That costs are too high this blatantly obvious.  Everyone is fixated on the capital cost of HS2 – rightly so, but of course after being incurred it can be ‘lost’ as a sunk cost.

The issue that is not talked about is the initial and future over optimistic traffic    Trains carrying 1,000 passengers every 3 or 4 minutes from London.

The principal HS2 problem is the lack of revenue, 69% of which is to come from existing routes. Is there the demand for 1,000 seat trains leaving Euston every 3 or 4 minutes?

The latest proposal to decrease the operating speeds to more realistic levels and curtail the Leeds route may save on construction costs but it also significantly lessens the numbers of available passengers that can be pumped along the lines.

From a ‘save the planet’ perspective – why are all these people travelling anyway?  “Is YOUR journey necessary?”

The UK is not a large land mass.  Apparently, London is the one attractive (???) destination.  London is the problem – with 80% of rail journeys, mostly commuters centred there

 BBC commentator 3 Sept 19.   The government hopes its creation will free up capacity on overcrowded commuter routes.

A review of the likely HS2 income is essential.  It is highly doubtful if there will be enough revenue to cover the operating costs.  Writing off an 80bn or more construction debt may well leave us with an asset that consumes cash forever more.