The current setup requires upgrading now as anyone who has to negotiate that part of the M25 in rush hour knows. That won't come cheap.
If something
requires upgrading there is a presumption in the SE that funding will be waved through. Are you aware that this doesn't automatically happen re
requires upgrading projects elsewhere in the UK?
I presume TFL have lumped in all sorts of works and contingency costs into this figure
We cannot progress funding of this magnitude based upon presumption. The level of drain required from public funds must be verified. TFL is well-qualified to make cost assessments on transport infrastructure projects, so their estimates must be taken seriously and examined.
One thing people need to understand is that a large amount of that figure will come straight back into the public purse from all the various taxes imposed
One could equally argue this for the LGW scheme and for alternative schemes of merit around the UK which represent far better value to the taxpayer. The vast costs associated with LHR R3 cannot be approved based on a flimsy excuse of this sort.
The project will likely be carried out by companies and workers from all over the UK who will take that money home and spend in in the local economy.
Ah, the infamous
trickledown argument. Based upon this, the streets of Burnley, Bridgend, and Stanley should already be paved with gold trickled down from recent SE construction projects such as Crossrail, the Olympic Park, Thameslink remodelling and so many more. Curiously, that never quite seems to work out!
Materials will be made in factories all over the UK.
Also true in much larger volume if public funds are instead deployed on projects of merit located all around the UK where each pound spent buys so much more.
Taking private finance and putting it into a large infrastructure project is a great way to put other peoples money into the economy.
But if this is attempted on a scale so large that the host company risks default or failure to raise the capital required, default to the taxpayer becomes a huge concern. Will the taxpayer be underwriting the privately-funded element of LHR R3?
The same goes for projects like Hinckley
I thought the bulk of the money from Hinckley was destined for France and China. Where will the LHR R3 billions be off to?
and is why it is possible to build out of a recession.
A much more effective way to build out of recession would be to invest public funds directly into attractively-priced projects of merit located directly within depressed and neglected areas across the UK.
It also provides a countrywide benefit despite the final project being based in the SE.
Large-scale projects of merit around regional UK can also provide this. Unfortunately, I can't quote a real-world example, as during the last 50 years all multi-billion pound projects have been allocated to the SE exclusively. Time for some rebalancing?
The money does not just disappear.
Well the money from Crossrail, the Olympic Park and all the rest didn't find its way to my part of the world. Where did it go?
An expanded LHR that allows people to fly from their regional airport to destinations all over the world does benefit the whole of the UK.
Like a crumb from a large loaf benefits a mouse? The scale of funding required versus the underwhelming payback is beyond pitiful. Invest directly into those regions instead.
It is wrong to think of it as another SE project that will only benefit London.
But it will absolutely, overwhelmingly benefit London with only crumbs and empty promises trickling down to the rest of the UK.
The nation really should get behind this and it's a shame the MAN supporters feel so threatened.
The whole nation should feel threatened by another GBP12-18Bn of public funding glibly allocated to a project of very low merit within the charmed SE bubble. BTW, that cheap
MAN Supporter jibe undermines your credibility as a serious contributor.
it will also allow more destinations that no airport, even LHR in it's current form could support. This in turn brings in people from further afield than the UK and that is worth a lot of money to our economy.
Have you seen some of the surprising destinations which carriers such as Ryanair and Wizz have introduced to the London airports portfolio? LHR has no monopoly on attracting new destinations. Even the Davies Report acknowledged that wasn't one of its strengths. A new runway at LGW can bring such people into the UK too.
Hopefully the right decision will be made as for the majority of people an expanded LHR is a win win situation.
Since it will cost many multiples the value it represents to make happen, LHR R3 is a win for selected lawyers, surveyors, engineers and very few others. Certainly not for the public. Absolutely not for the public. The right decision is LGW, subject to rigid cost oversight and the promised private funding being forthcoming.
I would say that BA's domestic traffic to all London airports has actually increased and freed up space for passengers connecting onto other BA services from Heathrow.
It is good to note real-world evidence that passengers are content to use London gateways other than LHR to meet their travel needs.