Will the government's proposed large infrastructure projects be sufficient to lift Britain out of a second recession?

Readers' comments (26)

• David Mayer | 13 Dec 2011 1:11 pm

  This "statement" was typical of the sort of spin that Labour used to put out - hey, lets announce some Good News to bury all the Bad news. The projects would probably have gone ahead anyway. But whats this about a second recession? We haven't got out of the first one yet, by a long way.

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• John Falch | 13 Dec 2011 2:11 pm

  What recession. We are working flat out with decent margins.
  
  There is a recession in the "public" sector, with a few surplus "cost" type jobs being removed every year.

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Anonymous | 10 Jan 2012 12:29 pm

  Will the new high speed rail link still operate if there are leaves on the line?

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Graham burke | 10 Jan 2012 1:08 pm

  Why do these projects take so long? I will be 78 by the time this railway gets to Scotland! Why don't we use some of this unemployed labour and get on with the job. This is a great opportunity to give some new skills to some very needy young (and older) people.

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• T Ward | 10 Jan 2012 5:41 pm

  Great Britain is minuscule compared to the USA and yet over 3000 miles of track was laid from east to west by hand. We should be expert at railway building, after all we invented them. A high speed link from France to Scotland should not be a problem. By the time we have thought about doing something its too late. How can we put the Great back into Britain when we dither so. No mention is given to freight going on this line. Reducing freight costs etc. and getting it shipped out quickly. With such sums of money being invested all sectors should be considered.

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• JG | 11 Jan 2012 9:22 am

  T Ward: Comparisons are odious. E.g the Brits + many Indians (real ones) laid out a fine rail network in India, a lot more humanely than those in the USA.
  
  Budding/"frontier" USA killed "Indians" (native Americans, the owners, untitled), or at least dispossessed them and others with no recompense to get those very simple mostly at-grade tracks across the USA. A lot of the rest was "empty" desert etc I believe they also employed a lot of Chinese labourers on poor terms and with very few safety measures in getting through the rocky ranges to the west, nearly in California.
  
  The current UK proposal will never go directly to Scotland. As proposed, there is already a gap where the quickest way will be to walk, along Euston Road. How daft can it get? All for London commuters as planned.
  
  There are no proposals or slots for freight: carrying goods at that speed would be a misuse. It may free up some slots elsewhere for that.
  
  They should start from Scotland, instead of London, if it's worth doing at all..

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Peter Meredith | 17 Jan 2012 5:07 pm

  A relative of mine spent years in India and West Africa. He spent much of his time teaching the indigenous people how to lay railtrack and run trains at the start of the 20th century. I find it amazing that in 2011, we don't just get on with it.

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• JohnK | 17 Jan 2012 5:07 pm

  Ref. All of the above ... agree mainly, but starting work in Scotland... consider the upcoming passport controls at the border.

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Philip Baker - HV Insulation Engineer | 17 Jan 2012 7:10 pm

  There are infrastructure projects that could lift the UK out of recession, but they must involve as wide a number of UK engineering sectors as possible, and ensure that the bulk of the expenditure is in the UK by UK companies.
  
  This approach is called the " wooden dollar trade cycle ".
  This means that although there is a cost, it is recycled within the UK and not an addition to imports, which is a direct transfer of UK wealth.
  
  The main projects should be aimed at long term cost saving objectives.
  1. The reduction of power consumption by smart control systems.
  2. The production of sustainable base load power, from resources within the UK.
  3. Our reduced dependency, on oil and petroleum products, which continue to be used by Global traders as economic blackmail that destabilise industrial economies.
  
  Specific to the HS2 we should forget HS to Birmingham and upgrade the ECML to Scotland and service this direct line with other CROSS RAILS.
  The time lost in the Cross Rails could be minimal and the East coast corridor, quicker by being direct. I live in the West Country and a few minuets earlier getting into London is always lost by the follow on journey, be it either by road, foot, rail or air.
  
  The issue is carriages i.e. rolling stock
  We need longer main line trains, with a minimum of 10 carriages.
  Compared to existing units, that would already provide an increase in seats by 25%.
  
  The carriage and rolling stock can built in the UK, and the fittings and hardware can be supplied by UK companies.
  
  Taking the direct approach to satisfy a need, is always more efficient, saves more time and is usually more cost effective.
  
  The alternatives, which are politically driven grandiose schemes, fail before they have even been approved.
  
  So let’s cut the nonsense and get the UK engineering activity on the boil with infra structure projects
  which satisfy real needs and benefits.

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Robin Hood | 24 Jan 2012 1:24 pm

  So, now that we know the results of the poll (which has largely come from the industry, I presume), what happens now?
  
  Well, NOTHING I'M AFRAID.

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment