by Michael Smith (Veshengro)
The Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management (CIWEM) hopes that Gordon Brown’s support for high speed rail finally indicates a serious move towards a low-carbon economy. However, if Brown is truly going to emulate the Victorian spirit of investment shown in the nineteenth century, then he will have to commit to a cohesive environmental strategy, sustainable infrastructure development and risk-taking on a massive scale.
In 1850, it cost £54,000 to build one mile of railway but it was a technological revolution that transformed and powered national economies. This year, Ministers pledged a timid £1.4 billion in their carbon budget but the Government must now take advantage of the opportunities available in the £3 trillion green global marketplace that is growing at five percent per year.
The CIWEM calls on the Chancellor to create a £10 billion green investments fund with £6 billion for infrastructure, £1.5 billion for domestic energy efficiency and £1 billion for retrofitting of schools, hospitals and other public buildings. Increased funding for green job training, research and development in environmental technologies, as well as mandatory refurbishment standards for sustainable homes, schools and other buildings are also vital.
Nick Reeves, the CIWEM’s Executive Director, says: “So far, the Government’s green investments have been predictably small in comparison to other commitments, many of which will add to the UK’s emissions burden, and totally inadequate to meet the challenges of climate change.”
“The railway mania of the 1800s was backed by a mind-boggling level of investment that required numerous Acts of Parliament very quickly. The Victorians had no doubt of the benefit of their gamble and Gordon Brown can be in no doubt of his. This Government must share the Victorian’s foresight, passion, vision and ability if urgent action on climate change is to be taken. Unless we cut our carbon emissions and invest in adaptation measures, we face a desperate fight for survival. So far the Government's record on the environment has been derisory and conflicting. Unless its response to the threat is proportionate and urgent, the public will have every right to mistrust the seriousness of its endeavor. I wonder whether the Government is really capable of showing leadership at the crucial climate negotiations to be held in Copenhagen?”
Personally, and professionally, as an environmental journalist, I must say that I am not someone who would clamor for or demand a high-speed rail link.
We do, in fact, not need a high-speed rail service but a rail service that is reliable and affordable; otherwise people will not use it.
As long as it is cheaper to fly to, say, Birmingham or Belfast, than to use a train – even though the latter would be slower – then people will use the plane. Simple as that.
What this country – and not just this country alone – needs is a railroad system where trains run on time and get you where you want to get in a reasonable time frame on time for a low cost.
We don't need to get to Birmingham in 35 minutes; we need to get to Birmingham in a good time of say 1.5 hours but at a 30 minute tact and at costs that are below forty pounds sterling return during peak. Period!
This country does not need gimmicks. We have had enough of them, including politicians. But Britain needs a rail service that is good and cheap, as other countries can do.
That might, however, mean to nationalize the railroad service again and go back to British Rail. It worked, when they did not happen to strike at that particular moment, and was affordable. Two-hundred-and-seventy-five pounds return from Surrey to Birmingham, however, is not affordable, and that was second class.
Let's work for a good rail service that everyone can afford and not a gimmick service.
© 2009
<>
