Quote: "BAA and the airlines all want extra runways, and are prepared to pay for them at NO EXPENSE to the taxpayer (in stark contrast to a certain multi-billion pound high speed rail line to Birmingham) yet the politicians wont bite the bullet and grant permission."
Exactly, and not just BAA and the airlines, it's also most Conservative and Labour MPs, business and trade, and pax fed up with the delays and congestion.
Quote: "Because the permission is dependent on a public enquiry that will be controlled (and paid) by govt. Given the level of modern opposition, the govt cannot just give permission. The process involves compulsory purchase etc."
No, this not correct, no further public enquiry is necessary, it is a way of chucking it back in the long grass.
All that is needed is to restore the permission already granted in 2009 and then revoked in 2010.
But Cameron and co. won't stand up to the "tea boy".
Quote: "The people of west London would still throw a tizzy every time it is mentioned despite the fact the airport has been there since the forties, and the people of the Chilterns would still go nuts that someone has the audacity to smash civilisation through their sleepy villages."
It's not just the people of west London, but also parts of Berkshire, Buckinghamshire, Middlesex and Surrey as well, who will throw a much bigger tizzy when they lose their daily half day of quiet as mixed mode is phased in.
This will be the consequence of no expansion: even more will have to be squeezed out of the two rwys, and to hell with the increased congestion and delays. That said, most of the vocal opposition lives miles away from Heathrow.
With 4 rwys, alternation can continue. The penny will drop slowly, hope it's not too late by then.
As for the people of the Chilterns, they have a point in one respect: it's the wrong (long) route to the wrong destination (too close for any benefit) in a bad scheme that needs rethinking.
Last edited by Fairdealfrank; 26th Jul 2012 at 00:11.