Or is it £10Bn (Sir Peter Hendy). Or £20Bn (TfL). Which everybody is saying they will not pay up for.
you're against further investment in the south
I've always been completely clear that I do not oppose investment in the south. But I do endorse fair and equitable distribution of public infrastructure funding nationwide. And that means that the SE is due for a pause after 30 years of monopolising the kitty to give other regions a chance to get their turn and play catch-up.
I know where I would be putting my money.
If you personally can provide the £5Bn - £20Bn required to eliminate the public funding requirement then feel free to put your money into LHR R3. However, if that funding is actually to be provided by the rest of us then deeper concerns must be addressed.
YOUR post by any chance? Sorry, but I will accept the findings of the government and those who are willing to put billions of £££ on the line over your own.
My post(s) which cited several expert sources and which were not a simple personal opinion piece. You can accept whatever findings you like, but don't then insist to the rest of us that the R3 proposals are a "no brainer" just because you contemptuously ignore alternative expert opinion which does not support your pre-conceived preferred outcome.
You have still not acknowledged the fact that much of the infrastructure included in the surface works needs investment anyway.
I acknowledge that there are priority infrastructure projects nationwide which require a combined public funding total far exceeding what is actually available. It is a matter of allocating scarce public resources. And those projects of merit around the regions which have been on hold for 30+ years deserve their turn with no further delay. And yes, they benefit UKplc as a whole too. London does not have a monopoly on the national interest.