An impressive matrix to score their active travel schemes, as to which will get the precious funding

Have I got things right, here?:

My major concern is this.  Our transport experts, including the consultants they call in to help them, do have an impressive matrix to score their active travel schemes, as to which will get the precious funding.  However,

1. Does the matrix take into account an existing 20 Kms, off road cycle-walkway that seems to have been done by the very low standards of decades ago in the 20th century?  A score for the length of time since first opened and for so little (if any) improvement over those decades.  The longer the oversight, the bigger the score.
2. Does the matrix take into account the very variable state of the route with three different councils having three different approaches over maintenance?  From adequate with the route in the City of Wolverhampton to down right negligent and disgraceful for decades in the case of Dudley MBC.  Only in this year did South Staffordshire DC act to get rid of the mud in the old railway cutting.  Well done to them.  A score for the numbers of different councils responsible for the cycle-walkway.
3. Does the magic matrix take into account that our Black Country Route connects three substantial centres of population, with a combined population of 600,800?  A score for the population of the places the cycle-walkway passes through.
4. Was it the matrix that gave the funding to a ready built section of the London to Edinburgh principal mainline railway to be turned into a cycle-walkway between Brownhills and Lichfield, total population 47,738?  A MINUS score for the group, 'Back the Track' who have been campaigning for their Two Capitals, principal mainline railway to be used only by a few cyclists and walkers instead of thousands of passengers relieving road congestion and full trains!
5. One is 20 Kms that is starved of funds when commuters and business users like me would like to use it between Dudley, Wombourne and Wolverhampton but the other is 8 Kms long through S Staffordshire countryside with few people commuting between the two small towns, Brownhills and Lichfield.  Is the matrix working correctly in coming up with this anomaly?  A score for the length of the cycle-walkway being proposed.
6. Has the matrix really been set up correctly to give funding to the 8 Kms mainline railway between two small centres of population?
7. Has the matrix taken into account that both Network Rail and the DfT agree that the 8 Kms being funded is the northern extension of the UK's only available but unused railway ...​
    "of national strategic significance".pdf
   ​A MINUS score because Network Rail and DfT want their freight and passenger trains on the planned and funded cycle-walkway.
8. Has the matrix worked out that stopping car and train users from using this mainline alternative to HS2 will mean that cyclists will have to tolerate congested roads?!  A MINUS score for doing the least to lessen road congestion and the least to lessen jam packed commuter trains by doing the cycle-walkway rather than putting commuter, regional and intercity TRAINS back.
9. Is the matrix able to understand that the benefit to society is greater from finishing the railway with trains and stations than putting walkers and cyclists on it?  Especially, with Brum to Manchester HS2 unlikely to be resurrected.
10. From all this, my super-duper Black Country Cycle-Walk Super Highway would score 100%!!  Campaigning cyclists, Back the Track, would get ZERO for destroying the railway forever (it would never get its trains back, what with trams on 5.5 Kms in Dudley)!!

By the way, I'm against upsetting motorists with cycling schemes when there is so much to be done with thousands of miles of off-road cycling routes - FIRST!