HS2 under review

[Mike Storey]

20 minutes ago, lmsforever said:

Obviously someone does not like the people who are being affected by this project, are you not aware that many many ordinary people are losing their homes and are not receiving a good price.Not far from here a farm is being split in half and no reasonable acsess points offered ,they are still waiting for an answer and houses at the rear of an estate  will be passed extremely close and no real solving of noise.I would suggest comrade you have a look at the whole economy farming is an important sections.

 

Many ordinary people?? Where? London is the only place where you could use the word "many", and virtually all have been re-housed or have received arbitrated offers, few of which remain in dispute (even the property specialist "Whistlebower" accepts that, because he believes the settlements made were too high!!). The same is happening (and explained in parliamentary summaries to the Select Committee) throughout Phase 1 and 2a sites. A huge majority of the eventual routing of HS2 has been decided in order to minimise the effect on the majority of settlements between the nodal points.

 

"Good price"? What is that? The 3-point valuation process used has existed since 1961.

 

Farm split - have you seen the farm that still exists on the M62, where the eastbound and westbound carriageways were expensively separated and diverted around either side of it, leaving only one tunnelled access point, because the owner-occupier at the time would not accept any offer made? A "reasonable access point" is defined under compulsory purchase precedents (I dealt with several like this on various projects), and HS2 cannot offer anything below these case histories. If the farmer concerned wants more than that, then he/she has to prove it necessary in law. That is almost certainly why he/she is "waiting" for an answer. HS2 will be deciding whether it will be cheaper to go more more expensive or fight the matter in court. HMG could veto any commercial decision to just pay up and get on with it, for fear of setting precedents for all future road, rail, pipeline, electricity lines, runways, power stations, waterways, etc etc etc. 

 

Noise issues for private residences also have a plethora of case history and EU law on their side, which HS2 will not contest (as it would be a useless waste of expenditure compared to just dealing with it). I can only assume the people you cite, want more than the law allows.

 

But let's get to the nub of it. You have attacked the project for likely overspend, but seem willing to support every opportunity to ensure that excessive amounts are spent to quell the concerns of individuals over and above what is required by law. 

 

So which is it?

 

 

 

[bimble]

6 hours ago, locoholic said:

On BBC TV Midlands Today they've just said that two-thirds of the land required for HS2 is under Schedule 16 possession: that is, HS2 has sole access to the land even though they haven't paid for it! And the landowners are legally trespassing by walking on the land that they still own. The rationale being that HS2 are avoiding paying for the land to keep their costs down, whilst still being able to progress the project. This doesn't seem like something that should be going on in a civilised country.

 

this two-thirds... are we talking about only phase one (London - Birmingham)...?? Because I've spent most of the last three months travelling the rest of the route for work (west & eastern branches), and have seen no signs of this, including talking* to landowners when we check in with them.

 

* - Indeed, schedule 16 possession preventing access to land is about the only complaint** I haven't heard.

 

** - the most common being "it's a waste of money just to get to (insert Birmingham/Manchester/Leeds) 20 minutes faster", which goes to show how effiecient the HS2 publicity department has been in getting across the reasons for HS2...

[jamie92208]

12 hours ago, Mike Storey said:

 

 

 

Farm split - have you seen the farm that still exists on the M62, where the eastbound and westbound carriageways were expensively separated and diverted around either side of it, leaving only one tunnelled access point, because the owner-occupier at the time would not accept any offer made? 

 

 

Though I agree with everything else that you've said Mike I think that it needs to be said that the story about the farm is an urban myth.  As far as I know the split in the carriageways was for geological reasons and having split them it made no sense to buy and demolish the farm in between.   There are in fact tunnelled access points both above and below the farm.   The myth was spread further in a TV Drama, the name of which I can't remember, that used the farm as the centre of a storyline about the farmer with lots of cash.

 

Jamie

Edited March 2, 2019 by jamie92208

[locoholic]

To all of you leaping to the defence of HS2, may I point out that Sir Mark Worthington had to be appointed as an independent commissioner last year to deal with the large volume of complaints against HS2, precisely because HS2 wasn't behaving itself.

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/sir-mark-worthington-appointed-as-independent-hs2-construction-commissioner

[Mark Saunders]

17 minutes ago, locoholic said:

To all of you leaping to the defence of HS2, may I point out that Sir Mark Worthington had to be appointed as an independent commissioner last year to deal with the large volume of complaints against HS2, precisely because HS2 wasn't behaving itself.

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/sir-mark-worthington-appointed-as-independent-hs2-construction-commissioner

 

To  paraphrase Mandy Rice-Davies, "they would say that wouldn't they", as it is a national preoccupation with the perceived value of property and actual!

 

Plus the link does not say HS2 not behaving itself rather for items they can't agree.

[locoholic]

8 hours ago, Mark Saunders said:

 

To  paraphrase Mandy Rice-Davies, "they would say that wouldn't they", as it is a national preoccupation with the perceived value of property and actual!

 

Plus the link does not say HS2 not behaving itself rather for items they can't agree.

 

Your quote applies equally to HS2 and the government, neither of whom are remotely likely to admit to delays in payments for land purchase or compensation.

 

The news item I saw was apparently an edited version of a report to be aired on the BBC West Midlands local Sunday Politics programme midday tomorrow.

Edited March 2, 2019 by locoholic
Typo

[Mike Storey]

8 hours ago, locoholic said:

To all of you leaping to the defence of HS2, may I point out that Sir Mark Worthington had to be appointed as an independent commissioner last year to deal with the large volume of complaints against HS2, precisely because HS2 wasn't behaving itself.

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/sir-mark-worthington-appointed-as-independent-hs2-construction-commissioner

 

Once again, you, or someone you have heard, seen or read, is being mendacious by yet again drawing false conclusions from announcements or news items. There is no question that a number of property-related compensation issues have taken overly long to resolve to mutual satisfaction, and some payments have been late, but that is true of just about every scheme I have ever come across, where statutory powers are being used, whether by private or public enterprises. Indeed, the NFU (and Farmers' Weekly) have an ongoing war of words about the Compulsory Purchase process, as currently used across many, many infrastructure schemes, and regularly cite examples across the country.

 

The role of Independent Construction Commissioner was planned soon after the 2017 Act was passed and was written into the HS2 complaints procedure well before Worthington was finally appointed by HMG. See attached for the latest process, but note the date of publication - some three months before his appointment was announced and some six months before he was actually in position. Thus, whilst disputes could technically be referred to that position, it would appear there was no-one in authority there to deal with them, and that may well explain why a number of disputes have lingered unresolved for so long (if third party arbitration or Tribunal was declined by either party). HS2 did not have the power to appoint an Independent Commissioner - that is government's job.

 

https://www.hs2.org.uk/how-to-complain/

 

Perhaps your synthetic ire should be better directed at Her Majesty's Secretary of State for Transport, or his team?

 

[Bernard Lamb]

A friend of mine has three rental properties in the Chilterns that are very close to the projected course of HS2.

They are classified as being in the zones that are entitled to compensation.

He is quite pleased with the financial aspect of the compensation scheme so far.

Particularly as he does not live there himself.

Bernard

 

[jamie92208]

1 hour ago, Bernard Lamb said:

A friend of mine has three rental properties in the Chilterns that are very close to the projected course of HS2.

They are classified as being in the zones that are entitled to compensation.

He is quite pleased with the financial aspect of the compensation scheme so far.

Particularly as he does not live there himself.

Bernard

 

A friend of a friend owns a small factory that is on the site of the Leeds HS2 station.   He's getting near retiring age with no family that want to take on the business so was very happy when the statutory notice arrived.  His only problem now is living long enough to actually get the compensation.

 

Jamie

 

[The Stationmaster]

16 hours ago, lmsforever said:

Obviously someone does not like the people who are being affected by this project, are you not aware that many many ordinary people are losing their homes and are not receiving a good price.Not far from here a farm is being split in half and no reasonable acsess points offered ,they are still waiting for an answer and houses at the rear of an estate  will be passed extremely close and no real solving of noise.I would suggest comrade you have a look at the whole economy farming is an important sections.

But this is no different at all from what happened in the past with motorway (in particular) construction or expanding various airports, especially Heathrow.  In fact the protection, especially financial, for landowners being affected by these sort of projects today is massively better than it was when much of the motorway network was built.  And of course for many of those affected the finished motorway was no more conveniently accessible for them than HS 2 will be for many of the affected property owners. 

[black and decker boy]

3 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

But this is no different at all from what happened in the past with motorway (in particular) construction or expanding various airports, especially Heathrow.  In fact the protection, especially financial, for landowners being affected by these sort of projects today is massively better than it was when much of the motorway network was built.  And of course for many of those affected the finished motorway was no more conveniently accessible for them than HS 2 will be for many of the affected property owners. 

And a lot more damaging environmentally, air pollution, now known as a killer and noise, endless noise. HS2 is at least clean and does not inflict 24/7 noise on its surroundings 

[locoholic]

7 hours ago, Mike Storey said:

 

Perhaps your synthetic ire should be better directed at Her Majesty's Secretary of State for Transport, or his team?

My ire is no more "synthetic" than your willingness to defend any scheme simply because it involves trains. You have no evidence that the allegations made on TV are false, and yet you accuse me and others of being mendacious.

 

I prefer to wait and watch the programme. As I have already stated, I'm quite open to the possibility that the story may not be true. But I am also quite prepared to believe that HS2 are deliberately withholding payments to landowners - after all, they have both motive and opportunity.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Quote

 

 

Edited March 2, 2019 by locoholic

[letterspider]

I am French tourist with bags and I want to visit the Midlands (I suppose this scenario is now going to be very unlikely because of Brexit but in any case)

Why is HS1 and HS2 not being connected? How am I going to enjoy frictionless movement between St Pancras and Euston?

Surely a link between HS1 and HS2 would also provide the sort of redundancy that was mentioned higher up in this thread, relating to Old Oak Common?

I have read the decision not to have a link - and I go away with the impression that the decision seems to be largely for political reasons

Am I missing something here..?

 

[Joseph_Pestell]

1 hour ago, letterspider said:

I am French tourist with bags and I want to visit the Midlands (I suppose this scenario is now going to be very unlikely because of Brexit but in any case)

Why is HS1 and HS2 not being connected? How am I going to enjoy frictionless movement between St Pancras and Euston?

Surely a link between HS1 and HS2 would also provide the sort of redundancy that was mentioned higher up in this thread, relating to Old Oak Common?

I have read the decision not to have a link - and I go away with the impression that the decision seems to be largely for political reasons

Am I missing something here..?

 

 

The original decision, to have a link between HS1 & HS2, was certainly a political one. The decision not to have one is more about cost/benefit analysis. Is there enough direct traffic to justify not only the build cost but the greater complexity of timetabling? Can the scarce capacity on HS2 be used more efficiently?

[Joseph_Pestell]

6 hours ago, Mike Storey said:

 

 

 

Perhaps your synthetic ire should be better directed at Her Majesty's Secretary of State for Transport, or his team?

 

 

I think CG has quite enough irate people to deal with already this week. You should not kick a man when he is down (although I might make an exception in his case).

[caradoc]

2 hours ago, locoholic said:

But I am also quite prepared to believe that HS2 are deliberately witholding payments to landowners - after all, they have both motive and opportunity.

 

 

Would you also be prepared to believe that some landowners and householders might be deliberately exaggerating the value of their property to extract the maximum compensation from the cash cow that is HS2 ? After all, they have both motive and opportunity.

 

Regarding noise from the railway, during the upgrade of the Oxford/Bicester route the local papers carried scare stories from, among others, the owner of a riding stables near the line who predicted death and disaster from horses spooked by trains. Since the line actually re-opened, that particular anti-railway stance seems to have gone quiet..........

 

 

[letterspider]

 

1 hour ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

The original decision, to have a link between HS1 & HS2, was certainly a political one. The decision not to have one is more about cost/benefit analysis. Is there enough direct traffic to justify not only the build cost but the greater complexity of timetabling? Can the scarce capacity on HS2 be used more efficiently?

 

Can the network afford NOT to build one? It's bad enough having to make change of train within a station but having to transit across town with luggage, kids etc is a pain.

Still as as passenger, I imagine I am not an important part of the cost projections!

 

[Joseph_Pestell]

8 minutes ago, letterspider said:

 

 

Can the network afford NOT to build one? It's bad enough having to make change of train within a station but having to transit across town with luggage, kids etc is a pain.

Still as as passenger, I imagine I am not an important part of the cost projections!

 

 

Not as one passenger, or even four, no. To justify a link, one would need to prove a demand for several thousand passengers a day between the North/Midlands and the Continent. And there is not much evidence of that demand - which is why the sleepers ended up in Canada.

 

The big problem is the availability of "low-cost" flights. Just so much easier, cheaper and quicker from Birmingham or Manchester to the Continent on a plane.

[Tricky-CRS]

What gets me with all this is people bashing HS2 because its not paying out enough compensation and then arguing it should be cancelled as cost are escalating. Sorry but compensation needs to be fair for the properly owner and the tax payer and not treating it as a cash cow. We are increasingly becoming small minded and for projects like this we need to look at the future and put society first and not the individual.

[lmsforever]

March Modern Railways   Alan Williams column at the bottom read and learn !

[Richard E]

1 hour ago, lmsforever said:

March Modern Railways   Alan Williams column at the bottom read and learn !

 

I'm sorry but that is totally useless to me as I do not subscribe to Modern Railways. Can you give some context as to what the article is about, all I can find is that he has written about the end of industrial action in the North. And I suspect I'm not alone either.

[caradoc]

1 hour ago, lmsforever said:

March Modern Railways   Alan Williams column at the bottom read and learn !

 

Crikey, is he trying to get more money off HS2 for his house too ?

 

(Sorry, but I do not normally buy Modern Railways either).

[black and decker boy]

Alan Williams hasn’t particularly said anything of note in his article and what he has written suggests he doesn’t understand the linkages between HS2 phase 2 & NPR and how you only get NPR with HS2.

 

he hasn’t suddenly found a smoking gun that proves HS2 must be cancelled or the world will end despite what the wealthy of Buckinghamshire would tell you

[The Stationmaster]

6 hours ago, letterspider said:

I am French tourist with bags and I want to visit the Midlands (I suppose this scenario is now going to be very unlikely because of Brexit but in any case)

Why is HS1 and HS2 not being connected? How am I going to enjoy frictionless movement between St Pancras and Euston?

Surely a link between HS1 and HS2 would also provide the sort of redundancy that was mentioned higher up in this thread, relating to Old Oak Common?

I have read the decision not to have a link - and I go away with the impression that the decision seems to be largely for political reasons

Am I missing something here..?

 

It's a very interesting situation and the big question was always going to be who would use it and how much would it cost?  I think, as much as anything else, that the thing which killed it was the early estimates of the likely cost plus the fact that it was, as already stated above, more of a political gesture than anything else (in other words Regional Eurostar reborn but faster but still a question mark over whether it would be fast enough).  Add in the assessed domestic need for the number of trains per hour on HS2 and there wasn't really any room left for international trains anyway.

 

Then you come back to the real question - who would use it?  Heading out of England towards France where would the trains go - logical answers are probably Paris and Brussels, maybe Köln but not much further.  But basically it would be difficult to compete with the airlines for business traffic - who wants to get up in the middle of the night to travel to a meeting in Paris or Brussels, let alone further afield when they could get up a couple of hours later and get there sooner going by air.  The real business market is - like it or not - to/from London.  Journey time will always be a killer of daytime business traffic southbound because of the difference in clockface times between England and France etc

 

So going southwards what alternative markets are there?  Simple answers are leisure and tourism but the former tends to be very fickle and subject to change, for instance in its first couple of years it was all the rage to have office outings for lunch or whatever in Paris instead of going to a restaurant in London, the rugby, and things like the Prix De L'Arc de Triomphe attracted a lot of extra trade but that was it although there was always a weekend peak (and probably still is) to Paris.

 

Tourism is equally fickle - Eurostar did a lot of extra research as the start date for Regional services drew nearer and various alternatives were being studied to reduce the operating costs.  Outside London on the Regional Eurostar routes and now similarly on the wider HS2 network the major generators of potential tourist traffic were identified as Edinburgh and York but neither would justify even a daily weekday service.  Things have changed a bit since then and other potential spots might have opened up but again the scope will be very limited and will probably boil down to less than daily services - which will kill a path on HS2 on the days they run and potentially leave it unused the rest of the time.

 

Coming northbound the situation is slightly different because of the difference in clockface times.   So not bad for coming back from meetings (but you had an airline ticket to go outbound - why come back on the train?) but beneficial for business travel inwards, particularly to London.  But don't forget you lose an hour going home so starting from, say, an hour north of London may not be attractive although from London it is acceptable. 

 

Leisure and tourism - I wonder if the French still come over for the sales in London?  That used to be good business for Eurostar and again there is no doubt still a regular weekend traffic to London but it is probably still very 'peaky' which is not what is wanted to make best use of HS2 capacity.  Tourism - just turn round what I said above - Birmingham is not going to be a big market - the places attracting tourists in relation to HS1/HS2 are London, York, and Edinburgh and even with that hour gained coming north Edinburgh is quite a long trip even if it is more comfortable than an aircraft.

 

Throw in then the need for border, customs, and security checks and how they will be done and you are most likely adding a lot of cost to operating an international train which serves more than one UK station, it certainly worked out that way for Regional Eurostar.  And forget sleeper services overnight - as just about every major railway in Europe is already doing, or has done, exactly that (and again journey times southbound will still be hit by that extra hour).  The inconvenience of crossing London is not a welcome or enjoyable experience and passengers arriving on HS1 will face that walk, or taxi ride, along the Euston Road, as would those heading south.   But I seriously doubt removing that inconvenience for some of them is hardly going to produce a positive net benefit from building a link between HS1 and HS2. 

[Mike Storey]

7 hours ago, locoholic said:

My ire is no more "synthetic" than your willingness to defend any scheme simply because it involves trains. You have no evidence that the allegations made on TV are false, and yet you accuse me and others of being mendacious.

 

I prefer to wait and watch the programme. As I have already stated, I'm quite open to the possibility that the story may not be true. But I am also quite prepared to believe that HS2 are deliberately withholding payments to landowners - after all, they have both motive and opportunity.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Your ire is synthetic because it adopts the anger of others directly affected (unless you have a farm, land or house for which you are claiming compensation not yet revealed on this forum??) and assumes that, if they have complained, they must be right, and HS2 must be wrong.

 

I accused you OR others of mendacity. As you keep reporting only what others have said, then we can assume it must be them.

 

In Farmers Weekly, the most likely bastion of the interests of the poor and downtrodden, I have found just two reports of "farmers" directly affected by HS2 (Oct 2018), who complain they have not yet received full settlement. In one case, the farmer has received a full (and apparently equitable) compensation sum for the land, buildings etc, with which he has already bought another farm. His complaint is that the compensation for "lost opportunity", against some vaguely described business venture, has yet to be received - perhaps one might be more truthful in saying yet to be agreed? He has also not received relocation costs, but does not say when they were submitted, given he has only recently relocated. He has already had a new business venture at that new location turned down, under planning rules, but is already committing funds to create a dozen or so holiday cottages or similar. Interesting definition of hardship. The other case is more straightforward, being about delayed agreement over compensation level, something you would expect when disputed. There have been no other specific HS2 cases reported in that organ since. So what is it that Channel 4 has unearthed that the Farmers' (and NFU's) own newsletter has not?? I wait with genuine interest, despite their previous reports on HS2 and on other matters, having been less than conclusive.

 

HS2 have opportunity, howsoever limited, to delay payment. That is true. But given that the law will ultimately decide the amounts payable, that an independent commissioner is now in place, and that it is not even their own money, just what is the "motive" you grandly espouse?