• IT was interesting to learn from Stephen Plowden’s May 25 letter (Arrogance over HS2) that while George Osborne was chancellor the Treasury was unable to express its opposition to HS2 because Mr Osborne favoured it.

One might have hoped that once Mr Osborne was no longer in office, the Treasury would have been able to speak its mind.

Unfortunately this does not seem to have happened, possibly because the new chancellor, Philip Hammond, supported HS2 when he was transport secretary and does not want to admit a mistake. It is most unlikely that the Treasury has now been persuaded of the merits of HS2.

Its defects are clearer than ever and in the debate in the Lords on January 31, two former permanent secretaries of the Treasury, Lord Burns and Lord Macpherson of Earls Court, voted for Lord Framlingham’s amendment, which, had it passed, would have been the end of the scheme.

In his letter in the same issue, Sam Price (An independent estimate of the cost of HS2 is more than £100billion, May 18) refers to Michael Byng’s cost estimates, which were made after the Lords debate.

They suggest HS2 is likely to cost more than twice the official estimate. The government has not commented on these calculations. If it does not accept them it should publish a detailed refutation.

PETER JONES
Fitzroy Road, NW1