Letter: Regrettable move by British Rail
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: The decision by British Rail to abandon the low-level King's Cross station for Channel tunnel services is not surprising ('BR to scrap King's Cross plan', 17 February) given the economic malaise in London and the South-east, but it is also regrettable for a reason not mentioned in the Independent report.
The low-level station, if it had been proceeded with, could have been completed well before the end of the century. With modest improvement to existing lines, it could, therefore, have been receiving Channel tunnel trains in about five years' time. It would not have required the building of the new high-speed link to the Channel tunnel, over which there is so much controversy.
Nevertheless, the advantage over Waterloo would have been considerable for many passengers, and a direct route to King's Cross would have been much superior to the tortuous route that the few trains to the north-east of England will have to take.
The St Pancras alternative is likely to be dependent on a new high-speed link being built. There is a great deal of uncertainty about this. It is unlikely to materialise for at least 10 years. In the meantime, Scotland and most of England will have to make do with third-rate connections to Waterloo, or an extremely limited number of slow through services.
It is not good enough. It reflects badly on the indecisiveness of government to ensure the advantages of the Channel tunnel are spread more evenly across the country.
Yours sincerely,
A. J. H. DAVIES
Director
Yorkshire & Humberside Regional Association
Barnsley
18 February
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments