In linea di principio, sostieni o si oppondi alla costruzione di nuove linee ferroviarie ad alta velocità tra le città dell’Inghilterra settentrionale?
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/travel/survey-results/daily/2025/09/09/66443/3
di coffeewalnut08
In linea di principio, sostieni o si oppondi alla costruzione di nuove linee ferroviarie ad alta velocità tra le città dell’Inghilterra settentrionale?
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/travel/survey-results/daily/2025/09/09/66443/3
di coffeewalnut08
32 commenti
This is in light of Reform saying they’d scrap Labour’s plans for Northern Powerhouse Rail, if they were to be elected
I support not deciding these things “in principle” but on a case by case basis. Because new railway projects aren’t a matter of principle are they? We shouldn’t either build all or none of them right? And no one should care what survey results say because people are morons and whether an infrastructure project is a good idea isn’t a matter of public mood or popularity. It’s economics and risk analysis and engineering.
I support doing a cost benefit analysis and accepting the results. That way we won’t waste as much money on white elephants.
I actually think the funding model from Crossrail is the best approach.
I’m sceptical that we’ll realise anywhere near the benefits that have been put forward and I can definitely think of better job creation schemes that could become self perpetuating such as creative hubs and R&D centres.
Or just more education.
For their cost, rail seems poor value.
Support it but we need to have a ministerial veto on planning and environmental regs. No more bloody bat tunnels or underground sections pushing up costs just build it.
It’s easy to support things *in principle*.
But once you ask people how much extra tax they’re willing to pay to fund it, or how happy they are with the line going past *their* house, or living with the disruption from construction for a few years….the results will be rather different.
Just like how many people are in favour of more housebuilding *in principle*, but always find reasons to object to it in reality.
The gender divide is funny, men are nearly twice as likely to strongly support it.
I’m not in the north so it won’t benefit me. I oppose
Rail is not a viable method of long distance transport in these days of extremely high land and labour costs and (justifiably) high comfort and safety expectations. A 3 lane motorway can transport orders of magnitude more people and freight than a rail line over the same distance for less money. Rail is a premium mode of transport for those who want to travel comfortably city centre-to-city centre and only massive state subsidy (from the poorer rail deprived regions to the wealthy commuters of the capital) keeps it running at all.
In past times, when wages were low and alternatives extremely expensive, it was a sensible investment. Today it only works as mass transit in densely populated areas that can support frequent services.
I have absolutely no time for Reform (an obvious thinly disguised National Front successor) but duplicating existing rail links is not sensible infrastructure spending. HS2 is a massive white elephant designed only to enable some political peacocking and deliver pork to favoured MP’s constituencies.
I get genuinely angry when I have to contend with the fact the FUCKING SPAIN, has more High Speed Rail than us. SPAIN!!! They’re a third world country and they’re doing better than us? We has severely lost the plot on Infrastructure development and I don’t care how many NIMBY’s we have to trample on, we need to catch up and then some if we’re to have something that even resembles a healthy economy.
The UK isn’t that bug so speed isn’t an issue. Its the cost of the train that the issue. Even for longer trips like London to Edinburgh a train is never going to be as convenient or fast as a flight which costs a fraction.
No, the lesson learnt from HS2 is that *High speed* rail is just not that critical in the UK because our urban areas are so close together. when you build High Speed rail the cost goes up drastically compared to conventional speed rail.
The main benefits of HS2 will be freeing up existing railway for more freight allowing more goods to flow north-South/ South-North
This would have been achieved if the HS2 line was conventional speed railway.
People don’t realize how much the cost goes up for high speed rail, because of the higher safety standard. one example: High speed rail track has to be laid on concrete slabs not the gravel/aggregate ballast you normally have for convectional rail. To have to concrete the whole HS2 route is so expensive (and also not carbon friendly)
We probably could have had conventional speed rail that went to Manchester and still had the second route to Leeds cheaper than High speed rail just to Birmingham,
so I would advocate new conventional speed rail line between northern cities not high speed
I support governments making infrastructure decisions and then future governments continuing what’s already been started without chopping and changing
Reinstate canals for logistics instead. Frees up railway capacity for pedestrians, frees up roads for private vehicles. Win win!
I support it in general but the cost is enormous and we are incredibly bad at budgeting these things so the costs spiral even more.
I do support this proposal. Connectivity is vital to today’s economy and lifestyles. That said it must not become an ego trip for politicians and a cash cow for civil engineering consortia.
We should not be ashamed to use the best experience from around the world in terms of engineering the line and controlling costs.
Very much so. We need to get people out of cars when travelling between cities and we also need to get more freight on train. Both of those things can only be achieved with new lines.
Oppose, the longer I can stay out of Leeds the better.
Joining city centres to make a single economic area would make sense. Manchester and Liverpool should be ten minutes apart by high speed rail
Infrastructure is a proven way to stimulate an economy and effectively spend govt money
Anyone who opposes this and lives in the North is a turkey who just loves voting for Christmas.
Don’t worry Reform voters, Farage will fatten you up good with a nice diet of bullshit, before he sells you out.
I would much prefer new high-speed rail lines in the South. Joining cities like Chichester and London. I guess you’d have to plough through Petworth and Haslemere – so nothing much would be lost.
Support, big time, do something for the North, address the N/S divide by investing massively on Northern infrastructure
HS2 was never really about speed, it was mainly about capacity.
Apart from London, our big cities are all underperforming economically. A high speed link between our two biggest non-London cities – Manchester and Birmingham – makes a lot of sense.
Yes better, reliable, reasonably priced railways connecting northern cities are badly needed
Money spent in London should be spent on the Midland and the north, absolutely support investment outside of London.
Were using railways that are essentially 200 years old…. Imagine if the Victorians were like us. We’d have absolutely no train options. It’s a 200 year infrastructure project we should complete it in full and maybe expand the scope otherwise it’s pointless.
Opposed. They’re unnecessary. Higher capacity, reliable, cheap local trains should be the priority
Support on my assumption that it could better connect 8 million people across Sheff, Leeds, Manc and Liverpool, and there would be large economic benefits to doing that.
Having a modern and functional rail network that can reduce the number of vehicles on our roads needs to be a priority for all parties, but it can’t become a haphazard mess like HS2.
Everything needs to be planned beforehand, even wildlife corridors or bat tunnels. The biggest failing with HS2 was that they tried to do it piecemeal, a hybrid bill so that not a single part of the plan was final, it led to a too many cooks situation with none of the budget estimates being anything close to accurate.
Support, but we also need to not bulldoze people’s lives or destroy parts of our country to do it. These things need creative solutions.
It’ll cost, lets except that and stop letting news outlets kill the project because they want to get people emotional.
If we had a fast an effective high-speed rail network it would balance some of the inequality in the UK, and overall, pay for itself again and again. Same the the railnetwork did before we fucked that up.
Infrastructure allows us to grow.
Strongly support. Infrastructure is the difference between a successful state and a shit one.
Just get what we have working efficiently and then think about it.