I suggest a campaign about ...

HS2 - High Speed Rail Link. We dont need to spend £160m per mile

Costing over £160m per mile, the proposed HS2 High Speed Rail Link will not only help further bankrupt our country but will slash and scar our countryside, leaving a permanent reminder to our children of politics gone mad and a dynasty of greed of gargantuan proportions.

4,527 votes
Sign in
or sign in with
  • facebook
  • google
    Password icon
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Joanne Barnes shared this idea  ·   ·  Admin →


    Sign in
    or sign in with
    • facebook
    • google
      Password icon
      Signed in as (Sign out)
      • john turner commented  · 

        no business case, destroys part of the Chilterns AOOB, blights allour house prices, all for 25 mins less for lon to birmingham and no benefit to us.

      • Chris commented  · 

        People need to get the idea out of their heads that HS2 will suck all the money out of the UK's budget. It will cost £17bn and be built of the next 15 year! CrossRail and Thameslink alone are costing £20bn and will only serve the London area. HS2 will serve some of the UKs biggest cities and towns and will operate services as far as Glasgow from day one.

        I can't understand why people are happy to see London receive over £20bn over the next 10 years but the north can not have access to £17bn over the next 15 years. For a project that WILL benefit the whole of the country.

        You should be under no illusion that if HS2 doesn't go ahead then the money will be spent else were. This is a once in a lifetime chance to really build something that will benefit the whole of the UK for decades to come.


      • Abigail commented  · 

        Too many negatives to list... money, environment, poor service when the weather isn't right... but fundamentally its wrong on all counts. I used to be proud to live in this country and in the chilterns, such a beautiful place - its slowing being taken away by poor ideas, dodgy mps and a misguided desire to turn this country into an even faster-paced nation.

      • Anonymous commented  · 

        No business case, no environmental case, no economic viability, no way!

      • Steph commented  · 

        A waste of money for environmental destruction

      • Karl D commented  · 

        £36bn - £60bn depending on the overspend, for a railway with 4 stations which will shave a massive 10 minutes of journey time is a waste of money vanity project. It will also destroy thousands of square miles of British countryside.

      • Frances Cutler commented  · 

        There are so many other things that need the money,and if money is to be spent on rail it should be designated to upgrading existing lines and electrifying others

      • christine commented  · 

        All around us there are cuts - except in regard to HS2! As a frequent traveller to Birmingham I can attest to half empty trains at present even though the service is very good. Can't the money be better spent!

      • Anonymous commented  · 

        There are many better uses of my money during this time of crisis.

      • lisa dishman commented  · 

        we can't afford it! there are many other lower cost options available to us

      • Peter Wiltshire commented  · 

        The population density of England is nearly four times that of France. The TGV is good for them. HS2 is not for us. We need open space far more than we need save a few minutes travel time.

      • Tony Brignull commented  · 

        If Britain were twice as big and three times as rich there might be a case for high speed trains, but others commenting here are right: until everyone who buys a train ticket for any journey is guaranteed a seat, HS2 will remain a very expensive and irrelevant luxury for this smallish, impoverished country. There are other far more important infrastructure needs, a national water grid, for example, so that the north can sell its surplus water to the south.

      • Rod commented  · 

        We need to invest more in our transport infrastructure but not in massively expensive high speed trains. I believe it will cost £500m to save each minute on the journey time. If we want to help re-generate northern towns there are much better, more effective and cheaper ways of doing it and well before 2033. How many libraries, day care centres and jobs could be saved now with the sort of moeny already being spent on this white elephant.

      • Bryan Hart commented  · 

        This project is not fully costed, it does not provide the connectivity a project like this must have and we can't afford it, £30bn, more like £100bn to get to Birmingham. More carriages on existing trains, less first class coaches and more investment in the whole infrastructure. We have just spent £9bn on west coast route modernisation to turn it into a commuter line, no sense, no strategy

      • Leslie commented  · 

        We learned today that the expected receipts of the sale of the Forestry Commission will pay for only ONE MILE of the proposed HS2 track. Have we gone mad on our spending priorities ? when every day there is more news of front line service cuts (including local bus services) ? and local transport considerations are put to one side in favour of a proposal which looks like a subsidised railway for the few, when there is so much investment required in infrastructure that would be used by the many ? This isn't about NIMBYs along the route. It is about opportunity costs to the country.

      • Chris commented  · 

        Why would a number of small donations require a finance director?

        It maybe slightly off topic but I believe it’s a major issue when you consider the importance of the project. The public at the moment are getting a mainly biased view of the project, not because the whole country is against it but because of the effort and you have to assume money being put into the no campaign.
        There are organizations and campaigns that support HS2 but you wouldn’t think it from the spin coming from the no camp. I also have to take issue with some of the emotive language and misleading information that is used to strengthen a case that was initially supposed to be a local “grass routes” campaign.

        The case for HS2 is strong, I am not one for blindly supporting anything suggested by the government but the case for HS2 is strong even under scrutiny. I would go as far as saying that the government is not being optimistic enough and the benefits are broader than even the government suggest.

      • Sian Brownhill commented  · 

        Has the rest of this country not realised that there is only one transport budget and if HS2 goes ahead it will swallow the entire transport budget?

      • Pippa Hart commented  · 

        Please put a stop to a project that has no sound business case, will take much needed funding away from the rest of the country's underfunded rail network; thereby benefiting a small minority of business travellers to the detriment of the majority. The damage to the countryside and the blight to communities living along the line is massive - which if it was in national interest might be justifiable - but the figures do not add up and the route is flawed.

      • Tammy Phelps commented  · 

        Last week I discovered that the course I teach at Bucks New University has been scrapped due to the government's slashing of funds. I'm out of a job and I live next to the proposed HS2 line. Please will someone explain to me why we are prepared to let our greatest and most respected national (and international) asset - university education - fall at the wayside - and instead pump billions of pounds of taxpayers money into one train line?

      • louise vincent commented  · 

        It is a huge white elephant we cannot afford to prioritise. Upgrade existing infrastructure rather than a high speed link on a journey that will take people to the outskirts of one city rather than connect people to many, better.

      Feedback and Knowledge Base