You've not answered the question on rail growth. Not that I expect anyone who is opposed to HS2 would, as the predicted growth was for 2.5% growth a year meaning that by opening of Phase 1 it was expected to be about 50% higher than the 2008/09 passenger figures (the last available when HS2 was announced). From the table I posted above is currently 70% for the regions which benefit from HS2 phase 1.
To reach the 100% increase by 2033 that's 1.1% growth a year, including between 2026 and 2033 when there's due to be a lot more trains providing a lot more capacity in the form of HS2 phase 1 services.
There is no question to answer, you simply quote old statistics as justification for supposed future growth. I cannot be bothered to look them up, but I would wager that if I looked up similar figures for other regions, especially commuter regions like the West Midlands the growth statistics would be considerably higher than those for passengers into London. Dispatches programme Jan 2019 London Bham 70% full at peak and 43% full on average, longer trains means more capacity. Train capacity to and from London is not the problem. The next Prime Minister will shortly be presented with a sign off for HS2 he will be told that costs already exceed "official" estimates and that he is looking at a total cost in excess of £100 billion. If I were the PM I would think of what that £100 bn could be used for over the next 7 years. I would refuse to sign the document and rip it up, and then sleep easy that night, because I would not sleep easy if I signed it.
There are plenty of worthwhile rail re-instatement and enhancement projects around the UK, and the subject of this thread is one of them.
Over and Out.