The cost of making it happen negates the business case for this.
Until an accurate figure can be agreed upon for the taxpayer funded portion and this can be compared to projected income I really don't see how that can be correct.
There will also be significant income to the taxpayer and the economy from the main airport construction works in the form of VAT and other taxes paid by workers and companies involved in the expansion. After construction a larger Heathrow means more employment therefore more taxed income. Expanding Gatwick may need less from the taxpayer but will also bring in less income.
I remind you once more that there are numerous essential works already required on public infrastructure across regional UK. There is no justification for those in the vicinity of LHR to jump the queue for scarce public funds.
We need to remember this project was pretty much given the go ahead 7 years ago with a completion date of 2015. Due to political wrangling and who knows how much taxpayers money spent on consultations and delays it is likely to run beyond 2030. Jumping the queue it is not.
Incorrect. Besides mainline rail, Manchester Airport is accessible by light rail (Metrolink), National Express coaches, independent coach operators, regional and local bus services, and (of course) by private cars and taxis. The bulk of MAN's catchment area is well-served by at least one of the public transport alternatives listed here. Such are the facts (since you raise the topic). However, note that I only reference Manchester Airport in this context in answer to you raising the subject. I have never argued the LHR R3 debate from a Manchester Airport perspective, although I'm sure you would like to portray that notion as some kind of ulterior motive on my part.
National express?? Are you serious? It is no coincidence that a large percentage of the people on this thread that are against the project are based within easy access to Manchester airport. For too long people in the north have been only given Manchester as their long haul option (And paid a premium for it). Those with easy access have enjoyed having these flights at the expense of the people in the other northern regions that are expected to use the methods you outline above to get there. Nobody wants to use the coach or light rail when they have bags to cart around.
The LHR transfer option exists because it is considered useful by a proportion of the market. However, many customers prefer alternatives for a multitude of reasons. Each individual customer makes a travel choice appropriate to their own circumstances, location and budget. BTW, congratulations on reaching the T5 seating inside 45 minutes. You obviously caught the duplicated full security check at a very quiet time and didn't require an airside transfer to one of the other LHR terminals (so tedious).
So once again you are talking about a future development that will not be operational until after 2030 from first hand experience. Even that is just wrong by the way. Getting on the BA shuttle at LBA you can go straight down the fast lane to security avoiding the queue and walk directly onto the aircraft. At LHR you are out the door and down the escalator onto the train to one of the other terminals. All this will be improved further as part of the project and will be without your luggage that is making its own way to your long haul flight. Nowhere near as tedious as waiting for a train on a cold platform with all your bags, especially after a long haul night flight.
Than again, who cares about the majority of the north as long as the people of the Lancashire and Cheshire can have local direct flights.