Another consequence of the Airports Commission’s analysis is that growth at regional airports would have to be restricted to allow expanded capacity at Heathrow"
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...rts-commission
Are we really that dim up here that we would not only allow a possible £12billion taxpayer spend on Heathrow? but at sametime allow some Whitehall xxxxhead suggest we will also need to dismantle your long haul network.
...well you know where you can stick that !
Perhaps unsurprisingly I am sceptical about the "analysis" quoted in this report. Given that it originates from a campaign group whose website states its view of flying 'should be about reducing air travel in favour of trains or not travelling at all' I suspect they are trying to pick up on anything they might feel undermines the case for an expanded Heathrow. Indeed some of their 'policies' would damage air travel at all UK airports, not just Heathrow.
Now thirty odd years ago may still be too much for you so let's come forward to today. I suggest you read, understand and inwardly digest the following and then, if you can justify it, repeat what you said about Bagso.
https://www.theguardian.com/news/dat...h-east-england
This is not just a Manchester problem, nor an air services problem. It is a major problem for the UK as a unit and with a Cabinet dominated by Home Counties MPs, the rest of the country needs to sit up, take notice and work together to not only divide the wealth more evenly but to share the services and benefits as well.
As for the research by IPPR, respected as they are (and should be) they are not immune from picking a headline figure to, well, make a headline even if the truth is not entirely reflected. Their figures are for 'expenditure on public infrastructure' not 'public spending on infrastructure' so overlooking the fact that sad fact that the private sector is paying more towards Crossrail than the Government is spending on infrastructure in the north (and yes, I do appreciate the irony of what I'm saying).
I absolutely agree that the balance of infrastructure spending is heavily skewed towards the south east, but the reality is the majority of tax revenue comes from the south east as well. To some degree that is why the former Chancellor developed his Northern Powerhouse policy, but at a time of limited scope for public spending on the infrastructure that might stimulate private sector investment and business activity we seem a long way off rebalancing things and very much in a chicken-and-egg situation.
It should also be remembered that private sector contributions towards infrastructure in the north are low in comparison to London and the South East and so it makes an already difficult investment argument that little but harder. I absolutely agree with philbky that the Cabinet is not representative of the Country, but one would hope that recent events have induced a rethink as to what decisions may or may not be in the interests of the nation as a whole.