Northern Powerhouse? Unlikely if this is true.

[Northmoor]

I quite agree - however there is a saying "you can take a horse to water but cannot make it drink"

 

This is why building the most fantastic infrastructure in the northern regions will not on its own make much difference. For that Government needs to be de-centralised (and by that I mean moving the HQ of big hitting departments out of London, not simply shifting various processing agencies out to the regions) and also encourage the development of industries other than financial and legal services (which have a very unhealthy relationship with politicians and which seem to value the ability to 'network' with ministers / Whitehall to protect their profits).

Correct me if I'm wrong, please.  Isn't:

- The NHS HQ is in Leeds;

- The Department for Social Security is run from Newcastle;

- A large proportion of the Ministry of Defence is based in Bristol.

 

That's the three largest departments, all based outside London.  I would be fully in favour of moving the Department for Transport to Crewe!  It's not large government departments that make up London's commuters, it's thousands of companies that have their HQs there, with hundreds (or often only tens) of key decision-makers based there.  The bulk of the company employees are elsewhere.  I worked for a FTSE250 company whose London HQ only had about 12 desks and a boardroom.

[phil-b259]

Correct me if I'm wrong, please.  Isn't:

- The NHS HQ is in Leeds;

- The Department for Social Security is run from Newcastle;

- A large proportion of the Ministry of Defence is based in Bristol.

 

That's the three largest departments, all based outside London.  I would be fully in favour of moving the Department for Transport to Crewe!  It's not large government departments that make up London's commuters, it's thousands of companies that have their HQs there, with hundreds (or often only tens) of key decision-makers based there.  The bulk of the company employees are elsewhere.  I worked for a FTSE250 company whose London HQ only had about 12 desks and a boardroom.

 

The NHS is not the same thing as "HM Government Department of Health and Social Care" and a 'proportion of the MOD' is not the same thing as actually having the Secretary of state for defence working out of Bristol.

 

The point is it doesn't matter how much low level stuff you palm off to the regions - it may well increase employment locally but from a cultural perspective the focus at the top is that they still require a presence in London or they will be 'missing out' on being close to their palls in Government / Whitehall.

 

As such the perception by Governmental departments is still that London & the wider South East is far more important than more distant regions.

 

Shift said 'palls' out of London to the likes of Manchester or Leeds and suddenly London doesn't look so attractive anymore.....

Edited December 16, 2018 by phil-b259

[pH]

I'll see you and raise you London Prestwick... thanks to Ryanair...

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1510045/Prestwick-Ryanairs-airport-for-London.html

Going OT (apologies), in the past Prestwick was quite often the airport for London when weather (fog or snow) closed Heathrow. Scroll down to 'Commercial Use' on this page - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow_Prestwick_Airport

 

It meant special trains being run from Prestwick to London. I've seen a picture of a Clan on such a special on the line to Mauchline.

[rodent279]

I can't help thinking that, nice idea returning Woodhead to use is, it's time has gone. Maybe in the late 80's-mid 90's it might have been feasible, but it's too far gone now. It shouldn't have closed, and if it hadn't, I'm sure there would have been a place for it in today's railway.

But it did, and as Zomboid says, you'd get more value out of a new alignment properly fit for purpose.

However, for the same money you could probably electrify, quadruple and open up the tunnels on the Hope or Standege routes.

Edited December 17, 2018 by rodent279

[Arun Sharma]

Correct me if I'm wrong, please.  Isn't:

- The NHS HQ is in Leeds;

- The Department for Social Security is run from Newcastle;

- A large proportion of the Ministry of Defence is based in Bristol.

 

That's the three largest departments, all based outside London.  I would be fully in favour of moving the Department for Transport to Crewe!  It's not large government departments that make up London's commuters, it's thousands of companies that have their HQs there, with hundreds (or often only tens) of key decision-makers based there.  The bulk of the company employees are elsewhere.  I worked for a FTSE250 company whose London HQ only had about 12 desks and a boardroom.

Since you asked, 

The DSS is run from London even though there are benefit agencies in Blackpool and Newcastle.

MoD Procurement Executive [or whatever name it's going by this week] has offices in Abbey Wood [bristol, not Plumstead] and Foxhill [bath] but the MoD itself remains in Whitehall.

 

Decentralisation of these ministries won't have occurred  till the seniormost tiers of civil servants in these ministries have been relocated well outside of London and the SE. For reasons probably very similar to those described in various episodes of "Yes, Minister", that is sadly unlikely to happen.

[Enterprisingwestern]

As the North - South divide seems primarily to be based around money differentials, and as someone mentioned house prices rocketing when companies de-centralise, the Spanish idea of taxing people on their house selling profit might even things up a bit, although to be anything like meaningful, that ship has long since left the harbour.

 

Mike.

[frobisher]

I'll see you and raise you London Prestwick... thanks to Ryanair...

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1510045/Prestwick-Ryanairs-airport-for-London.html

Or an actual "London Airport"

Edited December 17, 2018 by frobisher

[Barry O]

Woodhead tunnels are kept in good condition. The HV cables could be rerouted if required ..so you could do up the modern bores for new rails. But does it solve the overall problem? Not really and the major problem is (like Transport in Leeds) a complete inability of the decision makers and planners in thinking about a holistic approach to the problem. Too much of eating the elephant in small size chunks...but that is only because they can't work out what the real problem is (or rather they may know but its "too difficult" to solve).  Nothing is too difficult ...but it seems our powers that  be and some of the people they consult with are not capable of looking at the overall problem.

 

Baz

Edited December 17, 2018 by Barry O

[Joseph_Pestell]

Woodhead tunnels are kept in good condition. The HV cables could be rerouted if required ..so you could do up the modern bores for new rails. But does it solve the overall problem? Not really and the major problem is (like Transport in Leeds( a complete inability of the decision makers and planners in thinking about a holistic approach to the problem). Too much of eating teh elephant in small size chunks...but that is only because they can't work out what the real problem is (or rather they may know but its "too difficult" to solve).  Nothing is too difficult ...but it seems our powers that  bee and some of the people they consult with are not capable of looking at the overall problem.

 

Baz

 

Looking at Google Maps, it would not seem too difficult to build a loop line round the east side of Leeds to relieve the congestion over the two tracks from Neville Hill into Leeds.

[Reorte]

Woodhead tunnels are kept in good condition. The HV cables could be rerouted if required ..so you could do up the modern bores for new rails.

AIUI even the new tunnel isn't up to standard for a tunnel that long so wouldn't be permitted for a reopening (which also AIUI would legally be a new railway and hence 100% subject to current standards, even if it happens to make use of some old structures).

[Barry O]

AIUI even the new tunnel isn't up to standard for a tunnel that long so wouldn't be permitted for a reopening (which also AIUI would legally be a new railway and hence 100% subject to current standards, even if it happens to make use of some old structures).

Not insurmountable in the problem area.  If people want it to be solved instead of wasting money elsewhere....

 

(what is AIUI by the way)

[Reorte]

Not insurmountable in the problem area. If people want it to be solved instead of wasting money elsewhere....

Nothings's insurmountable with enough money, the question is where it's best spent.

(what is AIUI by the way)

"As I understand it"

[Northmoor]

Since you asked, 

The DSS is run from London even though there are benefit agencies in Blackpool and Newcastle.

MoD Procurement Executive [or whatever name it's going by this week] has offices in Abbey Wood [bristol, not Plumstead] and Foxhill [bath] but the MoD itself remains in Whitehall.

 

Decentralisation of these ministries won't have occurred  till the seniormost tiers of civil servants in these ministries have been relocated well outside of London and the SE. For reasons probably very similar to those described in various episodes of "Yes, Minister", that is sadly unlikely to happen.

The Defence Equipment & Support Organisation have a bit more than "offices in.." Bristol and Foxhill - those two places host several thousand people including most of the key decision makers - but several other distributed locations as well.  The Whitehall building headcount is very small by comparison.  I knew them all well, these people were my customers for about fifteen years. 

 

Why would you want to have government distributed across the whole country? The whole point is that the executive are in one place.  I would place more blame for lack of regional development on local governments, who suffer a painful lack of ambition, innovation and commercial awareness.  Example: a town local to me, Farnborough, known as perhaps the birthplace of aviation in the UK.  Despite several thousand people being employed in aviation and related industries, the local council declined to support an aircraft replica being placed on one of the main roundabouts as you entered the town, because, "we don't want to be known for just one thing"!  Most places would (or should) give their eye-teeth to be known for ANYTHING, but apparently Farnborough would rather be anonymous.  In the end, a smaller replica commemorating Frank Whittle was funded by local campaign.  

 

London has developed as a world centre of finance because a nucleus was allowed to develop which attracts similar and supporting businesses which feed off each other.  Companies do not want to be told where they can locate by government; there was an experiment at that called the Soviet Union which wasn't exactly a roaring success.

 

 

Looking at Google Maps, it would not seem too difficult to build a loop line round the east side of Leeds to relieve the congestion over the two tracks from Neville Hill into Leeds.

Sadly the process is a little more complex than that.......

[locoholic]

London has developed as a world centre of finance because a nucleus was allowed to develop which attracts similar and supporting businesses which feed off each other.  Companies do not want to be told where they can locate by government; there was an experiment at that called the Soviet Union which wasn't exactly a roaring success.

 

Whereas the current system results in people living eight to a room or in garden sheds in London - not a "roaring success" either.

[Northmoor]

Whereas the current system results in people living eight to a room or in garden sheds in London - not a "roaring success" either.

I agree that is a major problem - and yet still people want to move in!  When people are moving OUT of places, you really need to worry.

[locoholic]

The Northern powerhouse already exists - in Scotland.

 

I rarely venture north of the border, and last weekend was astonished to find there are now FIVE modern electrified rail routes between Glasgow and Edinburgh (via Lenzie, Cumbernauld, Bathgate, Shotts and Carstairs)!

 

That is a level of investment that northern England can only dream of. The answer would seem to be to devolve powers from Westminster to a northern regional assembly. One thing's for sure - the current set-up is delivering nothing, nor does it look likely to in the future.

 

If the Scots compare the situations north and south of the border, no wonder they want independence!

 

 

[Legend]

1 minute ago, locoholic said:

The Northern powerhouse already exists - in Scotland.

 

I rarely venture north of the border, and last weekend was astonished to find there are now FIVE modern electrified rail routes between Glasgow and Edinburgh (via Lenzie, Cumbernauld, Bathgate, Shotts and Carstairs)!

 

That is a level of investment that northern England can only dream of. The answer would seem to be to devolve powers from Westminster to a northern regional assembly. One thing's for sure - the current set-up is delivering nothing, nor does it look likely to in the future.

 

If the Scots compare the situations north and south of the border, no wonder they want independence!

 

 

 

Its not all rosy. Lack of Glasgow Airport Rail Link for one thing 

[ess1uk]

mentioned today in the news about HS2

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48284105

[Kingzance]

Like so many projects operated by governments, this is massively over budget. In almost any government project, there seems to be no accountability to deliver as those spending the money simply expect more taxation to pay for any excesses whereas in the private sector, going over budget on any project could lead to dismissals. Whilst I am not a fan of our upper house (particularly from how it is filled), in this case it raises some very pertinent points.

 

Do we need a high speed track to send more people into an already London-centric capital economy? Is the removal of six platforms at Euston, the destruction of many local businesses and more than 100 houses currently underway valid for a vanity project that is uncertain to be completed in the present fiscal and political climate? Should we be destroying newly built homes to push through the proposed rout around Mexborough? Given the need to use compulsory purchase powers, why not use those powers to increase existing track capacity around the present pinch points in the network? If we are serious about the UK’s impact on global warming, pushing these trains along at something approaching 400km/hr is a waste of energy acknowledged by HMG when arguing that enforcing speed limits saves energy!

 

When HS2 was first put to Parliament by the Blair government, the cost was in the £mid teens billions. It has escalated more than three-fold since then so the benefits should have similarly escalated to retain its justification. Those benefits have not increased.

[Zomboid]

I'm sure the debate has been had elsewhere several times, but upgrading the existing on the North/ South has gone about as far as it can.

Remember the WCRM project and the years of disruption it caused? It's full already. We've played the marginal gains game as far as it's possible to, and the only option left that will offer any real benefits at all is new lines.

 

Not to say that the project is above scrutiny, but I'd love to know which "existing pinch points" could be eased to create a step change in capacity anywhere near to what an LGV/ Shinkansen/ HS2 would.

[lmsforever]

The so called powerhouse is a political project and like all of its ilk there is a top loading of polaticians who have not got a clue about the basics.It sounds good to spout to voters but as to actually doing anything it will take years to even start .Leeds had an idea to bring trolleybuses onto the roads but it produced so many negatives it was dropped ,same with trams.There are good ideas about but they are stifled by ill informed claptrap from the public but mostly the people in power also change happens at the next elections everything could change.Just think a new leader and it could be widen the roads buld new motorways railways there finished ,don't laugh it could happen.

[lmsforever]

4 hours ago, Kingzance said:

Like so many projects operated by governments, this is massively over budget. In almost any government project, there seems to be no accountability to deliver as those spending the money simply expect more taxation to pay for any excesses whereas in the private sector, going over budget on any project could lead to dismissals. Whilst I am not a fan of our upper house (particularly from how it is filled), in this case it raises some very pertinent points.

 

Do we need a high speed track to send more people into an already London-centric capital economy? Is the removal of six platforms at Euston, the destruction of many local businesses and more than 100 houses currently underway valid for a vanity project that is uncertain to be completed in the present fiscal and political climate? Should we be destroying newly built homes to push through the proposed rout around Mexborough? Given the need to use compulsory purchase powers, why not use those powers to increase existing track capacity around the present pinch points in the network? If we are serious about the UK’s impact on global warming, pushing these trains along at something approaching 400km/hr is a waste of energy acknowledged by HMG when arguing that enforcing speed limits saves energy!

 

When HS2 was first put to Parliament by the Blair government, the cost was in the £mid teens billions. It has escalated more than three-fold since then so the benefits should have similarly escalated to retain its justification. Those benefits have not increased.

You are correct this project is purely London centric and it will destroy the connectivity available on the wcml  and replacement of intercity by local services is not good for passengers.

[Phil Parker]

And yet when I talk to people involved with scheduling trains in real life, they are desperate for more rail capacity and can't see any other way of providing it than a new line. As others have said, we can't upgrade the WCML more, and when we try it causes chaos.

 

My feeling is that if the project doesn't start in London then it doesn't happen. The idea that the money should be spread out to local transport means that the north would gain half a dozen bus stops and the rest of the cash would evaporate into consultancy fees and MPs expenses. At least this way, something gets built.

 

Cost overruns are due to it being built by the British. Were the Chinese to do it, a pear tree local to me, voted the greatest tree ever by anti-HS2 protesters, would have been flattened. Instead, it's been cloned and grafted, all at our expense. I bet the rest of the project is full of this sort of thing. If you want the project on time and on budget - get on with it and ignore the woolly moaners trying to keep this country in the 18th Century. Medium term, people will be happier because they won't have uncertainty (something Heathrow has caused for decades) over future works. It's not nice if your home or business is directly affected, but better get it over with quickly and move on than having to endure years of worry.

[locoholic]

8 minutes ago, Phil Parker said:

And yet when I talk to people involved with scheduling trains in real life, they are desperate for more rail capacity and can't see any other way of providing it than a new line. As others have said, we can't upgrade the WCML more, and when we try it causes chaos.

 

My feeling is that if the project doesn't start in London then it doesn't happen. The idea that the money should be spread out to local transport means that the north would gain half a dozen bus stops and the rest of the cash would evaporate into consultancy fees and MPs expenses. At least this way, something gets built.

 

Cost overruns are due to it being built by the British. Were the Chinese to do it, a pear tree local to me, voted the greatest tree ever by anti-HS2 protesters, would have been flattened. Instead, it's been cloned and grafted, all at our expense. I bet the rest of the project is full of this sort of thing. If you want the project on time and on budget - get on with it and ignore the woolly moaners trying to keep this country in the 18th Century. Medium term, people will be happier because they won't have uncertainty (something Heathrow has caused for decades) over future works. It's not nice if your home or business is directly affected, but better get it over with quickly and move on than having to endure years of worry.

It comes to something when a person's passion for anything that runs on rails means they endorse the working practices of a repressive communist one-party state.

[Zomboid]

There is something about the UK which gives NIMBYs and BANANAs (Build Absolutely Nothing Anyway Near Anything) the kind of sway that they just don't seem to get anywhere else. Resulting in extra unnecessary costs by putting it in a tunnel where the landscape doesn't warrant it and things like that (Buckinghamshire isn't quite as mountainous as the landscape traversed by the Sanyo/ Kyushu shinkansen, but it'll be just as tunnel-y as those lines).