Now, to the subject matter. The comparison between HS2 and the M1 are invalid because not only does the M1 now exist, but also the M6, the M40, the M4 and the A1M plus a multitude of interconnecting roads and motorways quite apart from the existing rail links which are far better than when the M1 was being proposed (late 50's).

Maybe I'm being thick but I don't understand that argument - I accept the M1 and the rest of the Motorway now exists but it didn't when the M1 was first proposed in exactly the same way that a high speed rail network doesn't currently exist in the UK.

The Motorway network was designed as much to relieve traffic on the existing roads as it was to take traffic from the rail network.  The proposed HS2 link and hopefully eventually a full UK high speed rail network is designed also to take traffic from the existing road and rail networks, both of which are at virtual capacity.

The whole idea of HS2 is idiotic and constant references to "this, that or the other" on the way to industrialisation are also invalid as they were new "things" and HS2 is only an insignificant departure to add to existing transport infrastructure. It's a bit like someone in 1860 proposing a new canal to link London and Scotland!

You argue as though you believe that high speed rail is old technology - it isn't - far from it - the majority of industrialised nations are and already have invested heavily in this new technology - once we led the world in technological innovation now it seems that we must fight Luddite attitudes just to try and catch up in these fields.