Wrecking the Countryside Just to Reduce Jouney Times by a Few Minutes

[The Lawspeaker]

Wrecking the Countryside Just to Reduce Jouney Times by a Few Minutes

The news that new high speed trail links are to be built across the country has not met with approval from countryside campaigners. Many have expressed their concerns over the potential impact on the countryside of both the construction and operating of such services.

Campaigners in Buckinghamshire, for instance, are unhappy that one proposed route will cross the picturesque Chilterns. In addition they point out that as no new stations will be built along its route that the service does not serve local people in the slightest.

Other rural campaigners are insisting that the implementation of the plan must result in travellers leaving their cars at home and actually using the service, thereby saving on road usage and resultant pollution.

The proposal, at present, centres around plans for a new 200mph rail link between London and Birmingham.

From Birmingham the new line will branch to provide services to Sheffield and Leeds as well as Manchester.

According to the planners the new high speed trains could shorten journey times to less than 90 minutes between Leeds and London – quite why that justifies ripping through pristine countryside has not been explained.

In addition it is claimed that the new rail routes could generate an estimated £33 billion in revenue for the regional economy, a figure some ridicule.

In a bid to pacify objectors planners say they will try to minimise the impact on the countryside by constructing the new rail route as close as possible to existing motorways and other major roads.

That is all very well but Land & People wonders why it is so important to cut up to an hour from the rail journey time between London and Leeds for instance?

Surely the preservation of our ever-shrinking countryside is more important than reducing journey times by such relatively short amounts?

[The Lawspeaker]

I think that a modernization of the infrastructure is of course necessary but couldn't they just build tunnels underneath such vulnerable areas ? It's expensive but the only good solution.