HS2 won't benefit UK

Overall there is little or no proven benefit to UK PLC in this project which appears to be driven by political motivation

I was concerned and disappointed at your editorial in the January Issue of PE with your emphatic support of HS2.

I would ask you to seriously consider the following points/issues which are at complete variance with the views you submitted :

• “Most dissenters are driven by local self-interest... in fact it's primarily about the geographical inconvenience that it brings for a vocal, but relatively small minority.” I believe you are completely mistaken in your comments about “there only being a small local minority opposition,” the Chilterns is an AONB (Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty) and as such is of national importance and therefore of national interest. Any project such as this has a detrimental impact on the whole country. Whether you like it or not, tourism is one of the major industries in the United Kingdom, and the proposed building of HS2 would have a major negative impact on tourism, not only in the Chilterns but other areas further north. This will have a nationwide negative impact on tourism, way beyond the immediate areas affected.
• “I personally believe there is a strong groundswell of support for HS2, among business groups, trade unions and most of the public at large.” I would expect business groups and trade unions to be in favour as they have “vested interests.” However I believe you are way off the truth in suggesting the public at large is supportive.
• Communications. With modern technology a far greater emphasis is being placed on electronic media, in future this is likely to have a greater prominence, reducing the need for personal travel.
• What is the actual 'cost benefit” in real terms of the small time savings to be made by individuals by using HS2 as an alternative to other existing routes? I would suggest it is likely to be minimal.
• What will be the “real cost” savings, in view of the fact that by travelling so fast the energy consumption will be so much greater thus negating any so called benefit to the economy. (We are a relatively small island compared to other countries where the much greater distances may justify High Speed Trains)/
• If it is built it seems, on the evidence of recent major civil engineering projects, that there will be minimal benefit to British Industry/Manufacturers. I would ask you to answer the following questions:-
• Where will the majority of the labour force come from?
• Where will all the major plant and machinery be manufactured? Tunnelling Machines? Concrete Batching Plant? Earth Moving Equipment? It is very unlikely UK manufacturing PLC will get any benefit from this? Even the cement used in the construction is likely to be UK sourced, but all from companies owned by non UK companies.
• Where will the locomotives and rolling stock be built? Again it is extremely unlikely that UK Manufacturers will get any business?

I believe that, overall there is little or no proven benefit to UK PLC in this project which appears to be driven by Political Motivation and those with vested interests against all economic and environmental reason.

I have heard it mentioned that HS2 could be compared with the project to build Concorde and look what happened to that!

However, at least with Concorde UK PLC got major benefits out of it's design and construction!

David G Scott, High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire

Next letter: Prestige, necessity and job creation