Could it be that a Manchester crossrail between Liverpool and Leeds, a similar distance as Thameslink (between Bedford and Brighton), for example, would offer similar benefits around the country as well?
The goal is to establish fast state-of-the-art trains providing frequent and reliable high-capacity rail services between Liverpool and Newcastle (with some trains deviating to serve major offline cities nearby such as Sheffield, Bradford, Middlesbrough and Hull). However, the last portion of that journey from north of Leeds runs on the route of the ECML, so the main investment would be required as far as the ECML junction. What would the national benefits be? This is a matter for in-depth expert analysis to quantify. However, if one were playing the odds of regional infrastructure innovations likely to provide the highest ROI, this proposal must rank amongst the favourites.
Again, just asking the qestion, which was about taxation not profits.
Is that yes or no?
Sorry, I thought I had been clearer on this one. When a company announces profits from a London HQ address, statistics show taxes collected against these profits as having been 'raised in London'. But those profits often derive from commercial activity around the wider UK or globally. Therefore, London's recorded tax-take is skewed markedly higher than would otherwise be the case whilst the numbers attributed to many other cities underplay their economic contribution in real terms. Therefore, we cannot use a simplistic model of using taxes directly where they are raised with any semblance of fairness. Also, many would argue that there is a moral case for helping out the neediest areas beyond their own tax-raising ability to prevent the poverty gap widening indefinitely.
Exactly, but this is required as well as LHR expansion (and other infrastructure requirements), not instead of. Simple as that.
We have established in our earlier exchanges that we agree LHR expansion to be operationally desirable. But the sums required to make this a reality must make sense from a financial perspective.
I am in agreement with much of your remaining commentary. Thankyou for the feedback as always.