HS2

[corneliuslundie]

Perhaps someone should have shown her photos of the construction of the M1 - and 30 years later.

Jonathan

[Northmoor]

11 hours ago, Pandora said:

There would be  far  less opposition if the scheme budget had not skyrocketed to the NAO assessment of  "poor  value for outlay " for the cost-benefit analysis.

One of the reasons the budget has skyrocketed is to implement all the environmental mitigations required to mollify the protestors.  These seem to be a lot of "environmental consultants" whose vocal objections were considerably less vocal once they'd been awarded several months consultancy work to identify the rare species they insisted lived on the planned construction sites.

[62613]

7 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

One of the reasons the budget has skyrocketed is to implement all the environmental mitigations required to mollify the protestors.  These seem to be a lot of "environmental consultants" whose vocal objections were considerably less vocal once they'd been awarded several months consultancy work to identify the rare species they insisted lived on the planned construction sites.

Beat me to it!. This was also mentioned on the original thread

[caradoc]

3 hours ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

She also scoffed at the planting of saplings as part of the tree mitigation work, without appearing to realise that not all the mature trees that have been felled were the product of natural woodland, but were planted by landowners, from 100 to 200, or even more years ago.

 

Another example of such ludicrousness was a BBC News report, some time ago now, on the 'destruction' HS2 was bringing to the nature reserve around the lakes at Calvert, completely ignoring the fact that the lakes are artificial and the direct result of heavy industry, ie brick-making. 

 

[melmerby]

1 hour ago, caradoc said:

 

Another example of such ludicrousness was a BBC News report, some time ago now, on the 'destruction' HS2 was bringing to the nature reserve around the lakes at Calvert, completely ignoring the fact that the lakes are artificial and the direct result of heavy industry, ie brick-making. 

 

An awful lot of "natural"countryside is the result of human intervention.

e.g. The Broads or even the Cumbrian Fells.

 

A project or industry shouldn't only be judged on what it currently is but on what it leaves behind.

Toxic pools and unstable waste/slag heaps spring to mind as some of the undesirable legacies.

[Bernard Lamb]

16 hours ago, Pandora said:

There would be  far  less opposition if the scheme budget had not skyrocketed to the NAO assessment of  "poor  value for outlay " for the cost-benefit analysis.

But have costs skyrocketed? Just how far are they removed from the original  (undisclosed) estimates? Given the events explained by others they seem fairly reasonable to me.

If you put forward a true cost for any project then it will get thrown out.

Dealing with the MOD for many years has made me rather cynical but has given me a grasp of realism.

As for the NAO. Strictly speaking they are of course correct. However what price do you put on easing traffic at the southern end of the WCML? The alternatives are far worse in all manner of ways.

Bernard

[Mike Storey]

On 19/05/2021 at 23:53, Pandora said:

There would be  far  less opposition if the scheme budget had not skyrocketed to the NAO assessment of  "poor  value for outlay " for the cost-benefit analysis.

 

You keep coming up with unsubstantiated or wildly out of date quotes, so I wonder where you got this one?

 

The latest NAO report on HS2 (2020) says this: "Given it is still at an early stage, we do not seek to conclude on whether the programme is ultimately likely to be value for money."

 

So, please place your source material on record, or stand by to be reported to the Moderator.

[Richard E]

Was it not the Oakervee Report and Lord Berkeley that said 'poor value for money' and not the NAO.

[jamie92208]

Lord Berkeley has been consistently  anti HS2 for several years.

 

Jamie

[Northmoor]

8 minutes ago, jamie92208 said:

Lord Berkeley has been consistently  anti HS2 for several years.

 

Jamie

Isn't this the same Lord Berkeley who has for years asked for government expenditure and subsidies, overt or otherwise, for rail freight?

[Pandora]

1 hour ago, Mike Storey said:

 

You keep coming up with unsubstantiated or wildly out of date quotes, so I wonder where you got this one?

 

The latest NAO report on HS2 (2020) says this: "Given it is still at an early stage, we do not seek to conclude on whether the programme is ultimately likely to be value for money."

 

So, please place your source material on record, or stand by to be reported to the Moderator.

Here is the source: Conclusion 56  the Oakervee Report:  "Conclusion 56: The demand sensitvity analysis suggests that the full HS2 network has a beneft-cost rato range of 1.0 to 2.1 and represents low-high value for money."

The Oakervee report on Phase 1:"the latest economic assessment indicates that Phase One alone has a beneft-cost rato including wider economic impacts, under fxed land- use, of 1.0. This indicates that Phase One as a standalone scheme represents poor-low value for money."

 

Link to Oakervee:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/870092/oakervee-review.pdf

Edited May 21, 2021 by Pandora

[Richard E]

Just now, Pandora said:

Here is the source: Conclusion 56  the Oakervee Report:  "Conclusion 56: The demand sensitvity analysis suggests that the full HS2 network has a beneft-cost rato range of 1.0 to 2.1 and represents low-high value for money."

 

And that is NOT the NAO nor is it anything to do with them. Therefore your claim is incorrect. Lord Berkeley, who chaired the report committee, is also a know HS2 detractor.

[jamie92208]

14 minutes ago, Pandora said:

Here is the source: Conclusion 56  the Oakervee Report:  "Conclusion 56: The demand sensitvity analysis suggests that the full HS2 network has a beneft-cost rato range of 1.0 to 2.1 and represents low-high value for money."

The Oakervee report on Phase 1:"the latest economic assessment indicates that Phase One alone has a beneft-cost rato including wider economic impacts, under fxed land- use, of 1.0. This indicates that Phase One as a standalone scheme represents poor-low value for money."

 

Link to Oakervee:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/870092/oakervee-review.pdf

Reading that it looks as if Oakervee is saying that it would be stupid to just build phase 1, but that adding the other phases makes the project good value for money.

 

Jamie

[Bernard Lamb]

18 minutes ago, Pandora said:

Here is the source: Conclusion 56  the Oakervee Report:  "Conclusion 56: The demand sensitvity analysis suggests that the full HS2 network has a beneft-cost rato range of 1.0 to 2.1 and represents low-high value for money."

The Oakervee report on Phase 1:"the latest economic assessment indicates that Phase One alone has a beneft-cost rato including wider economic impacts, under fxed land- use, of 1.0. This indicates that Phase One as a standalone scheme represents poor-low value for money."

 

Link to Oakervee:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/870092/oakervee-review.pdf

Did you read what I wrote in reply to your last post?

Just to repeat the situation.

The two main lines out of London to the north are full and trains are overcrowded. The government is still demanding that more houses are built near these lines but offer little incentive to create local jobs. More people will have to travel by train. 

Pressure groups with an axe to grind can moan all they like. I use the WCML and want and will campaign for a better service. HS2 is the best option that I have seen that will give me that.

The government agrees. It is to late to drag up outdated reports.

Simples.

Bernard

[Mike Storey]

1 hour ago, Pandora said:

Here is the source: Conclusion 56  the Oakervee Report:  "Conclusion 56: The demand sensitvity analysis suggests that the full HS2 network has a beneft-cost rato range of 1.0 to 2.1 and represents low-high value for money."

The Oakervee report on Phase 1:"the latest economic assessment indicates that Phase One alone has a beneft-cost rato including wider economic impacts, under fxed land- use, of 1.0. This indicates that Phase One as a standalone scheme represents poor-low value for money."

 

Link to Oakervee:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/870092/oakervee-review.pdf

 

As others have already pointed out, that is not a source from the NAO.

 

You should also be aware that the report was commissioned by the government to help them decide whether or not to proceed with HS2. The report broadly decided that it was preferable to proceed with the scheme, given that the full benefits would not be obtained without completion of Phase 2, although it highlighted some concerns over budget v cost estimations, but drew the conclusion that the very narrow criterion allowed for "benefits" was to the scheme's detriment (and contrary to road schemes under the same evaluation). That has since been adjusted (as per the Steer report on the benefits of HS1, delivered at much the same time).

 

You have therefore deliberately selectively quoted and inaccurately sourced, as it turns out. You surely cannot believe this is "free speech", when used to deliberately and falsely make claims against a project under review here. Or perhaps you are just thick.

 

Strike One.

 

[pete_mcfarlane]

3 hours ago, Richard E said:

Was it not the Oakervee Report and Lord Berkeley that said 'poor value for money' and not the NAO.

Oakervee carefully considered the evidence (as far as their remit went) and recommended that HS2 should go ahead.

 

Lord Berkeley, who was on the committee and opposes HS2, then issued his own anti-HS2 report based on the bits of evidence that agreed with his viewpoint. 

[jamie92208]

13 minutes ago, pete_mcfarlane said:

Oakervee carefully considered the evidence (as far as their remit went) and recommended that HS2 should go ahead.

 

Lord Berkeley, who was on the committee and opposes HS2, then issued his own anti-HS2 report based on the bits of evidence that agreed with his viewpoint. 

I seem to remember that he was part of a group that promoted an underground terminal at Euston with platforms facing east to west that continued to join HS1.  How they would have threaded the tunnels through the underground spaghetti at Kings Cross I have no Idea.

 

Jamie

[Pandora]

Here is the link to the NAO:

https://www.nao.org.uk/report/high-speed-two-a-progress-update/

[Ron Ron Ron]

...

Edited May 21, 2021 by Ron Ron Ron

[Ron Ron Ron]

That report basically says that the risks and costs were underestimated at the outset and that the urgent need for a proper grip on the project was flagged up previously.

The report also says that a more realistic assumptions are now being made about phase one and there is better control over that stage of the project.

It also points out that there are still significant risks going forward and further work needs to be done to establish full control over the programme.

 

"....Completing High Speed Two will require sustained focus and support from the Department and across government to ensure the programme is re‑established on a sound basis, balancing cost, time and benefits, and delivered in a way that achieves long-term value for money.

 

Seems fair enough to me. Pointing out the obvious warning signs and saying "It's vitally important to get a grip on this and not let it run out of control".

 

.

[Mike Storey]

14 hours ago, Pandora said:

Here is the link to the NAO:

https://www.nao.org.uk/report/high-speed-two-a-progress-update/

 

In addition to the apt comments by Ron Ron Ron, you have, again, clearly and deliberately focussed on one part of one line which is not the main focus of the report, and is merely an historical comment "from the outset". 

 

Given that report was put together in 2019 and not published until January 2020, since when construction has started in earnest (something the NAO believed could be a problem), and Phase 2B has been put back so that NPR benefits can be combined (unless they decide to cancel it altogether, which would be against the advice of this report and that of Oakervee), I am not at all clear what point you are continuing to try to make.

 

Is it just callous straw-grabbing from the far edge of reason?

[lmsforever]

Went past the works on road to Stone this morning  and saw a dodgy bloke jumping the wall next HS2  site god knows what he was up to.Been told that there are a good number od new tipper lorries parked at local compound ready for the 700 movments a week from tunnel site to Aylesbury  wait for the protests!

[Ron Ron Ron]

Am I in yet?

 

The first TBM, Florence, has made its first few dozen metres progress into the ground, at the Chilterns east portal.

Its partner, Cecilia , has now been fully assembled and is being made ready to start its own work.

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

[Ron Ron Ron]

Freshly minted Tunnel sections waiting to be taken to the tunnels....

 

[Ron Ron Ron]

You can track the progress of the TBM's and presumably other construction progress in due course, via HS2's interactive tracker map.

Just click on the icons on the map to get the info.

Not much there at the moment, but it says Florence is 30 metres in (which might be a few days old by now).

 

 

https://www.hs2.org.uk/in-your-area/map/#11/51.5903/-0.5013

 

 

 

 

.