Date published: 2008/09/29
The BBC says:
The Tories say they would scrap plans for a third runway at Heathrow and build a high-speed rail line instead.
They are proposing to create a new line linking London St Pancras, Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds - saying it would cut Heathrow flights by 66,000 a year.
Transport spokeswoman Theresa Villiers said it had been a hard decision but the party would "not run" from it.
The party says it would cost £1.3bn a year for 12 years. Airport operator BAA said it was offering a "false choice".
...
She said rail could offer a viable alternative to short-haul flights and mean about 66,000 fewer flights a year, 30% of the planned capacity of the third runway, eventually rising to 44% with a more extensive high speed rail network in the UK.The proposed 180mph rail link would run between St Pancras in London - the terminus for Eurostar - and Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds. Heathrow, the UK's largest airport, would also be linked in.
It would be a new railway with a new track freeing up the West Coast Mainline for more commuter journeys. Construction would start in 2015, to finish in 2027, should the Conservatives win the next general election.
The party says journeys would be reduced from 125 minutes to 80 minutes from London to Manchester, and from 55 minutes to 17 minutes between Manchester and Leeds.
A Conservative government would spend £15.6bn over 12 years on the project, which they say could be met from within current levels of government capital spend on rail. The private sector would contribute a further £4.4bn.
Once again the Tories have shown themselves to be unfit to run the country (unfortunately they will be running the country in a year or two). BAA is correct (for once) that this decision represents a "false choice". So on the one hand we have the private sector willing to pay to build a third runway at Heathrow, and on the other hand we have the government willing to throw billions of pounds of taxpayer's money at a rail line. In effect, what this means is that air passengers are willing to pay for the service they are provided, and rail passengers are not. What is it about rail passengers that they think the rest of the country should subsidise their lifestyle?
Further, cutting the Manchester to London journey time from 125 to 80 minutes would be a disaster. It would mean that thousands of people who live in Manchester would be happy to become London commuters, especially given that the taxpayer is massively subsidising their journey. Hundreds of towns and cities in the south of England already suffer from this problem. And the Tories want to spread it to the entire country, it seems. What a wonderfully "sustainable" practice the Tories want to foist upon the country.
Of course this decision would not be so bad if instead of Heathrow the Tories wanted to make Stansted the premier London airport. But if they are now 100% opposed to Heathrow expansion, the Tories have always been 110% opposed to Stansted expansion, because a few of the Tory landed gentry might suffer.
_________________________________________________________
All material not included from other sources is copyright cambridge2000.com.
For further information or questions email: info [at] cambridge2000 [dot] com
(replace "[at]" with "@" and "[dot]" with ".").