Grant Shapps, Transport Minister

Cyril Haearn
Posts: 13821
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am
Location: Leafy suburbia

Re: Grant Shapps, Transport Minister

Postby Cyril Haearn » 17 May 2020, 4:54pm

Lot of people continue to work at home, fewer trains are needed, timetables shall be thinned out
+1
Entertainer, intellectual, idealist, PoB, 30120
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we dislike mortons

atoz
Posts: 405
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 4:50pm

Re: Grant Shapps, Transport Minister

Postby atoz » 28 Jun 2020, 1:12pm

This says it all about this gentleman
https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/ ... ssion=true

Pete Owens
Posts: 1837
Joined: 7 Jul 2008, 12:52am

Re: Grant Shapps, Transport Minister

Postby Pete Owens » 28 Jun 2020, 3:20pm

You mean he won't splash out a large amount of taxpayers money to support your particular pet project?

mikeymo
Posts: 1201
Joined: 27 Sep 2016, 6:23pm

Re: Grant Shapps, Transport Minister

Postby mikeymo » 28 Jun 2020, 4:50pm

Pete Owens wrote:You mean he won't splash out a large amount of taxpayers money to support your particular pet project?


I agree.

Cyril Haearn
Posts: 13821
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am
Location: Leafy suburbia

Re: Grant Shapps, Transport Minister

Postby Cyril Haearn » 28 Jun 2020, 4:52pm

atoz wrote:This says it all about this gentleman
https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/ ... ssion=true

Right again atoz
Entertainer, intellectual, idealist, PoB, 30120
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we dislike mortons

atoz
Posts: 405
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 4:50pm

Re: Grant Shapps, Transport Minister

Postby atoz » 29 Jun 2020, 11:15am

mikeymo wrote:
Pete Owens wrote:You mean he won't splash out a large amount of taxpayers money to support your particular pet project?


I agree.


Not mine personally, I think you'll find this project has a lot of local support, supported by evidence-based costings. The alternative is to plug up the tunnel and let it collapse, at greater public expense. I wouldn't want to be a homeowner whose property is above the tunnel should that happen.

The evidence suggests that cycle schemes are only being considered because they are a cheapskate solution. They were not taken seriously pre covid. And this project is in an area that was not part of the Red Wall collapse. I rest my case.

mikeymo
Posts: 1201
Joined: 27 Sep 2016, 6:23pm

Re: Grant Shapps, Transport Minister

Postby mikeymo » 29 Jun 2020, 11:38am

atoz wrote:
mikeymo wrote:
Pete Owens wrote:You mean he won't splash out a large amount of taxpayers money to support your particular pet project?


I agree.


Not mine personally, I think you'll find this project has a lot of local support, supported by evidence-based costings. The alternative is to plug up the tunnel and let it collapse, at greater public expense. I wouldn't want to be a homeowner whose property is above the tunnel should that happen. Simples...


The emergency filling of one of the shafts was done to prevent the tunnel collapsing, according to Highways England. Although some of the people campaigning to keep it open mocked that as a concern, see 15:30 here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-loPcnwGWM

Graeme Bickerdike, the man wearing the woolly hat, speaks very authoritatively on railway matters. Professional qualifications and experience may not be the be all and end all, but it is worth pointing out that, at least as far as I can tell, he does not have any qualifications in civil or structural engineering. Or to have worked in those fields. A quick internet search may give you the impression that he has, but if you read carefully you will see that he hasn't. Again, at least as far as I can tell, correct me if you think I am wrong. I think he's a cameraman, writer and website developer. I wouldn't go so far as to say he deliberately misrepresents himself, but I think he's fairly close to it. I think he would certainly like others to gain the impression that he's a professional engineer, and maybe has even convinced himself of that.

https://uk.linkedin.com/in/graeme-bickerdike-56965783

So his criticism of Highways England's actions, who actually do employ professional, suitably qualified and experienced engineers, should be treated with a great deal of caution.

It's worth pointing out that I live in West Yorkshire, and ride a cycle. I'm not a disinterested party. The entire scheme would cost £24 million, and the population of the WYCA area is about 2.25 million. That works out at about a tenner each. I'm more than happy to pay that, if you tell me where to send the cheque.
Last edited by mikeymo on 29 Jun 2020, 11:23pm, edited 1 time in total.

mikeymo
Posts: 1201
Joined: 27 Sep 2016, 6:23pm

Re: Grant Shapps, Transport Minister

Postby mikeymo » 29 Jun 2020, 11:52am

atoz wrote:
mikeymo wrote:
Pete Owens wrote:You mean he won't splash out a large amount of taxpayers money to support your particular pet project?


I agree.


Not mine personally, I think you'll find this project has a lot of local support, supported by evidence-based costings. The alternative is to plug up the tunnel and let it collapse, at greater public expense. I wouldn't want to be a homeowner whose property is above the tunnel should that happen.

The evidence suggests that cycle schemes are only being considered because they are a cheapskate solution. They were not taken seriously pre covid. And this project is in an area that was not part of the Red Wall collapse. I rest my case.


Here is HE's response to an FOI request asking for the evidence they used for their emergency infilling of one of the shafts:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/663564/response/1583653/attach/3/Final%20Response%20to%20Mike%20Anderson%20Freedom%20of%20Information%20Request%20101091%20Redacted.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1

mikeymo
Posts: 1201
Joined: 27 Sep 2016, 6:23pm

Re: Grant Shapps, Transport Minister

Postby mikeymo » 29 Jun 2020, 12:09pm

atoz wrote:
mikeymo wrote:
Pete Owens wrote:You mean he won't splash out a large amount of taxpayers money to support your particular pet project?


I agree.


Not mine personally, I think you'll find this project has a lot of local support, supported by evidence-based costings. The alternative is to plug up the tunnel and let it collapse, at greater public expense. I wouldn't want to be a homeowner whose property is above the tunnel should that happen.

The evidence suggests that cycle schemes are only being considered because they are a cheapskate solution. They were not taken seriously pre covid. And this project is in an area that was not part of the Red Wall collapse. I rest my case.


The estimated costs to repair the tunnel vary immensely, from £1.2 million to £35 million. Some of the variation no doubt reflects the difference between what is considered remediation and what would be suitable for a publicly accessible cycle way. Presumably another factor for the wide variation in estimated cost is the possibility of hidden defects in the tunnel. It is easy to see from published photographs of inspections that even the act of carrying out inspections is one that might produce at least some trepidation in the inspecting engineers.

http://www.queensburytunnel.org.uk/reports/QueensburyTunnelCostComparisons(Feb2017).pdf

Given both the known knowns, known unknowns, and unknown unknowns, it isn't surprising to me that central government would not be willing to take on the risk of spiralling costs for a project that would be of benefit to only a tiny proportion of the population, and mainly in one very limited location.

To repeat, as a cyclist who lives in West Yorkshire, I don't mind paying my share of the cost of this project which is fairly near to me. But maybe taxpayers in other parts of the country might have their own cycling projects that they would like to see funded first. If I'm demanding that national taxes are used for this, then I can hardly blame people elsewhere in the UK who want their own project paying for first.

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 15826
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Grant Shapps, Transport Minister

Postby mjr » 29 Jun 2020, 12:29pm

mikeymo wrote:To repeat, as a cyclist who lives in West Yorkshire, I don't mind paying my share of the cost of this project which is fairly near to me. But maybe taxpayers in other parts of the country might have their own cycling projects that they would like to see funded first. If I'm demanding that national taxes are used for this, then I can hardly blame people elsewhere in the UK who want their own project paying for first.

From where I'm sat far from Yorkshire, it looks a bit insulting that Shapps is only offering £4m towards making it a viable cycle highway when he's willing to spend £7m destroying it. Surely even the most parochial cycling champion would not begrudge an offer to spend £7m on a cycleway in that context? Then it becomes a question of how much more it merits.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

mikeymo
Posts: 1201
Joined: 27 Sep 2016, 6:23pm

Re: Grant Shapps, Transport Minister

Postby mikeymo » 29 Jun 2020, 12:36pm

mjr wrote:
mikeymo wrote:To repeat, as a cyclist who lives in West Yorkshire, I don't mind paying my share of the cost of this project which is fairly near to me. But maybe taxpayers in other parts of the country might have their own cycling projects that they would like to see funded first. If I'm demanding that national taxes are used for this, then I can hardly blame people elsewhere in the UK who want their own project paying for first.

From where I'm sat far from Yorkshire, it looks a bit insulting that Shapps is only offering £4m towards making it a viable cycle highway when he's willing to spend £7m destroying it. Surely even the most parochial cycling champion would not begrudge an offer to spend £7m on a cycleway in that context? Then it becomes a question of how much more it merits.


I don't feel the least bit insulted. And I live here. I'm willing to pay my share of the cost, which, as I said, is £10. The national taxpayer can't be expected to pay for every single thing. Though I'm grateful that you're willing to also contribute. Presumably that's what you mean?

mikeymo
Posts: 1201
Joined: 27 Sep 2016, 6:23pm

Re: Grant Shapps, Transport Minister

Postby mikeymo » 29 Jun 2020, 5:28pm

atoz wrote:This says it all about this gentleman
https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/ ... ssion=true


Or of course Grant Shapps could well say - "tell you what, take it out of this":

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-51834313#:~:text=West%20Yorkshire%20%C2%A31.8bn%20devolution%20deal%20agreed%20%2D%20BBC%20News

the deal includes: "£317m to invest in public transport, cycling and walking through Transforming Cities Fund with local flexibility on delivery."

Seems fair enough, yes?

The 8 miles of cycle route which passes through the tunnel works out at £2million per km, according to that T&A report. Personally I wouldn't be the least surprised if it comes out at more than that. The other cycle route proposals round here seem to be about £1million per km, so the one which uses the tunnel looks like bad value to me.