T&N - At no stage have I suggested that LHR R3 lacks supporters. I merely called out your claim that "all sectors" support the project. Clearly they do not. Support for LHR R3 is not universal. I could draw up a comprehensive list of opponents but I don't see that that would get us any further forward.
I note and accept that you support LHR R3; likewise others must accept that I do not for the reasons outlined in earlier postings. This debate exists because there are two sides to the argument.
I’d want more school places, more doctors and a modern 24/7 A&E with a wide variety of outpatient services on the edge of my village thanks. Oh, that’s right, I can’t have that because my taxes are pooled for the greater good of all living in the country. I’m pretty sure I pay higher council rates than those “up north” and I paid a higher capital price to just get in to the area I’m in.
That's right. None of us can have everything that we want from finite public spending. However, if you were to discover that 92% of all state spending on health and education went to Greater Manchester and its immediate surroundings, don't you think you might object to that just slightly? You see, that's the issue with transport capital infrastructure funding in the UK ... London and the SE has been getting 92% of it and the remaining 70% of the population has been sharing the other 8%. And this has been going on for years. And with LHR R3 support works and Crossrail 2 on the horizon, and Transpennine Electrification cancelled (at just GBP260M), we aren't detecting any signs of a trend change.
We don't expect mathematical proportionality in transport capital infrastructure spending. But we do expect a helluva lot better than this.