Airports in the British Isles seeing more than a million passengers in 2014 (data per Wikipedia articles on each airport):
Airport code Passengers (2014)
Heathrow LHR 73.4 million Gatwick LGW 38.1 million Manchester MAN 22.0 million Dublin DUB 21.7 million Stansted STN 19.9 million Luton LTN 10.5 million Edinburgh EDI 10.2 million Birmingham BHX 9.7 million Glasgow GLA 7.7 million Bristol BRS 6.3 million Newcastle NCL 4.5 million East Midlands EMA 4.5 million Belfast Int'n'l BFS 4.0 million Liverpool LPL 4.0 million Aberdeen ABZ 3.7 million London City LCY 3.6 million Leeds-Bradford LBA 3.3 million Belfast City BHD 2.6 million Cork ORK 2.1 million Southampton SOU 1.8 million Shannon SNN 1.6 million Jersey JER 1.5 million Southend SEN 1.1 million Cardiff CWL 1.0 million
My my, can I segue in any subtle references into a Swedish band into tomorrow's threads?
Dear TSE:
I will provide you with a report on the commemoration service at St Paul's and subsequent shindig, in my capacity as Napeoleon's heir!!
My first act as Empress of the new Kingdom of Britain and France is to beat lightly with a stick the person who suggested that Ed Milliband = Napoleon.
(Start-rant) I hate Gatwick. It is a blemish on the gorgeous county of Sussex.
I've never had a good experience of using Gatwick airport (or is it "Gatport Airwick"). - The amount of walking from main departure area to the departure gates is ridiculous, - several times the security team have taken the pee out of myself or Mrs D. (and never give any advice in response to my polite questions on how I can help them in the future) - security staff once threw my camera onto the screening conveyer belt from where it bounced off and broke, and I was thus left without a camera for my holiday
And this is apart from the fact that it is awful to get to from North London, and the airport facilities are rubbish compared to Heathrow. (End-rant)
It seems very strange how governments of both right and left have been focused on creating choice and competition in markets and government services, but then think it's best if we create one monopolistic airport.
Whether you look at competition, or nearby air pollution, or how many are affected by noise pollution, or cost to the taxpayer, or diversifying risk in the case of bad weather, Gatwick is the clear choice. Why does anyone support Heathrow as being the place to expand?
Better able to retain it's pre-eminent role as a gateway between Europe and North America. Almost everyone agrees than a greater economic benefit accrues from LHR getting R3 than LGW getting R2.
There's no space for LHR R3 without flattening several villages.
So? The needs of the many...
[that's not entirely flippant, a few hundred people should not hold back the growth of a nation, as LIAMT has also said]
And a million people will be affected by air pollution.
Most of them by an almost immeasurable (and certainly imperceptible) degree. BTW I'm no champion of LHR expantion - indeed I'd be affected by increased noise from the third runway. But I do believe it will offer the best economic benefit to the UK as a whole.
Responding to your other comment, there are no plans to fund any of this, including any rehousing/compensation payments, by the taxpayer.
There were no plans for fiscal transfers in the Eurozone either, and it was strenuously denied at the time that it would ever happen. According to an independent analysis by KPMG, Heathrow will require £12 billion of taxpayer funds.
I also disagree that most of the 1,000,000 will be affected by an imperceptibly small amount. I have friends in Richmond who complain about the frequent noise - certainly they'd be affected by a 30%-50% increase in capacity - and that's more than a borough away.
Para 1: Eurosceptic paranoia
Para 2: You said 'air quality' earlier, so now you're moving the goal posts. I'll respond anyway: The per-runway movements will be broadly where they are now. If you're in Richmond, you're affected by landings on one runway, but not really bothered by landings on the other (or you're less, but equally effected by landings on both). Landings on the third runway will hardly be audible at all. Given improvements in tech, they are likely to suffer less in the future than they do now. They'd have a point if they talked about traffic congestion though...
(Start-rant) I hate Gatwick. It is a blemish on the gorgeous county of Sussex.
I've never had a good experience of using Gatwick airport (or is it "Gatport Airwick"). - The amount of walking from main departure area to the departure gates is ridiculous, - several times the security team have taken the pee out of myself or Mrs D. (and never give any advice in response to my polite questions on how I can help them in the future) - security staff once threw my camera onto the screening conveyer belt from where it bounced off and broke, and I was thus left without a camera for my holiday
And this is apart from the fact that it is awful to get to from North London, and the airport facilities are rubbish compared to Heathrow. (End-rant)
Oh its not that bad.....(regular South Terminal user...) - but to me the biggest difference is the passengers......Stansted - eek!
House prices suffered their sharpest monthly drop in six years last month following the introduction of a new tax, a report has found.
Average prices fell 1.6% in April — equal to £3000 — to £184,970, the largest monthly fall since March 2009 according to the Your Move/Acadata House Price Index for April.
The Scottish property market is reasonably buoyant at the moment without getting carried away with itself. Only the Aberdeen market is struggling for fairly obvious reasons.
Comments
I will provide you with a report on the commemoration service at St Paul's and subsequent shindig, in my capacity as Napeoleon's heir!!
My first act as Empress of the new Kingdom of Britain and France is to beat lightly with a stick the person who suggested that Ed Milliband = Napoleon.
Para 2: You said 'air quality' earlier, so now you're moving the goal posts. I'll respond anyway: The per-runway movements will be broadly where they are now. If you're in Richmond, you're affected by landings on one runway, but not really bothered by landings on the other (or you're less, but equally effected by landings on both). Landings on the third runway will hardly be audible at all. Given improvements in tech, they are likely to suffer less in the future than they do now. They'd have a point if they talked about traffic congestion though...
http://www.economist.com/news/europe/21649496-wolfgang-sch-uble-germanys-eminence-grise-and-hard-man-greece-firm-elder-statesman
http://thaddeusthesixth.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/review-witcher-3-ps4.html
Because it's a dreary grey radioactive dump?