WHY would this take 15 years to build?

Build now next to the existing railway which is cheaper land already and doesn't need to be governed that much because its already 'brownfield' in effect.

It would create so many jobs for local people in the area who could come from their apprenticeships etc and work on the line.
Think of all the jobs in the West Midlands that have been lost because of the collapse of the car industry. They could be retrained to work rail laying machines, work machinery to lay sleepers etc.

BUT NO! The government would rather build a 'cross rail' link that benefits those already rich people and companies in London get to the airport.

How about giving REAL benefits to people outside London?
Yes, I am grateful for the redevelopment of so many places elsewhere, but it still stands that all educated employment is in the SE. Why are the government so against these links (there was a maglev idea before too), but so happy for these expensive London extensions?

Jamie, Halifax, West Yorkshire

Uh...lets just carry on squeezing more people into London faster shall we ? Shouldn't we start encouraging more business and cultural activity in the regions so that those of us who don't want to have to go to London because that's where the best paying jobs are don't have to. Regional income tax anyone ? With London paying the highest.

C'mon this isn't really about getting to France....

A Moore, Chester, UK

The real issue if we invest in a new, high-speed line is can we achieve the higher speeds without cutting back the stopping patterns needed to adequately serve our densely populated country? If we can't, protests such as those against Eurostar cuts at Ashford could become the norm.

Hugh, London,

Sounds a good idea. If this were France or Germany, politicians would be saying, great, this will really benefit our citizens, let's get on and build it. But this is Britain. We're anti-Europe (except when we travel there on holiday or to our second homes) and like always to be the odd one out. So our transport department will take years to mull it over and then decide it can't be afforded - or at least not for another ten years. Benefiting our citizens? Well, if they're daft enough to swallow this environmental nonsense and want to use public transport.....

Barry, Wallington, UK

Travelling by train in this country is usually far more expensive than travelling by air or even alone in a car. Put passengers in the car and
the train cannot begin to compete. A family of four could go on a package holiday for the price of return tickets to Manchester! I must however admit that train travel is very reliable: You can rely on the departure being delayed, late running and the inevitable transfer to a bus for part of the journey due to engineering works. There is no financial incentive for Network Rail to properly maintain the track except by cost cutting; train operators are given short term franchises but are expected to make long term investments in rolling stock. Combining purpose built track with the old network is a typical British fudge guaranteeing bottlenecks and delays. Until this mess is sorted out there are far better things for our taxpayers’ money to be spent on.

David Elliott, Brighton, UK

How does encouraging more people to undertake a 300 mile round-trip commute to London from Birmingham 'tick all the environmental boxes'?

Anyway, it already costs £200 to go to London and back during peak periods on an open first class ticket. How much are they going to charge to do it in 45 minutes?

Mark, Birmingham, UK

This ticks all the right boxes in terms of economics and environmental issues. Also, unlike road pricing, this is a POSITIVE incentive to get people out of their cars. This project must go ahead.

But what politician will want to throw their weight behind a project that will only begin to deliver benefits after they've retired?! Since when did our government ever look more than one election ahead?

Richard, Oxford, UK

About time!
A new line will solve many problems we face:
-congestion
-pollution
-traffic deaths.
It will also help the economy, especially spreading wealth away from the South East "Core Area."
The longer they wait, the more expensive it will be! (although the government do not seem to care bout spending money at the moment- eg the Olympic Logo)
Therefore approving funding should not be a problem (should it !?).

W Dewar, Worcester, UK

If this indeed is as neccesary and in demand as the rail industry is suggesting, then the investment would make a sufficient return and no government support would be neccesary. The only thing the government should do is get rid of the red tape and allow it to go ahead inhindered and unsubsidised.

R Brunton, Stoke On Trent, UK

Similar progect being Planned for The Edinburgh To Glasgow,Airport to Airport.in 45miles in 14 mins.With Maglev train

D paterson, Glasgow, Scotland

Why should the taxpayer fund a line to Heathrow which helps a private company i.e. BAA. Surely it would be better that people fly from their local airport rather than have to travel to the bottom right hand corner of Britain. I would rather this Government tried to invest throughout the UK rather than this London bias.

Charles Frankland, Alderley Edge, UK

Key word in this article is "considering". By the time the government have done their considering the trains will be well overcrowded and transport will be in a right mess. Too many bureaucrats involved for a straightforward decision, and too many people creaming profits off a public service that is public transport at the moment.

Jay Long, Thatcham, UK

15 years!!! This could be up and running in 3 if it was given to a good engineering company to design and build - but I guess this approach would boot too many people of the public enquiry gravy train.

Peter, London, England

What's the big deal trains in France have been doing these speeds for some time.

Les Orrin, Shrewsbury, England