Private sector is more than capable of delivering on time and on budget providing government has no part in managing it.
I'm pretty sure ground work will be under way by next year
- News all the latest
- Theme Park explore the park
- Resort tour the resort
- Future looking forward
- History looking back
- Community and meetups
-
ℹ️ Heads up...
This is a popular topic that is fast moving Guest - before posting, please ensure that you check out the first post in the topic for a quick reminder of guidelines, and importantly a summary of the known facts and information so far. Thanks. - Thread starter Craig
- Start date
- Favourite Ride
- Steel Vengeance
- Favourite Ride
- Shambhala (PortAventura Park)
- Favourite Ride
- Ug Bugs
[🌎 Universal GB] Planning, Transport and Infrastructure
I'm pretty sure ground work will be under way by next year
Rail and road are both public infrastructure though and we don’t want any more of those nasty PPIs where the roads are involved.
However I think network rail have already committed to 2027 construction start of the new station and 3 years timeframe for that to be done which is reasonable in the circumstances.
One thing for certain the construction conglomerates will be absolutely salivating in the area and god help anyone else who wants to build anything nearby for the next 5 years
WanderingNortherner
TS Member
There is also a large housing development nearby which has been on hold for years due to the M1 J13 changes not being approved, this infrastructure expenditure will open up far more development land.
Benjsh
TS Member
Ironically investment into Northern railway was the most needed too. Not to mention cheaper to build. Transport in and around London is night and day compared to the rest of the country. People who live in the South East don't know they are born compared to what us northerners put up with in terms of train journeys. The whole thing was backwards from the start. Should have started in the north.
BarryZola
TS Member
If the government pledge any more money, tax breaks or whatever to this project they may as well have just built a theme park themselves and rented a few IP's. That's the danger of letting them have your pants down like this. Yes, you need to compromise somewhat, but when you start spending what will probably be approaching a billion quid on stuff like this after the construction firms have had their pants down again, you wonder how long it will take for the tax payer to start making money back on that investment and also how unfair it is on thousands of businesses who have already been badly treated in recent years.
Benzin
TS Member
I mean hasn't that been what the UK government have been doing for the best part of most of our lifetimes?
Matt N
TS Member
The thing with it, however, is that from a simple return/input standpoint, this should be a very profitable venture for the government.
Yes, it may take many years to materialise, but given that the eventual financial return for the UK economy is forecast at £50bn, £500m is a very small price to pay. The government are only putting in 1% of what the project is forecast to return, but making a big difference to whether Universal chooses to commit to the project.
The contributions of Universal to the economy will be two-fold. It will generate thousands of jobs in construction while it’s being built, and to be honest, it will probably be a huge boon for a UK construction industry that certainly needs one following the scaling back of HS2. Once it’s open, it will generate thousands of jobs for the people required to run it, and the resulting income tax and NI for those thousands of employees will be considerable. It will also bring tourists to the UK in huge numbers, potentially bringing a boost to many British businesses and generating lots of VAT. Not to mention that the corporation tax take from Universal’s profits will be considerable. I seem to remember hearing that Alton Towers was once one of the UK’s biggest taxpayers, so I’d imagine that Universal will generate a huge level of tax for the Treasury.
Yes, you could argue that spending this much on state aid to a private sector project is anti-competitive, or that the money could be better spent elsewhere. But the simple truth is that Universal’s competitors are not putting in investment that will generate a £50bn economic return for the Treasury, so it makes less sense for the government to give them huge amounts of financial support. And from the standpoint of the pledged spending being on transport improvements, this will also have wider positive impacts beyond Universal; for instance, Wixams railway station has been planned for years and will give the new town of Wixams the railway station it has long desired.
Yes, it may take many years to materialise, but given that the eventual financial return for the UK economy is forecast at £50bn, £500m is a very small price to pay. The government are only putting in 1% of what the project is forecast to return, but making a big difference to whether Universal chooses to commit to the project.
The contributions of Universal to the economy will be two-fold. It will generate thousands of jobs in construction while it’s being built, and to be honest, it will probably be a huge boon for a UK construction industry that certainly needs one following the scaling back of HS2. Once it’s open, it will generate thousands of jobs for the people required to run it, and the resulting income tax and NI for those thousands of employees will be considerable. It will also bring tourists to the UK in huge numbers, potentially bringing a boost to many British businesses and generating lots of VAT. Not to mention that the corporation tax take from Universal’s profits will be considerable. I seem to remember hearing that Alton Towers was once one of the UK’s biggest taxpayers, so I’d imagine that Universal will generate a huge level of tax for the Treasury.
Yes, you could argue that spending this much on state aid to a private sector project is anti-competitive, or that the money could be better spent elsewhere. But the simple truth is that Universal’s competitors are not putting in investment that will generate a £50bn economic return for the Treasury, so it makes less sense for the government to give them huge amounts of financial support. And from the standpoint of the pledged spending being on transport improvements, this will also have wider positive impacts beyond Universal; for instance, Wixams railway station has been planned for years and will give the new town of Wixams the railway station it has long desired.
GooseOnTheLoose
TS Member
It will be even more profitable for Universal / Comcast, who will get the majority of the benefit.
No one is doubting the economic impact Universal will have over 30 years, which is the period of time the much hyped £50 billion number is to play out over.
Google's tools and services already created £118 billion in economic value in the UK, as of 2023. With the uptake of AI, that's expected to be £400 billion by 2030. If the UK government pledged 1% of that figure (£4,000,000,000) to connect data centres, or provide additional infrastructure, there would be uproar.
The Co Op Live arena in Manchester has contributed £1.3 billion to the economy in its first year of operation. Over 30 years that will be close to £40 billion, almost at the same level as the Universal development. The entire project was privately funded. There were no central government incentives, or publicly funded infrastructure improvements in order to secure it. The project was expected to pay for it itself.
And they were and are still expected to pay for their own infrastructure improvements projects.
Manchester United's New Trafford Stadium is projected to contribute £7.32 billion to the UK economy by 2039, over 14 years. Expected to be entirely privately funded.
Three days ago Amazon announced that they were about to invest £40 billion in the UK over the next three years (2025-2027). This investment includes building four new fulfilment centres and new delivery stations nationwide, as well as upgrades and expansions to its existing network of operations buildings. The data centre investment alone is expected to contribute £14 billion to the UK economy over 5 years (2024-2028). All privately funded, again. No government assistance.
If a private enterprise requires a road, a railway station, or any additional infrastructure to see their project cone to fruition, it should be expected to pay for it.
I live on the transpennine route. The TRU will hugely improve things once they finish it despite the huge disruption it is causing now but there's still huge resentment around all the other properties and land that were CPOd for the abandoned HS2 eastern leg.
I guess the devil is in the detail as to "how much" they are providing:
Proposed Universal theme park in Bedford will come with ‘major investment’ in local infrastructure | New Civil Engineer
Universal is expecting to submit a planning proposal for multi-billion-pound theme park and resort project later this year and it is being touted as
www.newcivilengineer.com
Not going to offer my views on whether the government should or shouldn’t be subsidising the development and to what value. However what I would say is that the local authority that I’m familiar with regularly do ‘enabling work’ to make business more attractive in areas where the numbers wouldn’t necessarily stack up from a business perspective - I appreciate that Universal is the most extreme example of this!
If the roads, trains etc are all going to be not only financed by the government, but also government run projects, then prepare for huge cost over-runs and the works to not be completed until 2040 and beyond.
If the roads, trains etc are all going to be not only financed by the government, but also government run projects, then prepare for huge cost over-runs and the works to not be completed until 2040 and beyond.
jon81uk
TS Member
Have Alton Towers actually funded any of the road improvements?
Staffordshire Council applied for central government funding for improvements to the A50 and the B5031/B5032 which also benefitted JCB a company with even more money to pay for infrastructure improvements projects https://www.highwaysmagazine.co.uk/article/detail/1441
But the Wixams station site has been set aside for many years and will also benefit the new housing estate next to it https://maps.app.goo.gl/tbrzjYRyyXgu5qC58
Even without the Universal project this station is likely to have gone ahead. It might just be a little larger than originally planned.
But potentially not doing so means they could potentially go somewhere else.If it's been planned for twenty years, it sort of begs the question as to why it hadn't been built already. If the theme park is the catalyst, and requires it, they could chip in or actually pay for it.
The project will cost Universal the best part of £10 billion to build. It's clearly within their budgetary means to pay for their own infrastructure too, like we expect every other park to do.
My issue isn't that infrastructure is being built to support the park and the development, that is fantastic news. My issue is that Universal can afford to pay for it, and should pay for it, like every other developer is expected to do, which I've made clear from the off.
I welcome the project. I don't welcome £500 million of the public purse being spent on the interests of a private company, especially when our finances are stretched and in desperate need in other places, which would have equal or better economic impact.
Edit: The Financial Times are reporting that:
UK ministers line up £500mn transport package for Universal theme park
Scale of support for Comcast attraction a sign of government’s desire to attract inward investmentwww.ft.com
Paywall link removed: https://archive.is/g9hBH
It’d be penny wise and pound foolish to be that petty.
And the roads/trains etc are arguably going to support a whole load of other businesses/housing etc that’s going to be built up around Universal over the next few decades.
If that new Manchester Stadium is wholly privately funded and they don’t come begging for government handouts I’ll eat my hat.
Universal likely had many other options on the table, I’d rather we bite the bullet and help out a little so they stay here rather than be penny wise but pound foolish.
Also this infrastructure is going to support the new business’s and houses etc that are going to be created around this new park over the next few decades. So Universal rightly imo would have an argument that this infrastructure isn’t just going to benefit them so it should partly fall onto the government
Also all this talk about it data centres is null and void imo, for them to truly be fleshed out as the government keeps banging on about government investment will be needed in the form of energy and electricity infrastructure, nuclear power stations, SMRs whatever that may be. We don’t have the energy capacity for any of these ambitious projects atm, it’s all bluff.
We’ve been close to blackouts twice this year, so government investment will be needed for these projects.
BarryZola
TS Member
On the other hand, people could argue that Universal had already bought the land so were already somewhat invested in getting the project done here, so were less likely to look elsewhere. Yes, it's possible they would have looked elsewhere without getting some juicy freebies from the government, but they probably were just glad enough to get planning permission in the first place that it may not have been a deal breaker. No-one will know either way as the government have just seemingly given in to every demand at the first time of asking.
Jb85
TS Member
@Blackrock bkackouts? I very much doubt it - not seen anything in the news about this
jon81uk
TS Member
There was some discussion a few years ago due to the Russia-Ukraine war and gas shortages https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-63170747
I thought more recently though we have been OK with solar/wind and reduced our dependence on gas. I've not heard anything about it being a major risk in Winter 2024/25.
Not once but twice this year, on our current trajectory it’s not an if it’s going to happen but a when. Bad energy policy for the past few decades have gotten us into a mess.
Blackouts near miss in tightest day in GB electricity market since 2011
The tightest day in the GB power market since 2011 saw a near miss for blackouts and demand control as the spare margin fell to 580 MW
watt-logic.com
If you search for the topic on twitter you’ll see those who know far more about it than I do discussing both incidents in depth.
We’re extremely, extremely vulnerable atm. We’re overly reliant on energy coming into the country try via cables, and Norway in particular aren’t exactly happy atm that we’re so reliant on them.