Put HS2 on the back burner

Plans have been drawn and now the detail is being worked on, but do we really need it?

The High Speed Rail Link is causing some confusion, Labour started the problem and recently David Cameron has supported the decision to go for it. Plans have been drawn for the route and now the detail is being worked on, but do we really need it? 

The initial stage for HS2 of a fast link between London and Birmingham is really unsustainable. As journey times go, fast rail/car/air, with no intermediate stops, will when thought through balance out and may even make the fast rail the slowest (after taking to and from point of departure into account). Granted HS2 Birmingham to London is necessary if the rail link is extended to Scotland, but will this happen and if it does, when? 

Anyway will enough people want to go by train to justify a scheduled service? Personally I believe that HS2 should be put on the "back burner" until all the sums have been done and certified. This approach would satisfy the Governments fiscal policy, the financial constraints we will all be facing and all those who have had their lands/holdings jeopardised. Until the route is finally established to Scotland it is folly in making any progress. 

The good book says that "he who starts building a tower without knowing the final cost is a fool". Perhaps the same can be said of HS2, or is my logic at fault?

John Quallington - retired member Shrewsbury