Why should motorists subsidise a redesign of HS2?

From the outset, HS2 was an economic white elephant.

Following news that its high-speed trains will need to be redesigned, to incorporate extra doors – mid-project alterations that are expected to cost the taxpayer millions – I wonder if the public at large should be footing the bill for such design oversights and corrections. Surely, rail costs should be paid by rail users?

For the majority of people, rail is not an efficient mode of transport, in terms of time or flexibility, particularly with relatively short travel distances in such a small country.

Even inland freight and mail are more cost-efficient to move by road, which is why rail freight and post office rail use is nowadays virtually non-existent.

When it finally opens, to what percentage of the public will HS2 be actually useful? How much carbon dioxide emission and other environmental damage will have occurred as a consequence of its construction?

Those who do not, or infrequently, use rail have their own alternative transport costs to pay, so why should they subsidise rail users?

Road vehicle taxes, including fuel duty, contribute vastly to all manner of public services, even though our roads are potholed. What taxes per user do rail operations contribute?

Once it is renationalised, will rail be profitable and contribute to the nation’s coffers? Or will it again drift into an unaccountable inefficient entity supported by the taxpayer?

The reality is that rail (like canal barges) is now an out-of-date concept, of limited practicable use to a minority of people only.

Forcing people onto trains will have very little effect on reducing climate change. There are far more effective methods that could be employed to reduce CO2 emissions.

Graham Cooper

Address supplied

The experience of Paralympian medallist Tanni Grey-Thompson – who had to crawl off her train when it arrived at King’s Cross station, and no staff were on hand to help her off – was truly shocking. We should be grateful to her for sharing the story of such degrading neglect, to highlight the sub-standard approach to disabled citizens on our transport network.

Her’s is an extreme – but not uncommon – example of failures. Transport accessibility is also important to the elderly, the frail and those with small children or buggies.

Attention should also be drawn to the daily struggles of anybody not entirely able-bodied or fit, or simply hampered by luggage, kids, pushchairs, etc, when trying to navigate London’s Underground. Why are the vast majority of Tube stations still not step-free?

We understand that the system is ancient and cannot be overhauled all at once. But surely it should be mandatory to install lifts when major “upgrades” are taking place?

For example, work to replace the escalators at Marylebone station has taken several years – but the opportunity was not taken to install a lift!

This is a form of negligence that should be not allowed in our modern society.

Anne Cnudde

Address supplied

After the most recent draconian Taliban laws affecting women and girls, surely any Afghan woman reaching the UK should immediately be regarded as a legitimate asylum seeker and fast-tracked accordingly?

I believe the UK has a moral duty to support Afghan refugees by whatever means possible.

Perhaps the Taliban will realise the value of women and girls when there are no longer any of them around.

David Smith

Taunton

 I have no objection to 16-year-olds having the vote, but the idea of banning those over 80 is ridiculous (“It’s about time the elderly were prevented from voting”, Voices, Monday 26 August). People shouldn’t be judged by their age.

I’m 79, and I voted to stay in the EU – as did my husband. I believe there should be no taxation without representation. So, if I can’t vote in Tristan Clark Lam’s future, I shouldn’t have to pay tax either – and I’ve been paying tax for a very, very long time!

Kathryn Salomon

London

As a seventy-something, I was not allowed to vote until I was 21. I have also lived long enough to see how political parties love to blame each other for the state of the nation’s finances.

In 2010, when a Labour Party minister reputedly left a note explaining that there was “no money left”, there followed years of austerity under a coalition government and then a Conservative-majority administration.

Now that Labour is in power again, they want to get their own back by talking about inheriting a £22bn black hole.

Suffice to say, I’ve had enough of the lies peddled by politicians. Should I be prevented from voting by my age, I can’t wait to tell critics of future governments: “Don’t blame me – I didn’t vote for them!”

Piers Chalinor

Address supplied