Alternative route

The problem is not whether a rail system is required, but where it should be routed

I was at an exhibition recently in Amersham giving details of the proposed route of the HS2. The opinion there was very much against it.

The primary reason for attending, was to try and ascertain what was the logic for the proposed route to Birmingham. Whilst there, I was in conversation with the mayor of Amersham who hinted as to what probably was the thinking behind the Government's reason for the HS2.

It was not to reduce any congestion on the rail or road networks, but to reduce the congestion at Heathrow Airport. If Birmingham International Airport became the fourth airport for London, it would relieve the pressure on Heathrow for an extra runway. To make this viable, the airport would need to be upgraded and a fast and regular rail network between London and Birmingham International built. It needed to be a fast and regular service carrying probably 2 million passengers a year. Hence the HS2.

The problem is not whether a rail system is required, but where it should be routed. There are two rail links in existence, one direct and the other indirect. Whether these can be upgraded and able to cope with the increase in traffic needs to be thoroughly investigated.

If this is not possible, a new fast route to Birmingham International is required. I am not keen on the proposed route and am wondering whether the route could go up alongside the existing Midland line similar to the way the HS1 has been routed.

M J Taylor, Amersham, Bucks

Next letter: A matter of titles