Good news this morning with the proposal for HS3 receiving government backing and nice to hear Hull included in the comments made by Sir David Higgins.... but wait....if you looked at the visual representation of the article on the BBC's flagship website you will see no mention of Hull whatsoever and the line drawn on the proposal ending around Selby. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29779134 Now accuse me or paranoia but what the f** is this about? Hull is mentioned specifically in the plans by the boss of HS2 but whoever drew the map - presumably some Beeb lackey - decided to ignore that, assuming it was a mistake and Hull could never be included, and just end the line wherever they f**ing want. Or could they just not find Hull on a map?
Settle Gretle. The fact is that Hull is still a parochial little narrow minded community where we all feel persecuted by the those big bad brothers in the parts of the country that matter both politically and economically. As long as the Hull Trinity rules, it will remain so.
Re; My posts from yesterdays Yorkshire thread. Carmine I have said this for so long I just don't know for how long, we are NOT regarded as Yorkshire by those who think Yorkshire ends at York. I lived, for a brief period in my life, in deepest Otley, lovely place, and I can go back to the 1950's and 60's when it was impressed upon me that Hull will never be regarded as part of Yorkshire by those same folk. We were that place by the muddy Humber, and we are, and that is why I gave my backing to the County of Humberside at least it gave us an area based on something tangible, the River Humber. All sorts went wrong with the administration of such stuff and when working in Bridlington the locals detested being lumped into a place name of a muddy river. But I still believe that for this area to progress is, in some shape or form, a variation of Humberside away form that colossus called Yorkshire, because to be lumped with that area has not done us, and continues to hinder, this area's development. I never said Hull was not in Yorkshire I'm well aware that is it, what I actually said was that it is detrimental to the future prosperity of the Humber area being lumped in with the collosus called Yorkshire and that we need to fight our corner instead of hoping for development scraps. Humberside was at least a start, as was the Humber Bridge, you know the bridge from nowhere to nowhere. The creation of an administration area was only a start but the Yorkies/Yellowbellies argument got in the way and the rest, as they say is history. In the meantime in the real world Leeds had billions spent on it both road and rail links were improved whereas Hull, after the Humber Bridge, got a cheap swing bridge over the River Hull that broke down on its inauguration day. I'm still waiting for the Castle St improvements to start whilst grand plans have been announced for a Northern Corridor to combat the growing influence of the South East of the country, not that it includes Hull of course. Guess where the grand plan finishes? Nothing more to be said really its a belief I've held all my life from extensive travel and meeting people who are in total ignorance as to where Hull actually is, Manchester, Leeds, York, Liverpool yes they are known ok, but Hull, you get a blank stare and ........ where?
None of that explains why, the man behind the scheme specifically names the route including Hull, but the BBC decide to leave it off. Why would they do that? It makes absolutely no sense. They wouldnt leave Manchester or Leeds off the same map.
What he says is that there should be a "clear strategy to address poor connectivity across the north from Liverpool to Hull, as well as to Sheffield and Newcastle", he doesn't state that HS2/3 should cover these routes, neither are marked on the map for that reason.
The web page states that the time between Manchester and Leeds would be reduced by over 20 minutes. The time from Manchester to Hull is reduced by a similar amount. Therefore I deduce that the improvement work from HS3 may stop well before Hull.
Indeed it has not. However, tying ourselves to an even more narrow minded and parochial dead end across the Humber will not have made matters better. In fact, much worse. Hull's future is in East Yorkshire, aligned to York and beyond (to the North that is!). The best investment that could be made for Hull's future prosperity is dualling the A1079, and maybe a rail link to do the same, making Northerly travel as easy as the Westerly equivelant. Any cross Pennine electrification would decrease travel times and increase reliability marginally, but hard cash to improvr Northerly links would provide tangable improvements. The Councils North of the Humber seem to have mythical delusions of gradure and a thought that formal links with those South of the river will produce this heaving commercial renewable mass. That is wrong, as it is the market place which will produce this, if indeed it is ever a realistic proposition. Hull is becoming established as a commuter feed for the North's second City (i.e. Leeds), evidenced by the daily rush to get out of Hull every morning. It could also gain by establishing Northerly links to both the tourism overspill and other tangible benefits accruing by slashing travel times to York from the present 1 hour (ish) to less than 30 minutes, depending on where your journey begins. As a regular traveller, I actually find that the best and most reliable route to York is via M62, A1, A64 which is a ludicrously long diversion for the 20 miles or so between my home and York. For me, this drive towards a return of the Humberside region is commercially and culturally unnecessary. The only realistic rationale is to increase the political power of inconsequencial individuals who insist on looking backwards without seeing the reality that Hull's future lies in feeding off the success of Leeds and York.
He doesnt say HS3 should cover any routes but the BBC has drawn one on a map anyway. Sir David did not make specific proposals for how to achieve faster times, but says a mixture of current and new projects would make them possible. Eh? Of course it matters. Ok then, adopting that attitude we might as well never have an accurate journalistic report on anything ever again.
Its not that long ago they were talking about electrifying the Selby Hull route. What happened to that proposal or has this latest on overtaken it?
Ooh, look:http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/26/pennines-tunnel-hs3-plans Hull is mentioned.....
I reckon you're right. No date nor cost/funding mentioned. But there is a General Election next May....
You can't get a train from the main conurbation of East yorkshire to the capital of the county some 40odd miles away - so what hope is there for any fancy smancy scheme to run parallel with the ghostly m62 that slinks through our county ??
