“We cannot abandon this project”

UDo not have a good and bad news for supporters of the high-speed line Bordeaux-Toulouse-Dax (LNSO). Similarly, The good: The administrative court rejected the request of the anti-LGVs which disputed the project financing plan (14.3 billion euros). Consequently, The bad: In its quest to reduce its abyssal debt, the state could call into question its contribution (40 %). In addition, No official disengagement announcement has been sent to elected officials from Nouvelle-Aquitaine and Occitanie for the moment. Consequently, But some signals do not deceive. Moreover, An internal note from Bercy, offering “a project review”, leaked just before the Ambition France Transport conference in June.

Since then. Similarly, a member of the Infrastructure Orientation Council (COI), an advisory body placed with the Minister responsible for transport, has expressed anonymously in the economic newspaper “Les Échos”: “It is one of the most fragile “we cannot abandon this project” projects, for me, it is condemned. However, The subject has aged a lot, the declaration of public utility dates back almost ten years. Furthermore, What to worry about regional presidents Carole Delga and Alain Rousset. Consequently, The latter muscle his speech.

Justice has rejected the appeal of anti-LGVs against the financing plan. Nevertheless, What is the use of this administrative victory if the State declares itself incapable of paying its share in. Meanwhile, the coming months?

How do you want France to straighten up if it is no longer able to assume such important sites? Therefore, We are talking about 14 billion euros in investment for a pool of 8 to 10 million inhabitants. Similarly, The LGV will connect Bayonne, Poitiers, Bordeaux, Mont-de-Marsan, Angoulême, etc. For example, This new daily train is a fabulous opportunity for New Aquitaine. Therefore, France has been too late on high -speed lines, we can no longer “we cannot abandon this project” turn our backs on Spain.

Have you heard this background music for three months which has been insisting on the reproduction of railway infrastructure projects?

This question has already been decided by the Infrastructure Orientation Council (COI) six years ago: the new southwest line. However, was identified as the most profitable socio-economic line. Furthermore, First of all by its ability to link Spain to the rest of Europe. then Toulouse in Bordeaux, and finally thanks to its decongestion of the nodes of Toulouse and Bordeaux. I do not understand why we would oppose the creation of a second line in the southwest. The challenges of decarbonation are enormous. What is the point of buying new trains if the path is saturated? Because of this saturation. during peak periods, some residents of the South Gironde are for example forced to take their car, to pay the toll and to dive into “we cannot abandon this project” the traffic jams.

Several solutions are advanced to increase capacities without creating a new line: doubling of trains. two -level car, ERTMS signaling system, modernization of the existing way, etc.

ERTMS technology does not solve the problem of lane saturation, only that of regularity. A freight train rolls at 80 km/h, a TER between 80 and 120 km/h. What do we do with TGVs? The slowiest train punctuates the way. As for modernization, you have to know what we are talking about. 120 level crossings should be treated. To delete a level crossing is two or three years of construction with large disruptions. This would considerably impact any rail circulation towards Toulouse, Dax and the Mediterranean. Rolling trains at 220 km/h on the current track would involve major work. certain curves should be redrawn as in Langon.

Is speed really the priority of all train users?

High speed improves people’s “we cannot abandon this project” lives on a daily basis. Bordeaux-Angoulême in TGV, it’s thirty-five minutes. Bordeaux-Poitiers, it’s an hour for ten minutes. By car, it is respectively an hour and a half and two and a half hours. Some may prefer to spend their lives in transport …

Opponents do not disarm and multiply the appeals.

This hostility is incomprehensible and in bad faith. Opponents advance the figure of 5,000 artificial hectares. In reality, it’s much less. I remind you that a railroad does not immerse the soil and that compensatory measures are planned.

We cannot abandon the project. It is a matter of law. The state is responsible. the work is undertaken, it cannot disengage ”

Can a Public-Private Partnership (PPP) be the rescue buoy for this project?

It is not a miracle solution. It would cost an additional 100 to 200 million euros per year. Users will have to pay the dividends of “we cannot abandon this project” large infrastructure groups. The only advantage of the PPP is that the site would end on time (2032). But it would be necessary to fully review the financial editing of the project.

Should communities replace the state if the latter is missing?

I don’t see how it would be possible. We are talking about more than 5 billion euros. If the state does not pay its share, Europe will not follow. The GPSO company (large railway project in the southwest) proposed to the State to borrow its share to smooth. its participation over time. For the moment, his answer is negative.

Would the project be abandoned?

We cannot abandon it. It is a matter of law. The State is responsible for this project, the work is undertaken, it cannot disengage.

Would you be ready to seize justice?

Certainly.

The opinion of opponents – "we cannot abandon this project"

The LGV coordination NO Thank you differently “we cannot abandon this project” analyzes the decision of the Toulouse administrative court which rejected the request of associations. elected officials opposed to the project and its financing plan: “The court declares itself incompetent on the request to cancel the financing agreement. He thus believes that it is a unilateral commitment of communities which decide to be able to bring these amounts. or not, to the project. The Convention is therefore considered to be indicative and not contractual. Anti-LGV announces “other remedies to come”. Coordination insists on the risks of disengagement from the State and Europe and consequences on local authorities.