Your core argument, presented time after time, is LHR R3 is overpriced and taking too much taxpayer subsidy,
You're doing very well so far ...
consequently that taxpayer money should be spread more evenly out of the congested SE and there are many deserving causes in your own region
and in the UK regions as a whole, not the NW alone ...
You also support the ME3 at your local airport
I wish success upon all carriers serving both my local airport and others which link the UK public with the wider world safely and cost-effectively ...
whilst saying minimising the need for en effective hub in the UK.
An effective hub in the UK is a commendable aspiration. LHR already is a highly-effective hub primarily linking markets on either side of the North Atlantic. That's where we are now. The caveat I place upon developing hub potential from this point forward is that the cost of attracting additional connecting traffic must not outweigh the value of business so attracted. Especially not by order of multiple times the value of that new business. Refer also to my earlier comments regarding the reduced need for hub connections as other airports increase direct offerings of their own.
At core, IMHO that's localism vs national interest and being selective your rationale for what's good for one airfield versus another.
And this is where we differ. I don't accept the logic of financing any infrastructure project at a price-point which grossly outweighs the value of the benefits delivered following completion. And I apply this principle across the board. If you trawl back through the Manchester thread, you will find me opposing calls to build a full-length parallel taxiway alongside 23L/05R for exactly this reason. If funds are available for a project which adds little value to the business they should be redeployed to more compelling projects instead. [For clarification, this was a hypothetical discussion ... MAG has not to my knowledge proposed funding a white-elephant taxiway at MAN]. So it's not a selective rationale of what's good for one airfield versus another. It's a simple matter of robust economics versus fantasy economics. Whatever the location.
In your worst case scenario view, this was not the view of the independent commission employed to make a difficult yet fair decision.
But it is the view of highly-qualified academics who criticised the methodology deployed by PWC in producing the financial data which underpins the recommendation. According to them, the more widely accepted WebTAG methodology produces a far less-flattering business case. I don't question the good faith of Davies and his commission partners, but I do doubt the credibility of certain data points which were put before them as evidence during the course of compiling the report.
Perhaps we should close the Chunnel and build a new one from Manchester to Calais, in interests of "fairness"?
No, but in the interests of
fairness our politicians should ensure the roll-out of cross-channel rail services linking the continent directly with major cities across the UK, as was
promised by government right at the outset. The Channel Tunnel is a huge investment, we were told, but it will be worth it because services operating through it will serve major trunk routes across the UK. It's not just for the South-East. We're still waiting ...
If you're wondering why regional folks have such a cynical view of Westminster promises on transport infrastructure delivery, the Channel Tunnel debacle is exhibit number one. Indeed, the most disgraceful episode of the HS2 saga to date was the decision to axe the short spur which would have linked HS2 to HS1 enabling trains from Scotland, the North and the Midlands direct rail access to the continent. The saving represented by this cut was 2% of the overall project cost. If you need evidence of Whitehall contempt for regional connectivity, look no further. You think we distrust Westminster politicians on transport infrastructure decisions?
Then you're right. In the light of their lamentable track record, show me a reason why we should trust them. George Osborne was a rare ray of hope ... and look where he's been shunted now. Londoncentric dogma and contempt for the regions is alive and thriving in Whitehall.
Now here's an interesting thought to ponder. I wonder whether your eccentric idea of building a Manchester to Calais tunnel would actually come in cheaper than the LHR R3 proposals. I think it just might! There's plenty of leeway to work with after all! ;-)
You think TFL honestly budget this at EIGHTEEN BILLION pounds.
You apparently hold TFL in low-regard. As the previous paragraph shows, I hold certain other public bodies in low regard based upon their track-record to date. Only with the benefit of hindsight will we know which organisations were deserving of our trust.