Jump to content

Recommended Posts

On 23/07/2020 at 12:37, Ron Ron Ron said:

 

Just watched this today - why aren't people like Gareth Dennis interviewed by the media at the same time as people like Chris Packham (who has an axe to grind but no personal benefit from its cancellation) and instead of the CEO of HS2 or whoever it usually is (who could be seen as having an interest in the continuation of the project)?  This is a very succinct breakdown of much of the nonsense that is written about the scheme.

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Grovenor said:

Yes, go to Youtube and use the 'share' feature.

 

It is a very, very good analysis. The problem is that most people won't be prepared to sit through a 30 minute film on the subject. Which is why Packman's own dubious propaganda is much shorter. Hard to hit back at the moaners. Much better to keep promoting the main benefits of HS2, but that is something which has so far, not been terribly well done.

  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Northmoor said:

Just watched this today - why aren't people like Gareth Dennis interviewed by the media at the same time as people like Chris Packham (who has an axe to grind but no personal benefit from its cancellation) and instead of the CEO of HS2 or whoever it usually is (who could be seen as having an interest in the continuation of the project)?  This is a very succinct breakdown of much of the nonsense that is written about the scheme.

 

There is a lot of interesting information in there, however...

Chris Packham's arguments have indeed had lots of complete nonsense added to them. Gareth's views are obviously the complete opposite & he seems to have conveniently ignored some valid points, such as parts of villages being disrupted or removed to make way for the line.

He reminds me a little of a politician arguing on principle with absolutely everything their opposition says instead of whether they really do disagree with the point being made.

If Gareth's counter arguments were toned down a bit to accept some arguments are actually valid & tried to balance these with benefits, he will have a much stronger case.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Pete the Elaner said:

 

There is a lot of interesting information in there, however...

Chris Packham's arguments have indeed had lots of complete nonsense added to them. Gareth's views are obviously the complete opposite & he seems to have conveniently ignored some valid points, such as parts of villages being disrupted or removed to make way for the line.

He reminds me a little of a politician arguing on principle with absolutely everything their opposition says instead of whether they really do disagree with the point being made.

If Gareth's counter arguments were toned down a bit to accept some arguments are actually valid & tried to balance these with benefits, he will have a much stronger case.

I gave up on it after a few minutes, as it just seemed to be two people putting opposite points of view with neither providing any supporting evidence.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 26/07/2020 at 22:47, Pete the Elaner said:

 

 

On 26/07/2020 at 22:47, Pete the Elaner said:

If Gareth's counter arguments were toned down a bit to accept some arguments are actually valid & tried to balance these with benefits, he will have a much stronger case.

 

I thought he did that on several occasions, particularly the points about carbon, where he accepted that HS2 would generate carbon emissions, but balanced this by saying these would be more than offset by carbon reductions in modal shift.

 

For several other points, he simply asked for the evidence, or cases, to support Packham's statements, but concluded that there would not be any, because there aren't any. He did accept one or two arguments, but these were minor, it's true.

 

He also dismissed the obsolete and post-pandemic arguments, simply by saying COVID-19 is just a blip, citing the historic rise in rail demand over the past 25 years, and the countervailing resistance to more major road building and domestic air travel, and the rest of the argument, about teleworking and the reduction in need for travel generally, is basically another false dawn, as it was in the early 1990's. But that is an argument on both sides, as neither can "prove" their hypothesis (yet).

 

I am not sure that Gareth, or anyone else, would have a "much stronger case" by accepting a basically corrupted set of arguments, and then try to argue from there. I am also quite sure he knows this is a lost cause, because those people who want to think these things will think them, whatever the counter-arguments, let alone evidence.

 

The main public concern was about cost, not much else, and given the scale of HMG planned expenditure on so many other things now, it has pretty well faded into obscurity.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Mike Storey said:

The main public concern was about cost, not much else, and given the scale of HMG planned expenditure on so many other things now, it has pretty well faded into obscurity.

 

 

To put the costs into perspective, the headline cost of HS2 will be less than fewer than ten years subsidies for renewable electricity generation. The difference being that while HS2 is finance by government borrowing, the Environmental Levies for windmills etc are paid by a surcharge on electricity users bills. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 26/07/2020 at 21:47, Pete the Elaner said:

 

.....such as parts of villages being disrupted or removed to make way for the line.

 

Not sure there are any villages being removed for HS2. There is part of a housing estate in S Yorks that may be demolished (parliamentary bill yet to be submitted let alone approved) but certainly phase 1 does not wipe out any villages.

  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, billbedford said:

 

To put the costs into perspective, the headline cost of HS2 will be less than fewer than ten years subsidies for renewable electricity generation. The difference being that while HS2 is finance by government borrowing, the Environmental Levies for windmills etc are paid by a surcharge on electricity users bills. 

 

The costs of which are reducing by the year, as the unit costs of such provision reduces exponentially.

 

Not to mention the even larger subsidies paid to nuclear generators, with a lot more to come. And the subsidies that were being paid to "clean coal" generators, plus the incentives paid to new gas generators. Two sides etc etc.....

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
10 hours ago, black and decker boy said:

Not sure there are any villages being removed for HS2. There is part of a housing estate in S Yorks that may be demolished (parliamentary bill yet to be submitted let alone approved) but certainly phase 1 does not wipe out any villages.

 

Stretching it a long way admitteddly , the little community on Flats Lane and Knox Grave Lane near Weeford on Phase 1. The residents wanted to move together to new location. What the railway missed, the side road realingment didn't.

  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Birmingham Interchange site.

Looking north.

M42 left to right across the top of the photo, with some of the NEC car parks beyond.

The new M42 road bridge looks almost ready to be moved into position next weekend.

 

 

EePoSUPXsAA-Qtu?format=jpg&name=medium

Edited by Ron Ron Ron
  • Like 4
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Birmingham Curzon St. station site.

Site clearance and preparation appears to be almost done.

The new HS2 station will dwarf the adjoining Moor St. Station, which can be seen just to the left of the centre of the photo....

 

 

EePnleCWsAAPHw6?format=jpg&name=medium

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, caradoc said:

His nickname is Jelly Tot...... that'll go down well in Shawshank.

 

He claimed he didn't know where the boundaries of the work site were, but admitted moving fences!;)

  • Like 1
  • Funny 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again Packham peddles the same old nonsense about the purpose of HS2 (from the BBC website report);

 

Mr Packham said: ""People now see that a scheme for a railway which will tear up the countryside so that we can shave a few minutes off a journey time, makes no sense in the contemporary workplace"

 

  • Agree 1
  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, caradoc said:

Once again Packham peddles the same old nonsense about the purpose of HS2 (from the BBC website report);

 

Mr Packham said: ""People now see that a scheme for a railway which will tear up the countryside so that we can shave a few minutes off a journey time, makes no sense in the contemporary workplace"

 

I use agree to show that I agree that Packham is still peddling the same old drivel and getting other people to enrich the lawyers.  It will be interesting to read the full judgement in due course. Last time round the judge was pretty scathing about Pacham's behaviour.

 

Jamie

Edited by jamie92208
  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, caradoc said:

Once again Packham peddles the same old nonsense about the purpose of HS2 (from the BBC website report);

 

Mr Packham said: ""People now see that a scheme for a railway which will tear up the countryside so that we can shave a few minutes off a journey time, makes no sense in the contemporary workplace"

 

 

Perhaps those judging things understand how much nonsense this argument really is?

 

& Packham vows to carry on. Does he really believe alternatives have not already bee been investigated & eliminated by people with access to far more information than him?

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Pete the Elaner said:

 

 

 

& Packham vows to carry on. Does he really believe alternatives have not already bee been investigated & eliminated by people with access to far more information than him?

No.

He's on an ego trip with other peoples money.

IMHO it's about time the Beeb dropped him, what with his discredited planet warming travel company (now suspended) and this mischievious twaddle on HS2.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Pete the Elaner said:

 

Perhaps those judging things understand how much nonsense this argument really is?

 

& Packham vows to carry on. Does he really believe alternatives have not already bee been investigated & eliminated by people with access to far more information than him?

 

He intends to Appeal, against the Appeal Court's ruling. I presume that must mean the Supreme Court. That will cost a few bob, and may mean some blow-back...... They don't take prisoners there.

 

But, the fallacy of his arguments must have been well-countered by HS2 Ltd and HMG, in their defence. Whilst his "prosecution" of his arguments are largely upon technical/legal issues, he makes no friends in court by continuing to argue to the media from his other, more fantastical points of view. Perhaps he will be visited by Aliens soon?

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.