The point is, racedo and it's important, is that LHR expansion is private sector money. Unlike the HS2, the Olympics, etc., and other government projects/follies this will cost taxpayers nothing.
Can we put this "transfer pax"-knocking to bed please, we've been over it ad nauseum. They make some routes viable when otherwise they would not be, and that gives more choice to OD traffic. It benefits UK carriers who hub at LHR i.e. BA, BD, VS.
Think you will find that public sector billions will have to go in to support this with little if any payback in return.
Making routes viable is not worth taxpayers money nor should it be the reason for a new runway..
It has nothing to do with "Willy waving", it affects the real economy. There are 70,000 jobs on the airport and over 100,000 directly related. Over and above that many companies are based in the Thames Valley because of the convenience of LHR on the doorstep, and the range of destination it offers.
That is rubbish as the setting up of businesses anyway have the international airport close by as 25th on the list of importance.
Its a nice to have but not even close to being essential, availability of skilled labour, business space, overhead costs come way up the list.
If LHR is to be run "so it adds real value" it needs to be enlarged so that it is not running at 98-99% capacity (compared to 70-75% in the cases of AMS, CDG and FRA). The congestion needs to be reduced and this can only be done two ways: expansion, or a mass reduction in slot availability which easier said than done (who decides who loses slots, decisions open to legal challenges, etc.).
Two more runways are needed now: 2 for landings, 2 for takeoffs; existing for large aircraft, the new ones for any (they would be shorter).
Let's get them built as soon as.
Lets not waste resources on projects that offer little payback.