Pen Spot

Penny's corner of the Internet

A thought on the Granny Tax

Written By: Penny - Mar• 22•12

There has been much said about the so-called Granny Tax.

But all the commentators I’ve read have failed to mention is that there was already a ticking time-bomb with age related allowances.

Currently, the age related personal allowances kick in at the same time a man can get their state pension – currently 65. However, that state pension age is not fixed, and will gradually start to rise in a few years time. If it’s your 58th birthday today (22nd March) you will reach the state pension age on the 6th September 2019, when you are 65 years, 5 months and 15 days old.

So would you have got the age related allowance for nearly 6 months when you were earning? Or would you have had to wait for state retirement age?

Both options would have been messy for calculating tax. And both options would have had some inherent unfairness.

It was probably sensible for the chancellor to announce something sooner rather then later, but whether this was the right option is an entirely different question.

On the other hand, if you are a women in your forties, your state pension age has increased several times over your working life. And the date you can start to receive private pensions – where you invested your own money – has also increased.

Share

Jane Austen, on blogging

Written By: Penny - Jan• 17•12

Jane Austen didn’t actually predict the rise of the internet and blogging. However I was struck by the following discription of letter writing, from her novella Catherine:

‘Why indeed, Mrs Percival,’ said Mrs Stanley, ‘I must think that Catharine’s affection for her bower is the effect of a sensibility that does her credit. I love to see a friendship between young persons and always consider it as a sure mark of an amiable affectionate disposition. I have from Camilla’s infancy taught her to think the same, and have taken great pains to introduce her to young people of her own age who were likely to be worthy of her regard. Nothing forms the taste more than sensible and elegant letters–. Lady Halifax thinks just like me–. Camilla corresponds with her daughters, and I believe I may venture to say that they are none of them the worse for it.’

These days, the equivalent is blogging, effectively a letter broadcast on computers

These ideas were too modern to suit Mrs Percival who considered a correspondence between girls as productive of no good, and as the frequent origin of imprudence and error by the effect of pernicious advice and bad example. She could not therefore refrain from saying that for her part, she had lived fifty years in the world without having ever had a correspondent, and did not find herself at all the less respectable for it–.

I’m sure I’m not the only blogger who has encountered the attitude of “why write a blog?” When I was first telling people about the Stop HS2 blog, quite a number of people couldn’t see the point – and yet it is a vital part of the campaign.

Mrs Stanley could say nothing in answer to this, but her daughter who was less governed by propriety, said in her thoughtless way, ‘But who knows what you might have been, ma’am, if you had had a correspondent; perhaps it would have made you quite a different creature. I declare I would not be without those I have for all the world. It is the greatest delight of my life, and you cannot think how much their letters have formed my taste as Mama says, for I hear from them generally every week.’

‘You received a letter from Augusta Barlow to day, did not you, my love’ said her mother–. ‘She writes remarkably well I know.’

‘Oh! Yes ma’am, the most delightful letter you ever heard of. She sends me a long account of the new Regency walking dress Lady Susan has given her, and it is so beautiful that I am quite dying with envy for it.’

Fashion blogs. Need I say more!

‘Well, I am prodigiously happy to hear such pleasing news of my young friend; I have a high regard for Augusta, and most sincerely partake in the general joy on the occasion. But does she say nothing else? it seemed to be a long letter–Are they to be at Scarborough?’

‘Oh! Lord, she never once mentions it, now I recollect it; and I entirely forgot to ask her when I wrote last. She says nothing indeed except about the Regency.’ ‘She must write well’ thought Kitty, to make a long letter upon a bonnet and pelisse.’

Actually I’m more partial to the craft blog

Share

Turbulence Ahead

Written By: Penny - Dec• 31•11

Seth Godwin recently published a post about Unexpected Turbulence

It’s hard to summarise a post that’s only four sentences long, but the final sentence struck me as being very relevant to the HS2 proposal:

If your plan will only succeed if there is no turbulence at any time, it’s probably not a very good plan (either that or you’re not going anywhere interesting.)

Unfortunately, the HS2 proposal was originally dependent on very high levels of growth, higher then any other industry prediction. Eventually HS2 Ltd reduced the growth rate, but simply extended the forecast period – which was already longer then would normally be used in forecasting – until they got to the magic ‘doubling of passenger numbers’ that they needed to make HS2 a proposal that would not be rejected out of hand.

Share

Things which I wrote

Written By: Penny - Dec• 27•11

During 2011, Stop HS2 made a number of submissions to various inquiries as well as producing numerous leaflets. Although I didn’t write everything we published (although at times it felt like it!), the following three reports were written by me.

Transport Select Committee Inquiry into HS2:
Stop HS2 TSC Submission May 2011

Labour Party Policy review:
Stop HS2 submission Labour transport review

London Assembly Transport Review:
Stop HS2 submission London Assembly July 2011

They were proofread by others of course and a number of people made suggestions about topics that needed to be added, or removed. But as to the actual words on paper, it was my own work.

Share

HS2′s damaging economic effects

Written By: Penny - Dec• 23•11

This was originally posted on Stop HS2 on 23rd December.

In a debate on rail services to Scotland on 20th December, attended by just 5 MPs, Glasgow North MP, Ann McKechin said

“It is time for those who oppose HS2 to consider properly the economic interests of all parts of the United Kingdom.”

Opponents to HS2 have been considering the the economic interests of all parts of the United Kingdom – but has she?

If she had, she would realise that the HS2 proposal will have damaging effects on parts of the country not directly affected by it.

Evidence to the Transport Select Committee inquiry on high speed rail from the Cardiff Business Partnership showed the HS2 proposal would be damaging for Wales and the West Country.

The Cardiff Business Partnership evidence showed that Wales could lose 21,000 jobs if HS2 went ahead, and the southwest would have 48,000 fewer jobs, as well as lower economic growth.

Maybe it’s Ann McKechin who needs to spend more time considering the negative effects of the HS2 proposal.

PS If you are concerned about HS2, please buy the Old Oak Lament (Did you stop the HS2) by Dirty Mavis: you can get it from iTunes, HMV, Amazon, 7 Digital and Play.com.

Share

The time we use on trains

Written By: Penny - Dec• 08•11

This was originally posted on Stop HS2 on 8th December.

Most of the so called “economic benefits” of HS2 come from the idea that time is money, and if we are on a train, then we are wasting that time.

Time savings are separated into business user savings and commuter and leisure user savings: business travellors are assumed to have a very high income, and very valuable time.

Over half the monatarised benefits come from business user savings, so it is vital that these are justifiable – and that for instance business travellors are not spending the time on the train on their laptops, and making use of wifi.

Recent academic work shows that the amount of time spent working by business travelers on the train has been increasing over the last decade. A 2008 paper (The Productive Use of Rail Travel Time and Value of Travel Time Saving for Travellers in the course of Work, 2008 The Mott MacDonald IWT Consortium) says that

“In the UK a trend over time is discernible by comparison with the activities reported in the Autumn 2004 National Passenger Survey. A like-for-like comparison gave the proportion of business travellers who spend some time working/studying as 52% in Autumn 2004, 79% in Spring 2008. ” p8

Proponents of HS2 will tell you that all this makes HS2 more important, because they deny that anyone would work on a crowded train.

The first point is that the busiest trains are commuter trains (and a commuter’s time is not as “valuable” as a business travellor’s time, according to the HS2 economic case).

Long distance trains from Euston are not overly crowded: an independently verified survey in last weeks Financial Times showed that on average, trains from Euston between 4.30-6.59pm were only at 56% occupancy rates. (For some reason the Department for Transport had refused to release the details following an FOI request.)

And the busiest commuter trains go into Paddington: HS2 won’t make these less crowded.

But what the same research shows is that even for business users the amount of crowding on the train is less important then proponents of HS2 might have you believe: the report referenced above says “productivity remains high, even in the worst crowding conditions.”

These results show that the assumptions used by HS2 Ltd about the value of time for business travelers on trains are out of date and should be revised. This is especially important for a project which will not start operating for 15 years.

Share

The TSC’s view of the carbon issue

Written By: Penny - Nov• 26•11

This was originally posted on Stop HS2 on 26th November.

In a week when the Lords Science and Technology Select Committee says the Government is “too complacent” about Britain’s nuclear energy strategy it’s worth looking at what the Transport Select Committee said about the carbon impacts of HS2. That’s because the impacts of running HS2 on Britain’s carbon emissions are tightly connected to our energy policies, and use of low carbon electricity generation like nuclear power.

The Coalition Government decided to promote high speed rail, and HS2 in particular, as part of their efforts to create a low carbon economy, so it’s not surprising the Transport Select Committee included a section on the carbon impacts of HS2 in the report they issued recently.

They pointed out that a substantial amount of carbon would be emitted during construction: this is not taken into account in the case presented by HS2 Ltd.

The TSC also pointed out that because HS2 trains are powered by electricity, the carbon emissions of operating HS2 depend on whether the UK’s electricity supply is “decarbonised”. Without moves to generate more of the UK’s electricity by low carbon sources, such as nuclear or wind, HS2′s operations will only be carbon neutral in contradiction with the Coalition Goverment’s aims.

In France, however, high speed rail is part of a low carbon strategy. Why the difference?

The following table was in the TSC document (it’s their table 2): it shows the proportion of electricity generated by low carbon means, such as nuclear power. France, Germany, and Spain all have a much higher proportion of electricity generated by non-fossil fuels, meaning that when changing from road or air travel in those countries, there is a much higher carbon benefit.

Country Population (2010) Area&NBSP: High-speed lines in operation (2011) Rail passenger use (20091) Nuclear and renewables as % of total electricity production (2010) CO2 from domestic aviation (2009)
(million) (km sq) (miles) (million passenger kilometres) (%) (million tonnes)
France 64.7 547,660 1,185 88,610 89.6 4.5
Germany 81.8 348,630 803 81,206 41.0 2.1
Italy 60.3 294,140 577 49,524 26.5 2.2
Spain 46.0 499,110 1,285 23,056 53.9 3.6
United Kingdom 62.0 241,930 71 52,765 23.6 1.8

 

Note: 1 Rail passenger figure for Italy is for 2008

Sources:
Eurostat demo_pjan
The World Bank
Union Internationale des Chemins de fer (UIC)
Eurostat rail_pa_total
Eurostat nrg_ind_33a
House of Commons Library (SN/SC/5533) EU ETS and Aviation

The Transport Select Committee report concludes the section on carbon by saying “Table 2 also shows there is no simple link between highspeed rail and carbon emissions from domestic aviation.”

However the picture is even less favourable then the table implies.

Most of Britain’s non-fossil fuel generated electricity comes from nuclear power. All our nuclear power stations are reaching the end of their generating lives. Programmes to extend their generating life can only do so much: by the 2020s all Britain’s existing nuclear power stations need to be replaced to maintain our existing, relatively low level, of non-fossil fuel electricity generation.

Without genuine efforts to decarbonise our electricty grid, all carbon benefits claimed by HS2′s proponents are immediately worthless. And if our electricity generation is decarbonised, then the same carbon benefits could also accrue to a fully electrified railway network, or other electricity-powered modes of transport.

Share

Can York expect a HS2 station?

Written By: Penny - Nov• 21•11

This was originally posted on Stop HS2 on 21th November.

Reports in the Yorkshire Post (Hopes of extra high speed rail station for region and editorial here) recently suggest that the HS2 Ltd is considering a proposal for a station near York on the HS2 route.

There’s no timetable suggested for this station. However, this would have to wait until after Phase 2 – which includes the Leeds station – is finished. Even if there were no delays in the building process, this would not be until about 2033 at the earliest. If a York station was added in a third phase of HS2, it is unlikely to to open for years later.

Further, the York station is very much in the ideas stage of the proposal. There have been lots of ideas for where stations could be sited on the HS2 route – and HS2 Ltd have rejected them.

Early maps from HS2 included a station at Stoke on Trent – but no station was included in the HS2 consultation maps published earlier this year.

When drawing up the initial plans, HS2 Ltd looked at stations near Milton Keynes and Bicester. Even though in both cases there was a good case for building such stations, HS2 Ltd decided not to propose them, because it would slow down the non-stopping trains too much.

The York station proposal is a similar idea to the Milton Keynes station which HS2 Ltd rejected. There may be plenty of travellors, but with York’s position being partway between Leeds and Newcastle, an extra station would slow down the other trains, just like Milton Keynes was told having a station there would reduce the speeds of the Birmingham trains too much.

As it is, the time savings expected for Newcastle travellers are only between 0 minutes and 15 minutes. Including an extra station that they pass might mean that the HS2 ‘high speed’ trains are actually slower for Newcastle travellers then the trains they can already catch.

Even Julian Sturdy, the York Outer Member of Parliament and a member of the Transport Select Committee, questioned the proposal, saying

“Nevertheless, as with any such developments, there will be a number of local implications and the proposals would require a far-reaching public consultation.”

York can expect lots of discussion about a HS2 station. But an actual station? – unlikely.

Share

A view of the HS2 appraisal

Written By: Penny - Nov• 21•11

This was originally posted on Stop HS2 on 21th November.

Today Justine Greening is meeting MPs about HS2.

She is probably aware that many people – and the MPs who represent them – are very angry about HS2. This anger is caused by the way they have been treated by the Government and HS2 Ltd since the original annoucement of the HS2 proposal in March 2011.

Independent groups have highlighted this recently.

For instance, in one document released by the Freshfield Foundation, as a briefing paper for MPs in October, they say

“Good process is important. If the government makes decisions in a disciplined and transparent way the public will in general support them and money will be find its way to the best projects. The HS2 decision‐making process has not been disciplined and transparent.”

The New Economics Foundation(nef) response to the HS2 consultation gives a detailed look at the HS2 appraisal process

The nef consultation response says (p3):

“Despite these challenges there is a robust pathway for making convincing decisions. This begins with situating a project, particularly a large, impactful one, within national and sectoral strategies. Its direct contribution and inter-linkages with other policies and investments can then be openly assessed….

“The appraisal of HS2 misses fundamental aspects of good practice, despite that good practice being laid out in HM Treasury’s guidance, The Green Book. The DfT’s cost-benefit analysis excludes all environmental and social outcomes although HM Treasury stresses their importance. By not evaluating wider impacts the DfT has in effect put their values at zero in cost-benefit terms, even though people do think these impacts are important and have value. Thus, the benefit-cost ratio, a number which carries weight with decision-makers, is based on a very narrow selection of impacts. The overall result is to over-claim benefits and understate costs, creating a strongly positive bias towards the scheme.”

Nef identify 10 limitations of the HS2 appraisal (p4):

1. Important material impacts of HS2 are excluded from the analysis
2. By separating rhetoric on objectives from the appraisal, it is not possible to test the claims that are
being made for HS2 which has implications for accountability
3. Appraisal is not rooted in stakeholder engagement
4. Evaluation of potential alternatives is incomplete
5. Time savings are over-valued and over-emphasised
6. There are significant inconsistencies with existing rail capacity and future demand figures
7. The economic case is dependent on potentially optimistic economic growth
8. The opportunity cost of HS2 investment is poorly evaluated
9. Sensitivity testing is incomplete
10. The carbon case for HS2 has not been made.

Their conclusion is (p20)

“The case for HS2 put forward by the Government is incomplete. This means there is an insufficient basis on which to take a decision on whether to proceed or not. We recommend:

  • Immediate and indefinite postponement of the timetable for a decision on HS2
  • Establishment of a transparent process for rethinking the case for HS2
  •  Appointment of independent consultants to conduct a whole-society appraisal of the scheme alongside a plausible suite of alternatives. The appraisal should conform to HM Treasury’s Green Book, enhanced by stakeholder engagement and a clear exposition of the theory of change for each alternative scheme.

This sounds remarkedly similar to some of the questions which the Transport Select Committee say need to be answered before HS2 goes ahead:

“We have pointed to a number of areas that we believe need to be addressed by the Government in the course of progressing HS2. These include the provision of greater clarity on the policy context, the assessment of alternatives, the financial and economic case, the environmental impacts, connections to Heathrow and the justification for the particular route being proposed.”

Share

Grand plans and utopian visions

Written By: Penny - Nov• 15•11

This was originally posted on Stop HS2 on 15th November.

“We should look sceptically at grand plans and utopian visions” said David Cameron at the Lord Mayor’s banquet last night.

Although David Cameron was talking about Europe, he should also use this scepticism when he looks at HS2.

We are often told that the Europeans embrace high speed rail, and that we should welcome it with the same fervour.  In reality, there is a growing opposition to high speed rail from ordinary people: in the Susa Valley project in Italy, in Stuttgart, and elsewhere.

In Britain, we do have high speed railways: the West Coast Main Line, the East Coast Main line and the Great Western Line are all high speed railways, according to European definitions.  We should celebrate them, rather then allow politicians to denigrate what we have.

There are serious high level concerns in Europe about the cost of high speed rail – for instance, earlier this year the finances of the Dutch high speed company were discussed in the Netherlands Parliament, because of the parlous state of the company’s finances.  (The company is 95% state owned.)

If HS2 went ahead, we would spend more per kilometre on this high speed railway then any other country in the world, but the relative saving will be significantly less.  It takes less time to get to our large cities from London then from other European capitals to their regional cities. If others are questioning the cost of their lines, shouldn’t we be concerned about the cost of ours?

Here at Stop HS2, we hope that David Cameron holds true to his intention to look sceptically at “grand plans and utopian visions”.  And we hope he starts with HS2.

Share