Summary of points against HS2

• The case on time savings fails on diminishing returns and extra terminal times when the service is only affordable if booking is made in advance for travel on a particular time.
• The case on capacity increase fails on the lower cost of building for 125 mph running. 
• The argument based on the WCML upgrade precedent fails on the grounds that it was a more comprehensive scheme than just the provision of additional tracks. The four-tracking of the Trent Valley line was minimally disruptive. 
• Capacity shortage south of Rugby could be relieved by reinstating the Great Central; additional works may be needed at the approaches to London ie south of Milton Keynes, High Wycombe and Aylesbury. Most of the trackbed between Aylesbury and Rugby is still available.
• The WCML is two-track between Roade and Rugby, as the slow lines are routed via Northampton. There appears to be space for an additional pair of tracks between these points; it would require the construction of an additional tunnel at Kilsby.

In addition

• There is already a second route between London and Birmingham: the GW routes via High Wycombe and via Oxford
• There is a potential second route from London to Manchester: the Midland, which is four-track all the way to Trent. Speed restricted sections with sharp curves have been improved in recent years. Reinstating Ambergate to Buxton completes this, and adds useful local links in the process. 

Which is part of the point. If money is to be spent on the rail system, it is better to invest in schemes which will improve connectivity and journey opportunities, rather than on one big bang project.