Shed, classic! Ignore and deflect the inconvenient truth.
"that is still multiple times the NE equivalent. Or that of any other region."
It isn't.
Firstly, you still fail to compare like-for-like. Excluding private and joint public/private investment, London gets £770 versus the UK average of £400. Nowhere near the "multiple times" you continue to claim - although I note you've downgraded that multiple
"London is getting almost THIRTEEN TIMES (!!!!) per head what a NE resident is receiving."
Second, with 76% of the traffic using the M4/M25 junction not related to LHR, Public finance investment would still be required to improve traffic flows. So the £5Bn to £20Bn (dependent on source) you quote will still be required, regardless of expansion. An inconvenient truth for you.
Third, spending that £5-20bn in the North-East won't have the multiplier effect that it would as part of the R3 project. So yes you could spend it up there but the benefits case is much, much weaker. It's better for the UK - not just one of the regions. Another inconvenient truth.
Fourth, why do you think there's so much private/public investment in the South-East? I agree the difference between £770 & £2500 is stark however it's the result of private investment. Clearly, private investors aren't interested in investing to the same degree, elsewhere in the UK. Another inconvenient truth.
Finally, even the North East supports an expanded Heathrow. Unsurprisingly, there are anti-expansionists across the UK so you're in the minority. Another inconvenient truth.
Last edited by Trash 'n' Navs; 27th Sep 2015 at 07:53.