Quote: “The government could afford their share of this project, the could fix the "leaking" tax system and remember, the UKs national debt is not that bad in the current climate (76%) and we have the 2nd lowest borrowing rates, even if the current government payed for 100% with borrowed money, it would at most add 4% to that figure.”
What "share of this project"? Why would the government, even if had the resources of a sovereign wealth fund, or another equivelant, spend money on airports when it clearly believes this sector to be strictly part of the private sector?
In the current circumstances how could it be justified as a sensible use of taxpayers’ money?
Surely under a free market system as favoured by Labour and the Conservatives, and required by the single European market, the role of the government is not to obstruct airport expansion where the free market requires it.
Quote: “Remember the Government of Japan has a very high level debt, in fact it is enough to to almost bankrupt the nation, but they manage with the fact they borrow from the general public (which is what I am suggesting), now I am not suggesting we should have a national debt of nearly 200%, but we can fund a THA project and if it was done it would create jobs and improve our connections to overseas (and our transport infrastructure)
Japan has a system of publicly owned airports, the UK does not. Is Japan a role model to follow in this case?
Quote: “Of course they could prevent all of this by saying "yes" to R3 and R4 at LHR”
They could prevent this anyway, and almost certainly will, whether or not they approve a third rwy and/or fourth rwy at Heathrow.
Quote: “What I am calling for HM Government to set up a company called "London Airports Limited" (LAL) it will be a arms length company in the style of Network Rail, only it will be classed at a private company that is 100% owned by the DFT
They will purchase the following companies
Heathrow Airport Limited
Gatwick Airport Limited
London Luton Airport Operations Ltd (The Government can transfer the freehold from the local council to LAL)
Stansted Airport Limited
London Southend Airport Company Ltd
London City Airport Ltd.
Its may also purchase surrounding hotels and offices of those airports”
Yes, very good, but you fail to explain any reasons why the government would follow this course of action. What does it achieve? How much higher would APD, or taxes in general, have to be to pay for it all?
Quote: “Gatwick was sold by BAA for around £1.5 Billion, which is more or less the current value is it today, so the starting bid for LAL for LHR is £1.6 Billion
So LHR is only worth £0.1 billion more than LGW? You’re having a laugh!
How much over their market value would have to pay to the airport owners in order to bribe them to give up their role in the aviation industry?
Think of the compensation for BAA and others for the future profits they would be losing.
Wouldn’t it just be much easier for Call-Me-Dave to grow a backbone and a pair and allow LHR expansion?
Quote: “That is why BA are based at LHR, not because how good it is, but is location
Nonsense, BA is at LHR because its always been there and the same applies to its predecessors BOAC and BEA (apart from BEA’s move from NHT to LHR in 1953). Why waste money moving for no good reason? When BA‘s predecessors consolidated at LHR there was nowhere else to go.
Quote: “It includes the intriguing suggestion that "a key element of the scheme is that the airport terminal would be at Ebbsfleet railway station", which presumably doesn't actually mean that, unless we're talking about the world's longest airbridges …”
Yes, more nonsense.
Last edited by Fairdealfrank; 27th Nov 2012 at 17:31.