Search results

Makes a difference in what way exactly?

I not saying that existing infrastructure shouldn't be improved but there is a hell of a difference between upgrading existing lines and building a high speed option.

But what are the journey times/distances in those countries. Remember we are only talking about 44 miles between Leeds and Manchester! According to Wikipedia (!) the optimal distances for high speed rail is between 150 and 900km.

You might not have voted for them but you certainly do a damned good impression of one! Still, now I know you don't vote I can ignore all your political comments!

Ah, surprise surprise, tory boy speaks! The point I'm making is that is it really worth that investment in a high speed link between two cities only about 44 miles and to save about 25 minutes? Yes there may well be a big boost during the construction phase but how many companies are going to...

I'm generalising. However, the vast majority will probably vote to protect their gravy train, so to speak!

But all those people already vote conservative!!!!

I see the thinking but don't see the logic. The economic strength in London is not in greater London, it is in central London, quite a small area. The other thing, in 20 years time, are people going to be travelling around for meetings or will there be far more video conferencing?

And that extra 20 minutes at your destination is going to turn the north into a global powerhouse how?

So Georgie boy is hoping to con the northern electorate that building them a high speed rail link between Leeds and Manchester will make these 'great cities of the north' a global powerhouse. So, are our northern comrades dumb enough to believe him or will they see through the charade? How...