Shadow transport secretary Theresa Villiers told the MEN that plans for the £20bn line - revealed at the Tory conference - showed the Conservatives were 'the party to deliver good rail links to the north'.
"We understand that in many, many parts of the north people feel short-changed," she said.
"This would shorten the difference between the north and the south and help unify our economy. It would bring Manchester and surrounding areas into the same growth zone as the south east."
As reported in later editions of the MEN on Monday, Ms Villiers said the Conservatives wanted to build the new line, with trains running at up to 180mph, in return for scrapping the planned third runway at Heathrow airport.
It would link Manchester, Birmingham and Leeds directly with London and allow the West Coast Main Line to be used for commuter journeys to towns like Macclesfield.
Construction would begin in 2015 and the line would be finished by 2027. Ms Villiers rejected claims the project was not properly costed and would never see the light of day.
"It is going to be in the manifesto," she said.
"If we are elected as the next government we will give the go-ahead to this project.
"It is long term - there is no getting away from that - but if we never start it, it will never happen.
"MEN readers will be well aware that the West Coast Main Line is crowded at the moment and all the projections are it is going to be at breaking point by 2020.
"We would have to think about a new line anyway and a replacement would be only 30 per cent cheaper than a new high-speed line. "In that context is becomes obvious what the solution should be.
Economic advantages
"There are so many economic advantages to the country, and the north in particular. It would be environmentally positive and ease the pressure on the existing rail network."
Ms Villiers said the £20bn cost - £15.7bn from the public purse and £4.3bn from the private sector - was 'well within' existing government spending plans.
"The amount from the taxpayer - £1.3bn a year for 12 years - is about 25 per cent of what the government has pencilled in for capital spending on rail," she said. "It is something we can do."
The move was welcomed by environmental groups, with a spokesman for Friends of the Earth saying: "Scrapping airport expansion plans and investing in a fast and efficient railway network is essential if we are serious about tackling climate change."
But Ruth Kelly, the Bolton West MP and outgoing transport secretary, said that Heathrow would still be operating at 97 per cent capacity even if every flight to Manchester and Leeds was replaced by the train.
"These proposals are politically opportunistic, economically illiterate and hugely damaging to Britain's national interests," she said.
"The Tories are posing a false choice - we need both more capacity in Britain's airports and on our main rail lines."
Norman Baker, the Liberal Democrats' transport spokesman, said his party had long been calling for high-speed rail and the scrapping of the third runway at Heathrow. But he urged people to 'wait and see the small print' before deciding whether it was 'just another of David Cameron's empty promises'.
Ms Villiers also confirmed the Conservatives would 'abide by the result' of a referendum on a congestion charge in Greater Manchester.
The all-postal vote, to be held in December, will decide whether the region gets up to £3bn for public transport in return for the weekday, peak-time charge. Tweet
Comments
Login or Register to comment
A HIGH speed rail line linking London and Manchester in just 80 Minutes would unify the two cities’ economies and bring new prosperity to the north, and for all those who don't like crime, more crime, southern robbers and their dogs. Quick Run for the hills.
Like we are going there,and they are coming here...Butler N Crewe is a Voting Behaviour...not an announcement on a railway platform.
A HIGH Speed rail link existed until the intellectuals in the Government of the time closed it down .It was the Old Great Central main line through Woodheas tunnel(closed in 1981)to Sheffield Leicester ,Rugby and on to Marylebone.Why cannot some of this link be re-instated?
Five high speed lines have already been proposed recently by the rail authorities including one from London to Manchester.Don't the Conservatives read what's going on?Also,Heathrow will eventually build a third runway as 'market forces' a very popular Conservative get out term will demand it.
It's approx 202.5 miles from London-Birmingham-Manchester.They are going to do it in 80 minutes are they?The reason the French TGV train is able to travel at 186mph is that it's built on dedicated track.What we will have in this country is all the towns between the three City's mentioned wanting their own station.This will enable them to be part of this 'economic boom'.
Complete in 2027. So soon! 19 years time and 12 years to build, I can't wait. I wonder how long the Chinese would take to build it...probably about 12 months.
"Ms Villiers also confirmed the Conservatives would 'abide by the result' of a referendum on a congestion charge in Greater Manchester."
oh dear dont sit on the fence and wait for a result! throwing out the con charge will win back manchester for you mr cameron.
First off, the Conservatives promised quite a few things yesterday, as well as stating the 'cupboard is bare' in regards to available cash. These are just loose election promises. Britain is, on paper anyway, bankrupt, and will be for the foreseeable future. The knock on effect from the banking crisis plus the trillions pumped into the war on terror will make it impossible to build a super fast rail link AND keep poll tax frozen for two years. The Cons should just be focusing on lowering Government spending on stupid things (advertisements, consultants, expenses, et al) and concentrate on making Britain 'Great' again (NHS spending, housing, education, etc). It can be done. It just needs REAL accountants in charge of the money, not a politician.
Yawn!
stop me if you've heard this before.
will they use existing track,thus slowing commuter/everyday train journeys that most of us use.OR will land have to be bought/ homes demolished to make way for a dedicated track?
Like most of us don't work in central Manchester (as the C charge people think) most of us don't want to go to London that often either.
For the first time ever I might vote conservative due to this being in their manifesto.
High speed trains, like the French Thalyes and the German ICE for example, use dedicated tracks to get up to speed and require higher voltage over-head lines.
Also, all 'high speed lines' need to be controlled by the GSM-R safety system which hasn’t been implemented in the UK yet.
France, Belgium, Holland and Germany put the infra structure in place and built the safety network before 'spinning yarns' about the implementation of the trains themselves.
Interesting to note that KLM (the airline) are investing in the high speed railways as well. They can see a future for the business traveler within Europe using this as a good alternative to planes!
The UK is too far behind, not forward thinking enough regarding transport and also in the light of recent events, too 'skint' to do it regardless of shallow political promises from any party!
Just my two cents.
Lies, damned lies and Tory election promises...
HAS ANYONE ELSE NOTICED MORE AND MORE BUS LANES ARE BEING INTRODUCED AROUND THE CITY CENTRE??
ARE THE COUNCIL TRYING TO PUT THE SQUEEZE ON MOTORISTS CLAIMING THERES TOO MUCH CONGESTION!!!
sorry to go off in a tangent!!
This just comes from the idea that if you're not 60 minutes from London or less, your economic and all other hopes will turn to ash. We just don't need it, and if it accelerates the spread of London's rubbish to us then I'm all against it.
Better North-West links would help us much more - a high speed line from Liverpool to Leeds via Mcr would be a much more sensible idea in terms of boosting the economy. Even with additional express branches to Chester, Warrington, etc to add capacity and speed to the existing commuter routes it would cost a lot less. Mcr Airport can then serve as the North's "Heathrow" better, and the North-West & W Yorks metro areas can start operating as a single economic unit.
If we want a pie in the sky scheme to aim for in addition, how about a tunnel under the Irish Sea for a fast connection to Dublin, with whom these days we have far stronger shared cultural links. I can't help but think that would be a real boost to our economy, versus being linked to the all consuming London.
I can't speak for Oldham Jay B but I don't see how you can say that the Tories would win in Manchester by campaigning against the congestion charge.
Richard Leese didn't have any problems retaining his seat in Crumpsall in the last local elections.
Manchester's a diverse city, it's not full of Jeremy Clarkson clones.
This is good news for United fans. It means they will arrive home in London quicker now after home matches.
Garsinho, in theory, if this was implemented, United fans could arrive home before the match even starts, saving them time AND money! And my time machine is bigger then your time machine, and is funded by the council tax!
southmanchesterblue the problem with leese is he was probably the only sutable candidate for the area.
its much like my local elections near me.
but leese was originally against the idea of the con charge, not sure what changed him mind?
dessie the new bus lanes have been popping up for years. i've got 3 new ones in the last 2 years and they only support a handful of busses.
if they want to introduce bus lanes it should be made wider and the additional lane added. not replacing one lane for the bus lane.
the councils think they've got us fooled but we're not.
thays why a nice big yes in december will sho them what we think of their sneaky underhanded schemes.
Jay B: "if they want to introduce bus lanes it should be made wider and the additional lane added. not replacing one lane for the bus lane."
How would you do that? The only two options I can see would be knocking down buildings next to the road, or getting rid of the pavement. I'm not convinced that either option would be a good idea.
two of the three roads that now have bus lanes on them have very wide pavements.
many years ago these where trolley bus routes and the roads where more than wide enough.
one actual bus lane had a full two page spread on its design in the local paper and it did show 3 lanes either side. but this never came about and now its a major bottle neck any time of the day.
i tried to get hold of a copy of the paper but its vanished. even from library records.
and only 3 bus services actually use this route also. they ran just as well before the lanes where introduced.