T&N -
Too much supposition and you easily right off the Davies assumptions but expect me to accept yours without evidence.
I regard all 60-year financial forecasts with profound scepticism based upon the track-record of previous examples. Of Davies' numbers I wrote:
The forecast boost to GDP is £147Bn spread over 60 years ... these are the guidelines we must work with.
So whilst I expressed my reservations about long-term forecasting I accepted that "we must work with" these numbers. That cannot be described as "righting off" Davies' assumptions. [Should it be "writing off?"]
With respect to potential returns from the projects I outlined, I wrote:
Will it exceed £147Bn or £211Bn over 60 years? Very likely, but nobody really knows
Now, if I was "expecting you to accept my numbers without evidence", is that really the way I would express myself?
nobody really knows. And we certainly don't know that for LHR R3 either!
As you can read for yourself, I am not asking you to accept my numbers as it is impossible to forecast accurately 60 years out. And the same limitation applies to Davies' forecast and every other forecast of this kind.
All sectors endorse the Davies report so I'm going with it
Come on, now ... who are you kidding? Have you asked TfL? GIP? MAG? HACAN? Boris, Zak? YOU personally may disagree with those who oppose LHR R3, but to deny that opposition exists is plain silly.
Make your arguments about infrastructure investment "up there" to your MP
But the big decisions are made "down there". That is a big part of the problem. We must act accordingly.
the UK needs to grow its export market. As an island, you need an air-bridge
This island has multiple major airports, seaports and a Channel Tunnel. Exporting our products is not a problem. LHR R3 represents a 'nice to have' one-third increase in aircraft movements at one of those airports, deliverable only at a price which should shock anybody with basic maths skills.
The investment rate of return is one of the highest of any large-scale projects.
This response is based on faith. None of us knows the future, especially financial forecasts 60 years out. What we do know is that LHR R3 is extraordinarily expensive to deliver here and now. The projected cost appears to rise at frequent intervals. There is a
desire for capacity enhancement there rather than a true
need for it. And there are multiple projects of merit competing for the public portion of funds which can only be allocated one time.
Don't build it. Costs too much. Better uses elsewhere for the public element of funding.