So HS2 is another step closer to fruition, 50,000 pages of detail closer no less. I have no trouble admitting I am delighted this project is moving along relatively swiftly, despite bumps in the road so far.
Whilst I've worked in the rail industry for over a decade, I am first and foremost a rail traveller. And although I am currently living in Madrid, I am a regular traveller on the European rail network. So when I first heard about the proposed HS2 high-speed rail plans, one of my first thoughts was "what will this do for me?"
Anyone hoping that this week's reshuffle would inject some much needed decisiveness into the UK's top transport and infrastructure projects will have been in for disappointment. The Department for Transport has had two of its ministers replaced, and the Shadow Transport team has had a change of leader...
While I have some concerns about the detail of the project, in principle I remain supportive. This is not because I am infatuated by un grand projet. HS2 is a refreshing example of long-term strategic planning in this country which too often in the past we have shied away from and is one of the reasons why many parts of our rail system are currently overcrowded.
The capital is a crowded city as it stands - anyone who has travelled on the Northern Line during rush hour can attest to that. But we have bigger problems than being squished into tube carriages like sardines. It's not a pretty situation above ground either.
As public and parliamentary support for HS2 falls, surely it is only a matter of time before one of the parties changes their position. At the rate things are going, the debate may well descend into a race to see who will be the one to push the plans well and truly off the rails.
To give the Chancellor credit, there is now no serious politician arguing that we don't need to reduce the deficit and find a way to run a balanced budget again in the long-term. Given we are spending almost as much this year on debt interest as we are on education, that is something to be thankful for.
The news last week about a proposed high speed rail link in the UK resulted in numerous bulletins containing reports from middle England that were all seemingly variants on a theme.
We NIMBYs have plenty of reasons for objecting to the London-Birmingham High Speed Rail Link. It cuts a motorway-wide swathe through 150 designated nature sites, including ten SSIs and four nature reserves, without adequate consultation.
Imagine boarding a train in Birmingham that will zip to London in less than an hour. By 2026 the government hopes this will become a reality with the building of a brand spanking new high-speed rail link from Birmingham to London, courtesy of the tax-payer of course.
David Cameron has hailed it as the "biggest modernisation of our railways since the Victorian era". But we really shouldn't get too carried away about the government's £9.4bn programme of investment in the railways announced today, or believe it will do much to alleviate our transport problems.
We've had another bout of high speed rail bashing today. Margaret Hodge's Public Accounts Committee (PAC) implies that the case for HS2 - the proposed new 225mph line from London to Birmingham and beyond - is flawed. They think that the line could end up costing taxpayers like you and I much more than we've bargained for.
Back into recession, austerity yet to fully bite, pressure from backbenchers, the Opposition and world leaders - the Government needs to take bold action to show that austerity and growth can go together.
Infrastructure is a hot topic at the moment and hit the headlines again today when Ken Livingston rejected the idea of a new airport for London in the Thames estuary. Livingston's view on this particular project is another example of the single-mindedness of politicians across the world.
It has long been accepted that infrastructure development is a vital piece of the growth puzzle. David Cameron certainly subscribes to this mantra, having put infrastructure at the heart of his growth strategy when he outlined a huge £30bn investment over the next four years.
The UK government has been talking about building a new airport in the Thames estuary for over 30 years. And every time a new plan is put forward, it's been rejected -- for very good reasons.