed, it is envisaged that £2bn would ‘roll forward’ annually (hopefully to high- speed rail projects). I’d like to see that in- vestment made outside of London, which has a disproportionately subsidised trans- port infrastructure, compared to the rest of the UK. If the UK cannot agree on HS2, I suspect that the funds will be reallocated to further rail projects in and around the capital. And for those who believe that HS2 will starve the ‘classic railway’ of cash, I un- derstand that the expenditure amounts to just 10% of the Department for Transport’s budget.
We all have a vested interest in HS2. High- speed rail may well need public money to complete; the trick will be in converting it to an investment that demonstrably deliv-
ers a return to UK Plc – the taxpayer – time after time. This is what is now happening with HS1, as the UK receives concession fees, and is what notably failed to happen with the M6 Toll Concession.
Assertions over journey times are mis- placed; today’s ‘end-to-end’ - 85 minutes - minus HS2’s 49 minutes - equals a sav- ing of 36 minutes. This belies the ‘bigger picture’. Many will not end their trip at Euston. Some will opt to change at Old Oak onto Crossrail (24 trains per hour) which would deliver them from Birmingham to, say, Tottenham Court Road, in 50 minutes, compared with today’s Tube scramble that takes about 100 minutes.
However, journey times are the ‘icing on the cake’. Those who travel on the West Coast out of London experience the crowd- ing that takes place now. They will also be aware of the ergonomic limitations of the Pendolinos, built smaller so that they can tilt around the Victorian rail alignments. That railway has pretty much reached its technological limit, and is likely to be full a number of years before HS2 is ready - even with extra coaches being desperately added to the Pendolinos.
The West Coast ‘upgrade’ closed some stations (Norton Bridge, Barlaston, and Wedgwood) because local trains got in the way of the fast London services. Without HS2, closing more stations may be one of the few ways to squeeze more out of the network. With HS2, those stations could reopen, as well as long-awaited new ones at Nike Stadium, Kenilworth and more.
The environmental argument may not be as clear-cut as some supporters would wish; however moving one seat one kilometre with modern high-speed trains seems on a par with the current Pendolino fleet at 125mph. The issue here is that ‘no growth’ is not an option.
Additional rail capacity will better inte- grate our transport hubs. We cannot con- tinue to have a divided economy. Transport is a means to an end. I have no doubt that HS2 will help to deliver enhanced prosper- ity to those beyond the M25, and that it will generate thousands of jobs and opportuni- ties for people in our region and elsewhere.
For those who question the value of such investment, look around Birmingham and see how HS2 might influence people’s life chances.
I started work in inner-city Birmingham over 30 years ago, and I believe that this is the first truly innovative investment that will bring about transformational change.
Visit
www.campaignforhsr.com John Morris
FOR MORE INFORMATION rail technology magazine Apr/May 11 | 27
The rest of the UK deserves better, and in a democracy it is good to express views and opinions. However, the needs of the many cannot be sabotaged by a vocal minority; those who support HS2 must make their views known during the consultation.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180 |
Page 181 |
Page 182 |
Page 183 |
Page 184 |
Page 185 |
Page 186 |
Page 187 |
Page 188 |
Page 189 |
Page 190 |
Page 191 |
Page 192 |
Page 193 |
Page 194 |
Page 195 |
Page 196 |
Page 197 |
Page 198 |
Page 199 |
Page 200 |
Page 201 |
Page 202 |
Page 203 |
Page 204 |
Page 205 |
Page 206 |
Page 207 |
Page 208 |
Page 209 |
Page 210 |
Page 211 |
Page 212 |
Page 213 |
Page 214 |
Page 215 |
Page 216 |
Page 217 |
Page 218 |
Page 219 |
Page 220 |
Page 221 |
Page 222 |
Page 223 |
Page 224 |
Page 225 |
Page 226 |
Page 227 |
Page 228