|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Nov 13, 2022 22:23:48 GMT
Could you provide some evidence to support your theory Red. It seems a little unlikely not least because HS2 doesn’t connect to. Europe. What theory? |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Nov 13, 2022 22:56:03 GMT
At a wild guess Red, could it be the theory in your last post to which I replied
|
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Nov 14, 2022 5:35:25 GMT
Could you provide some evidence to support your theory Red. It seems a little unlikely not least because HS2 doesn’t connect to. Europe. In Red's absence |I can confirm it was part of a grand EU scheme, not just for us but other EU members. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Nov 14, 2022 10:07:23 GMT
You are of course correct Dan, in England high speed rail makes no commercial or economic sense. But that was always irrelevant. A high speed rail link between major UK cities and Europe was an EU plan as dictated in various treaties and directives. Other than to nod in subservient agreement the British government had little indeed nothing to do with it. UK high speed rail was planned from Brussels. As a matter of fact it wasn't Red. The EU's involvement in British Rail was restricted to the creation of two TEN-T Priority Rail Corridors, which were designated in the 1990s. Neither were required to be high-speed lines, although Corridor 2, which linked London to the continent eventually became one.
The other corridor, TEN 14, ran from from London to Scotland and used the WCML not HS2 which at that stage was not even a twinkle in the eye of the unelected dictators' eye.
There is no directive that any of the other twenty-eight TEN-T corridors on the continent had to be high-speed lines i.e. => 300 km/h, in fact many of them still don't.
TEN 2 and TEN 14 of course evaporated on Brexit.
|
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Nov 17, 2022 12:40:46 GMT
Feck me they have only gone and u-turned on their u turn on their u-turn on their u-turn. Its back on again.
Really quite staggering levels of incompetence.
I understand that once they have lost the next election, the Tory cabinet intend to set up a company maintaining moose heads in Torquay hotels....
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Nov 17, 2022 13:18:08 GMT
At a wild guess Red, could it be the theory in your last post to which I replied I assume you allude to the fact, and it is a fact, that HS2 is a part of the EU's Trans European Railway (TEN-R) High Speed Rail 2 (HS2) is a proposed rail link between London, Manchester and Leeds with further, later, extensions to Glasgow and Edinburgh. If mentioned at all by the last or present Government, it is put forward as an entirely British idea, but it is not. And if there are complaints about the proposed rail line, no matter how many times the Government says it will ‘re-consider’ – nothing will be done. Because nothing can be done. The whole project is down to the Government in Brussels. Enjoy- www.theeuroprobe.org/2015-088-hs2-controlled-by-eu-not-our-gov/ |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Nov 17, 2022 13:22:15 GMT
You are of course correct Dan, in England high speed rail makes no commercial or economic sense. But that was always irrelevant. A high speed rail link between major UK cities and Europe was an EU plan as dictated in various treaties and directives. Other than to nod in subservient agreement the British government had little indeed nothing to do with it. UK high speed rail was planned from Brussels. As a matter of fact it wasn't Red. The EU's involvement in British Rail was restricted to the creation of two TEN-T Priority Rail Corridors, which were designated in the 1990s. Neither were required to be high-speed lines, although Corridor 2, which linked London to the continent eventually became one.
The other corridor, TEN 14, ran from from London to Scotland and used the WCML not HS2 which at that stage was not even a twinkle in the eye of the unelected dictators' eye.
There is no directive that any of the other twenty-eight TEN-T corridors on the continent had to be high-speed lines i.e. => 300 km/h, in fact many of them still don't.
TEN 2 and TEN 14 of course evaporated on Brexit.
See above link. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Nov 17, 2022 13:33:47 GMT
I don't see any support at your link for the contention that the EU mandated that TEN 2 and 14 had to be constructed to High Speed Line standards i.e. => 300 km/h.
It would be very curious if they had since, as already noted, many of the other TEN-T corridors are not HSL even today.
Can you provide an official EU source for that assertion as opposed to partisan commentary?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Nov 17, 2022 15:45:27 GMT
The following depicts the TEN-T corridors as existed prior to the 2013 consolidation. Note that TEN-14 utilises the WCML not HS2. Note also how few of the rest are high-speed (=> 300 km/h) lines: none in Scandinavia, Switzerland, Eastern or SE Europe. The high-speed lines between France and Spain are only partially implemented (and not at all for freight).  |
|
