Maybe, and this is just one opinion, one of the main reasons why there is no major disagreement between the main parties about the HS2 is simply that there is common ground about the need for a huge public capital expenditure project, any capital expenditure project, in the UK. The writer can see no fully argued sense in pushing on with HS2 - yes, a need for greater rail capacity but huge speed in a small country? Destruction of environment? Increased pollution due to greater speed? The list goes on and on . . . and on.
BUT, a need for a huge capital expenditure project to underpin growth? Might not agree, but the arguments are more sustainable than the arguments that fail to support the case (not really a case, more a paper bag with a hole in it) for HS2.
It is undeniable that this country - and I mean England more specifically than the whole of the UK - is facing drought over the foreseeable future. Could be serious. The problem is, as I understand, not a shortage of water in total but water in the wrong places; in other words, the problem is the distribution of water.
It is believed that canals still form an important part of the water distribution network in the UK - however, as we all know, canals have been left to fall into disrepair, short term badly prioritised needs have led to the closure or breaking of others with the result that this valuable water distribution tool is no longer as effective as it could be or once was.
Anyone reading this who knows more about it than I do (and I know very little) is welcomed and encouraged to add their comments to this blog - or pick up the torch (well, it is that year) and carry it themselves. I think that the canals might be able to help with water distribution in a drought struck country but that needs some properly informed comment; is the cost affordable? Instinct says that it is bound to cost less than HS2 but, again, need informed comment.
So, how about a large capital expenditure scheme to revitalise the canal network right across the country with the main focus on water distribution. The environmental and recreational benefits are so obvious that they hardly need listing; maybe the opportunity exists to move some of the heavy non time sensitive freight back to the canal network.
High speed (HS2) train with its eventual 300 mile blight path bringing misery to many but useful transport to few and at a cost which will hurt everyone's pocket - or a revitalised canal network bringing water to the whole country and tranquillity to many?
I know which I would rather leave my children and grandchildren.
Please add your name to this petition now and send the link to this blog (it is quicker for you than explaining the whole thing) to everyone you know - whatever part of the country they are in - friends, acquaintances, relatives, colleagues.
The e-petition is:
No comments:
Post a Comment