Reader Comments:

Views expressed in submitted comments are that of the author, and not necessarily shared by Railnews.

• Andrew Battersby, Manchester

  Mr Hammond explained: “I don’t think a full cost-benefit analysis was carried out before Lord Adonis made the announcement in the run-up to the election"
  
  I think it was and was at greater than 2 - so was justifiable by the government's own definition. It won't happen coz it's no direct benefit to London, unlike Crossrail.

• Peter, Manchester

  Steve,
  
  I absolutely agree that we need to open new (and reopen old) lines. But electrification is a lot more than "ugly new wires".
  
  Electric trains can be larger and have better acceleration because you don't need to carry your energy source with you, and because electric motors are lighter than diesel engines. All this increases the route capacity without needing additional tracks which would otherwise be necessary (and expensive). They are more reliable and have lower maintenance costs than diesels, so there's a long-term saving. They are quieter and less polluting, which both passengers and line-side dwellers will appreciate.
  
  But most importantly, electric propulsion also allows us to choose which source of energy to use. Never mind climate change: once peak oil starts to bite, we will soon learn quite how cheap £1.20 is for a litre of diesel. And China's well-documented hoarding of its rare-earth metal resources is likely to scupper government plans of electric cars for all. A fully-electrified rail network, powered by a mixture of UK renewables, may prove to be the only option in the long term for reliable and vaguely affordable transport of passengers and goods around the country. At least that's my reading of the issue.
  
  As for the appearance of the overhead wires themselves, the citizens of the archetypal picture-postcard country, Switzerland, don't seem to think they're ugly...

• Mike Breslin, Liverpool, UK

  If the Government does indeed announce the abandonment of the Great Western electrification scheme, it is then highly likely that the proposed wiring of the Liverpool - Manchester route will also be thrown into doubt. Such decisions will undoubtedly result in ageing HSTs, Sprinters and Pacers having to rattle on for the foreseable future - probably until HS2 is complete, when some money for electrification may be available.

• Joel Kosminsky, London, Britain

  Replacing HSTs must happen in the near future, so link that spend with the future traction. That conversion will occur as fossil fuels become scarcer and more expensive. The Great Western can be adapted easiest of all for a bigger loading gauge, so trains built here for that route could meet EU 'inter-operability' standards and be exported as well. Think 'joined-up'!

• Mark, Cardiff

  The current government has, as a policy objective, a desire for a more even spread of economic growth and development throughout the UK. The cancelling of the £1Bn GWML electrification scheme, with its clear benefits for SW England and South Wales, seems at odds with this stated aim. Even more so when one considers:
   Approval to spend £18Bn on CrossRail
   Commitment to spend >£18Bn on HS2
   Approval for>£1bn metro extensions in Manchester and Newcastle, etc
  
  Furthermore, the Greengauge21 sponsored, KPMG assessment of the economic impacts of HS2, indicate that the current HS2 scheme will have a net negative impact on the economies of Wales and SW England! In addition, the recently published estimates by “Oxford Economics” clearly show the negative impact on employment in Wales as a result of the “current economic difficulties”. It would appear that Wales will only secure 0.3% growth in employment in the period to 2015 (Vs 2.5% in Scotland, 2% in the North East, 8.3% in London, 3.1% in the West Midlands, 2.9% in the North West, ...) and that it will take until 2025 to restore employment levels to those enjoyed at the last peak.
  
  Surely this data must be considered when the UK government is making capital investment decisions for infrastructure schemes that have an economic impact. The current UK government policy (i.e. pretty much ignoring Wales & SW England) would exacerbate what is clearly already a pretty poor prognosis. If UK government policy (as stated) is to encourage a more even spread of economic growth throughout the UK, they really can’t justify a position that sees support for CrossRail, HS2, etc and not GWML electrification (let alone further upgrades of the GWML, HS3-WW, GWML Heathrow access, etc).
  
  There is clearly a need for a more holistic and UK wide rail strategy that seeks to address the needs to all the major population centres in the UK. After all the Cardiff, Bristol and Swansea City regions have a combined population of >3M; if the wider South Wales and SW England region is included, that is over >6M. That is more than Scotland and on an par with the major northern conurbations. In the frenzied discussion and debate with regard to High Speed Rail on a UK north south axis, the needs of a substantial portion of the UK population have been completely ignored.
  

• Steve, Eastbourne

  This is what happens when you have full nationalisation! The debt is at the whim of the treasury and when they cut they will cut it all out.
  
  The worst of nationalisation and the worse of privatisation. This company is neither both its such a shame BT isn't at the whim of treasury on whether to upgrade its networks.
  
  At the end of the day I'd rather see £1 bill open new lines not just putting up ugly wires to run trains that already run on the line.
  
  Don't think NR will last much longer with this debt. Any private company with this much debt wold have to take action I remember BT having debt of nearly debt £30 bill they had to turn it around quickly otherwise bust or asset sales.
  
  We'll see but like normal this county just will never change or do anything radical more of the same i'm afraid!