←back to thread

Britain is building one of the world’s most expensive railways

(www.cnn.com)
61 points peutetre | 1 comments | 20 Nov 24 13:51 UTC | HN request time: 0.208s | source
Show context
lmm ◴[20 Nov 24 15:03 UTC] No.42194495[source]▶
Most of the money isn't being spent on building a railway, it's being spent on not building it, such as by redesigning Euston station to be smaller and more expensive, repeatedly, and making sure to spend a large amount of money demolishing buildings and digging a big hole in the ground before cancelling it.

Make no mistake, this was deliberate Conservative policy. They knew (as everyone else did) that they were going to lose the last election, years before the fact, and chose to set money on fire and sabotage the country's infrastructure in order to make life harder for the Labour government that was coming and ensure they couldn't get a win.

replies(2): >>42194626 #>>42196506 #
1. michaelt ◴[20 Nov 24 17:56 UTC] No.42196506[source]▶
There's a UK politics tradition called "kicking it into the long grass"

You've got a group of stakeholders who passionately believe X should be done. They've got some strong arguments, and some political backing. You've got another group of stakeholders who strongly think X should not be done. They've got some good arguments, and some powerful supporters.

So how do you resolve the debate? Which of the two groups are you going to upset? It's simple! You just delay the decision. Order a study, set up a committee, change the requirements, whatever. Just hold up any major works for 5 years or so without cancelling the project, and you can leave office making it some other chump's problem.

Nuclear power plant we might need, but it's expensive and nuclear? Long grass. Extra runway at a busy airport, but locals don't like it? Long grass. Decarbonising transport, but it'll raise prices? Long grass. Nuclear weapons renewal? Long grass. Incredibly busy road through a world heritage site? Long grass.