If we successfully Brexit, the old conflation that Europe = EU is broken. Gradually, we move into a world of Europes plural, in which a people can democratically decide how tight they want to couple with the German monetary beast.
I am not one predicting Nexit or Italexit or Frexit. The EU will stagger on. But longer term - a generation perhaps - our example could see a real loosening around the edges and a final nail in the coffin of the 1950s era "ever closer union".
We do need statesmen of imagination though. Not sure we've got that.
If the EU collapses, which is more than a REMOTE possibility, the UK will be in a good position. It's already out and can set the agenda on a new European order. If, as is more likely, the EU carries on, the UK will be in a very frustrating position. There will - literally - be no alternative to the EU. The UK will variously aim to ignore the EU, resist it, work around it, undermine it and co-opt it. These tactics will cancel each other out. The UK will find it difficult to ally with third countries because their more important relationship is with the EU too. Their relationship with the UK will be through the prism of their primary relationship with the EU.
No, never, not in a million years, not even in your dreams.
The EU is our biggest trade partner. And, if you were able to trace the EU's debt through the intricate maze that is the world's financial system, you would for a lot of it finish up in London. If the EU collapses we too are looking at a disastrous scenario, from which a few miles of water and a misguided Brexit will do nothing to save us. So we all hope the EU thrives, ok?
Fair enough. I am mostly in favour of the EU anyway. What I meant was that in the case of an EU collapse, undesirable as that would be, and as unlikely as that would be, Britain would have done well to get out first and would be in a stronger position to dictate the new order.
The problem with Soft Brexit is not the EU, it's us. Soft Brexit implies a passive, acquiescent UK. We didn't vote Leave to be passively acquiescent. It's not realistic.
Hard Brexit is what it will be. It could be a damage limited Hard Brexit. For example we could sign up to the Customs Union without making concessions on anything that is important in practice and it would give us some useful if limited benefits.
So, Heathrow is NOT delayed. This is about as fast as it could be (which is very slow, admittedly).
Nabavi vs Rentoul...
Interesting.
How long does an airport runway normally take to get built ?
Stansted:
First proposed - 1963 (not shortlisted) Proposed again - 1973 Recommended - 1984 Opened - 1991
Is Stansted that new? Wow.
Nope, its original terminal building opened as long ago as 1969!
The 1991 date is the opening of the hugely expanded airport when it officially became London's Third. There were a few small planes flying about the place prior, as others have said.
The fastest decision would be to give the go ahead to Heathrow and Gatwick and get on with it and declare that Britain is open for Business. The right decision 5 years ago was a "Boris Island".
This is very confusing about Heathrow. Has a decision been made and now its going to consultation as that's a legally required next step, or has this been kicked into the long grass AGAIN?
I don't understand how we've gone about a decade discussing this already under three Prime Ministers and with a major report if there hasn't been a consultation yet. Surely that should have been done by now already and should have fed into the Airports Commission's recommendation?
A decision has been made (the government is going to announce it's in favour of the third runway next week) and it's going out for consultation as the next week.
Of course, it could be "halted" at consultation of a variety of reasons...
Didn't they just have a big consultation exercise?
This is the public consultation. The previous one was a report from Howard Davies iirc. Not the same thing in planning terms I guess.
The fastest decision would be to give the go ahead to Heathrow and Gatwick and get on with it and declare that Britain is open for Business. The right decision 5 years ago was a "Boris Island".
Why would a hub airport in the middle of nowhere be a good idea?
The fastest decision would be to give the go ahead to Heathrow and Gatwick and get on with it and declare that Britain is open for Business. The right decision 5 years ago was a "Boris Island".
Boris Island was the right decision for one person who wanted to kid residents of south west London that no more planes would be coming near them and there was a chance they might all go away into Kent. For the other 13,879,756 residents of the metropolis it was always just a joke.
So, Heathrow is NOT delayed. This is about as fast as it could be (which is very slow, admittedly).
Nabavi vs Rentoul...
Interesting.
How long does an airport runway normally take to get built ?
Stansted:
First proposed - 1963 (not shortlisted) Proposed again - 1973 Recommended - 1984 Opened - 1991
Is Stansted that new? Wow.
Nope, its original terminal building opened as long ago as 1969!
The 1991 date is the opening of the hugely expanded airport when it officially became London's Third. There were a few small planes flying about the place prior, as others have said.
But it was still an airport prior to 1991. Even in 1984 it was designed for up to 25 million passengers.
This is very confusing about Heathrow. Has a decision been made and now its going to consultation as that's a legally required next step, or has this been kicked into the long grass AGAIN?
I don't understand how we've gone about a decade discussing this already under three Prime Ministers and with a major report if there hasn't been a consultation yet. Surely that should have been done by now already and should have fed into the Airports Commission's recommendation?
A decision has been made (the government is going to announce it's in favour of the third runway next week) and it's going out for consultation as the next week.
Of course, it could be "halted" at consultation of a variety of reasons...
Didn't they just have a big consultation exercise?
This is the public consultation. The previous one was a report from Howard Davies iirc. Not the same thing in planning terms I guess.
The the PR spin on this is a joke, if this is a necessary step towards construction.
So, Heathrow is NOT delayed. This is about as fast as it could be (which is very slow, admittedly).
Nabavi vs Rentoul...
Interesting.
How long does an airport runway normally take to get built ?
Stansted:
First proposed - 1963 (not shortlisted) Proposed again - 1973 Recommended - 1984 Opened - 1991
Is Stansted that new? Wow.
Nope, its original terminal building opened as long ago as 1969!
The 1991 date is the opening of the hugely expanded airport when it officially became London's Third. There were a few small planes flying about the place prior, as others have said.
But it was still an airport prior to 1991. Even in 1984 it was designed for up to 25 million passengers.
But the question was how long it took to deliver an airport expansion.
@SkyNewsBreak: The Treasury has abandoned plans to allow millions of pensioners to cash in their annuities which had been due to come into force next year
Presumably Theresa May as MP for Maidstone has "significant constituency interest" in the Heathrow outcome and could derogate from publicly supporting her own policy on airport expansion. She has to apply for permission from the Prime Minister first however.
Maidenhead NOT Maidstone!
Crap! Thanks for that.
Confusing Ann Widdicombe for Theresa May? Oh Dear!
Theresa May continuing to live up to her emerging reputation as a micromanaging ditherer. Though it's a smart decision if she's going for an early election after all (which she should).
Theresa May continuing to live up to her emerging reputation as a micromanaging ditherer. Though it's a smart decision if she's going for an early election after all (which she should).
It is unclear whether this is a dither or not. Is the consultation period the natural next step after a decision has been made?
Theresa May continuing to live up to her emerging reputation as a micromanaging ditherer. Though it's a smart decision if she's going for an early election after all (which she should).
Agree completely. Brexit, grammar schools and a third runway sound like the central pillars of her 2017 manifesto. Anyone who disagrees can do one.
Presumably Theresa May as MP for Maidstone has "significant constituency interest" in the Heathrow outcome and could derogate from publicly supporting her own policy on airport expansion. She has to apply for permission from the Prime Minister first however.
Maidenhead NOT Maidstone!
Crap! Thanks for that.
Confusing Ann Widdicombe for Theresa May? Oh Dear!
So, Heathrow is NOT delayed. This is about as fast as it could be (which is very slow, admittedly).
Nabavi vs Rentoul...
Interesting.
How long does an airport runway normally take to get built ?
Stansted:
First proposed - 1963 (not shortlisted) Proposed again - 1973 Recommended - 1984 Opened - 1991
Is Stansted that new? Wow.
Nope, its original terminal building opened as long ago as 1969!
The 1991 date is the opening of the hugely expanded airport when it officially became London's Third. There were a few small planes flying about the place prior, as others have said.
But it was still an airport prior to 1991. Even in 1984 it was designed for up to 25 million passengers.
But the question was how long it took to deliver an airport expansion.
Theresa May continuing to live up to her emerging reputation as a micromanaging ditherer. Though it's a smart decision if she's going for an early election after all (which she should).
Agree completely. Brexit, grammar schools and a third runway sound like the central pillars of her 2017 manifesto. Anyone who disagrees can do one.
The fastest decision would be to give the go ahead to Heathrow and Gatwick and get on with it and declare that Britain is open for Business. The right decision 5 years ago was a "Boris Island".
Boris Island was the right decision for one person who wanted to kid residents of south west London that no more planes would be coming near them and there was a chance they might all go away into Kent. For the other 13,879,756 residents of the metropolis it was always just a joke.
Not to mention the 30 million other people in the Heathrow catchment area who would find London's airport to be in the absolutely most difficult place to get to that could possibly be chosen.
Tories are silly Hard Brexiteers but soft on Heathrow Labour: Corbyn Lib Dems: lol SNP: lol UKIP: lol
What a mess.
Plaid Cymru, boss.
The Welsh government is skint as shit but with Plaid now in a coalition with Labour they've just decided to splurge a load of money on, erm, the Welsh language.
That worldwide language spoken only in rural Wales and Patagonia.
I'm Welsh. I love Wales. But why prioritise the Welsh language over cancer care?
Bringing back Welsh from the brink of extinction is a tremendous achievement for which Plaid, as its leading champions, can rightly be proud. Wales has become a case study for other endangered languages around the world.
But according to some Welsh politicians I was meeting recently, Plaid's close association (or obsession, if you prefer) with the language issue is the single reason why it has not, and cannot, emulate what the SNP has achieved in Scotland. It means they can never break through in the most populous parts of Wales where almost everyone speaks only English. For whatever reason the Scots Nationalists have never made their language the centrepiece of their campaign.
The fastest decision would be to give the go ahead to Heathrow and Gatwick and get on with it and declare that Britain is open for Business. The right decision 5 years ago was a "Boris Island".
Why would a hub airport in the middle of nowhere be a good idea?
Space is an advantage when it comes to airports.
It should be noted that Hong Kong International Airport has been rather a success, and that was similarly 'in the middle of nowhere'. And a rather nice bridge leads to it as well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsing_Ma_Bridge
Tories are silly Hard Brexiteers but soft on Heathrow Labour: Corbyn Lib Dems: lol SNP: lol UKIP: lol
What a mess.
Plaid Cymru, boss.
The Welsh government is skint as shit but with Plaid now in a coalition with Labour they've just decided to splurge a load of money on, erm, the Welsh language.
That worldwide language spoken only in rural Wales and Patagonia.
I'm Welsh. I love Wales. But why prioritise the Welsh language over cancer care?
Bringing back Welsh from the brink of extinction is a tremendous achievement for which Plaid, as its leading champions, can rightly be proud. Wales has become a case study for other endangered languages around the world.
But according to some Welsh politicians I was meeting recently, Plaid's close association (or obsession, if you prefer) with the language issue is the single reason why it has not, and cannot, emulate what the SNP has achieved in Scotland. It means they can never break through in the most populous parts of Wales where almost everyone speaks only English. For whatever reason the Scots Nationalists have never made their language the centrepiece of their campaign.
The Scots also voted much more decisively for devolution in 1997 (see previous thread, nudge, nudge, hint, hint!)
The fastest decision would be to give the go ahead to Heathrow and Gatwick and get on with it and declare that Britain is open for Business. The right decision 5 years ago was a "Boris Island".
Why would a hub airport in the middle of nowhere be a good idea?
Space is an advantage when it comes to airports.
It should be noted that Hong Kong International Airport has been rather a success, and that was similarly 'in the middle of nowhere'. And a rather nice bridge leads to it as well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsing_Ma_Bridge
Honk Kong is very geographically concentrated, making transit links very easy. A better place would surely be somewhere in the south Midlands.
The fastest decision would be to give the go ahead to Heathrow and Gatwick and get on with it and declare that Britain is open for Business. The right decision 5 years ago was a "Boris Island".
Why would a hub airport in the middle of nowhere be a good idea?
Space is an advantage when it comes to airports.
It should be noted that Hong Kong International Airport has been rather a success, and that was similarly 'in the middle of nowhere'. And a rather nice bridge leads to it as well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsing_Ma_Bridge
A mighty fine, speedy, comfortable, regular, fairly priced train gets you to Central in 30 minutes.
The fastest decision would be to give the go ahead to Heathrow and Gatwick and get on with it and declare that Britain is open for Business. The right decision 5 years ago was a "Boris Island".
Boris Island was the right decision for one person who wanted to kid residents of south west London that no more planes would be coming near them and there was a chance they might all go away into Kent. For the other 13,879,756 residents of the metropolis it was always just a joke.
Not to mention the 30 million other people in the Heathrow catchment area who would find London's airport to be in the absolutely most difficult place to get to that could possibly be chosen.
Erm, would have been reasonably close to HS1 out of St Pancras and Stratford.
The fastest decision would be to give the go ahead to Heathrow and Gatwick and get on with it and declare that Britain is open for Business. The right decision 5 years ago was a "Boris Island".
Why would a hub airport in the middle of nowhere be a good idea?
Space is an advantage when it comes to airports.
It should be noted that Hong Kong International Airport has been rather a success, and that was similarly 'in the middle of nowhere'. And a rather nice bridge leads to it as well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsing_Ma_Bridge
But if you have been to Hong Kong you'll know that almost everyone lives in tower blocks within a few square miles of the central city. So it is easy to use the same high speed transit system for passengers to get the workforce back and forth from the airport. In London, the airport workers live in Hounslow, Hillingdon, Ealing and Slough. There is no way they can work in a Thames Estuary airport without moving house. En masse. To somewhere where there isn't sufficient housing or infrastructure in the first place, even if they are willing to go there.
The fastest decision would be to give the go ahead to Heathrow and Gatwick and get on with it and declare that Britain is open for Business. The right decision 5 years ago was a "Boris Island".
Why would a hub airport in the middle of nowhere be a good idea?
Space is an advantage when it comes to airports.
It should be noted that Hong Kong International Airport has been rather a success, and that was similarly 'in the middle of nowhere'. And a rather nice bridge leads to it as well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsing_Ma_Bridge
But if you have been to Hong Kong you'll know that almost everyone lives in tower blocks within a few square miles of the central city. So it is easy to use the same high speed transit system for passengers to get the workforce back and forth from the airport. In London, the airport workers live in Hounslow, Hillingdon, Ealing and Slough. There is no way they can work in a Thames Estuary airport without moving house.
Ealing Broadway to Stratford on Crossrail, HS1 from Stratford to Kent.
The fastest decision would be to give the go ahead to Heathrow and Gatwick and get on with it and declare that Britain is open for Business. The right decision 5 years ago was a "Boris Island".
Why would a hub airport in the middle of nowhere be a good idea?
Space is an advantage when it comes to airports.
It should be noted that Hong Kong International Airport has been rather a success, and that was similarly 'in the middle of nowhere'. And a rather nice bridge leads to it as well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsing_Ma_Bridge
But if you have been to Hong Kong you'll know that almost everyone lives in tower blocks within a few square miles of the central city. So it is easy to use the same high speed transit system for passengers to get the workforce back and forth from the airport. In London, the airport workers live in Hounslow, Hillingdon, Ealing and Slough. There is no way they can work in a Thames Estuary airport without moving house.
Ealing Broadway to Stratford on Crossrail, HS1 from Stratford to Kent.
Or
Hillingdon to St Pancras on the tube, then HS1
You prove my point. At the times airport workers are required to work, these twice daily journeys are non starters.
The fastest decision would be to give the go ahead to Heathrow and Gatwick and get on with it and declare that Britain is open for Business. The right decision 5 years ago was a "Boris Island".
Why would a hub airport in the middle of nowhere be a good idea?
Space is an advantage when it comes to airports.
It should be noted that Hong Kong International Airport has been rather a success, and that was similarly 'in the middle of nowhere'. And a rather nice bridge leads to it as well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsing_Ma_Bridge
A couple of points.
Firstly, Hong Kong is a City State whereas London serves a large hinterland. London's airport needs to be positioned for that hinterland, while Hong Kong Airport can be anywhere accessible by public transport.
Secondly, the decision to place Hong Kong Airport on Chek Lap Kok Island was a political one. The most practical location would be an expansion of Shenzhen Airport on the Chinese border. I suspect nowadays they would do just that. The airport decision was taken in the dying days of the British colony when confidence was fragile. China initially objected to the building of the airport but didn't push it.
Theresa May continuing to live up to her emerging reputation as a micromanaging ditherer. Though it's a smart decision if she's going for an early election after all (which she should).
It is unclear whether this is a dither or not (snip)
If she cannot even dither decisively, all hope is lost......
The fastest decision would be to give the go ahead to Heathrow and Gatwick and get on with it and declare that Britain is open for Business. The right decision 5 years ago was a "Boris Island".
Why would a hub airport in the middle of nowhere be a good idea?
Space is an advantage when it comes to airports.
It should be noted that Hong Kong International Airport has been rather a success, and that was similarly 'in the middle of nowhere'. And a rather nice bridge leads to it as well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsing_Ma_Bridge
But if you have been to Hong Kong you'll know that almost everyone lives in tower blocks within a few square miles of the central city. So it is easy to use the same high speed transit system for passengers to get the workforce back and forth from the airport. In London, the airport workers live in Hounslow, Hillingdon, Ealing and Slough. There is no way they can work in a Thames Estuary airport without moving house.
Ealing Broadway to Stratford on Crossrail, HS1 from Stratford to Kent.
Or
Hillingdon to St Pancras on the tube, then HS1
You prove my point. At the times airport workers are required to work, these twice daily journeys are non starters.
Crossrail will open in 2018, however.
And I forgot about the Abbey Wood branch, change there for Dartford, Gravesend etc.
I am reaching the reluctant and mournful conclusion that Andrea Leadsom would have been BETTER than Theresa May.
And Boris would have been better still. He might have exploded the country but at least he'd be amusing.
Michael Gove really has a lot to answer for. That morning where he woke up and decided to nobble Boris was the morning that took the Tories off into a direction they didn't want:
Had Boris not been ambushed he would have been a candidate in the final 2, he would have won the membership vote, he would have put in a populist "Brexit but lets not throw the baby out with the bathwater" position and the growing inept chaos of the May administration would have been avoided. I know Boris is Marmite but he WON LONDON. Twice. Non-Tories like him. Hell I like him and am smart enough to know that behind the buffoonery is a smart man.
Instead what do we have? An unelected by anyone PM unable to command a split party to make any decisions about anything. So scared of doing anything at all she won't even call an early election to secure a big majority and actually have a mandate to do all this.
The fastest decision would be to give the go ahead to Heathrow and Gatwick and get on with it and declare that Britain is open for Business. The right decision 5 years ago was a "Boris Island".
Why would a hub airport in the middle of nowhere be a good idea?
Space is an advantage when it comes to airports.
It should be noted that Hong Kong International Airport has been rather a success, and that was similarly 'in the middle of nowhere'. And a rather nice bridge leads to it as well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsing_Ma_Bridge
A couple of points.
Firstly, Hong Kong is a City State whereas London serves a large hinterland. London's airport needs to be positioned for that hinterland, while Hong Kong Airport can be anywhere accessible by public transport.
Secondly, the decision to place Hong Kong Airport on Chek Lap Kok Island was a political one. The most practical location would be an expansion of Shenzhen Airport on the Chinese border. I suspect nowadays they would do just that. The airport decision was taken in the dying days of the British colony when confidence was fragile. China initially objected to the building of the airport but didn't push it.
1) It will.
2) It was a political one (the Chinese saw it as the UK taking money out of HK before the handover, as a rather large proportion of UK firms won the contract). But at the time, Shenzhen was nowhere near what it is now. The offshore airport was the best location at that time.
The fastest decision would be to give the go ahead to Heathrow and Gatwick and get on with it and declare that Britain is open for Business. The right decision 5 years ago was a "Boris Island".
Why would a hub airport in the middle of nowhere be a good idea?
Space is an advantage when it comes to airports.
It should be noted that Hong Kong International Airport has been rather a success, and that was similarly 'in the middle of nowhere'. And a rather nice bridge leads to it as well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsing_Ma_Bridge
But if you have been to Hong Kong you'll know that almost everyone lives in tower blocks within a few square miles of the central city. So it is easy to use the same high speed transit system for passengers to get the workforce back and forth from the airport. In London, the airport workers live in Hounslow, Hillingdon, Ealing and Slough. There is no way they can work in a Thames Estuary airport without moving house.
Ealing Broadway to Stratford on Crossrail, HS1 from Stratford to Kent.
Or
Hillingdon to St Pancras on the tube, then HS1
You prove my point. At the times airport workers are required to work, these twice daily journeys are non starters.
Crossrail will open in 2018, however.
And I forgot about the Abbey Wood branch, change there for Dartford, Gravesend etc.
Crossrail...which Boris always championed....and whose Heathrow station would have opened at around the same time the airport was to be shut down, under Boris's original plan. Another reason why it was always a nonsense.
The fastest decision would be to give the go ahead to Heathrow and Gatwick and get on with it and declare that Britain is open for Business. The right decision 5 years ago was a "Boris Island".
Why would a hub airport in the middle of nowhere be a good idea?
Space is an advantage when it comes to airports.
It should be noted that Hong Kong International Airport has been rather a success, and that was similarly 'in the middle of nowhere'. And a rather nice bridge leads to it as well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsing_Ma_Bridge
But if you have been to Hong Kong you'll know that almost everyone lives in tower blocks within a few square miles of the central city. So it is easy to use the same high speed transit system for passengers to get the workforce back and forth from the airport. In London, the airport workers live in Hounslow, Hillingdon, Ealing and Slough. There is no way they can work in a Thames Estuary airport without moving house.
Ealing Broadway to Stratford on Crossrail, HS1 from Stratford to Kent.
Or
Hillingdon to St Pancras on the tube, then HS1
You prove my point. At the times airport workers are required to work, these twice daily journeys are non starters.
Crossrail will open in 2018, however.
And I forgot about the Abbey Wood branch, change there for Dartford, Gravesend etc.
Crossrail...which Boris always championed....and whose Heathrow station would have opened at around the same time the airport was to be shut down, under Boris's original plan. Another reason why it was always a nonsense.
If you use the Central line often, like I do, you will want Crossrail to open yesterday
Theresa May continuing to live up to her emerging reputation as a micromanaging ditherer. Though it's a smart decision if she's going for an early election after all (which she should).
Making a recommendation with a final decision next year isn't dithering. Its a logical process. You dont let the contract the day you announce the preferred bidder.Its just due process.
All sorts of background preparatory work will go on over the next year so no time will be lost
The fastest decision would be to give the go ahead to Heathrow and Gatwick and get on with it and declare that Britain is open for Business. The right decision 5 years ago was a "Boris Island".
Why would a hub airport in the middle of nowhere be a good idea?
Space is an advantage when it comes to airports.
It should be noted that Hong Kong International Airport has been rather a success, and that was similarly 'in the middle of nowhere'. And a rather nice bridge leads to it as well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsing_Ma_Bridge
But if you have been to Hong Kong you'll know that almost everyone lives in tower blocks within a few square miles of the central city. So it is easy to use the same high speed transit system for passengers to get the workforce back and forth from the airport. In London, the airport workers live in Hounslow, Hillingdon, Ealing and Slough. There is no way they can work in a Thames Estuary airport without moving house. En masse. To somewhere where there isn't sufficient housing or infrastructure in the first place, even if they are willing to go there.
I've made that very point on here in the past, including the other day. Staffing is a big problem for BI. But not an insurmountable one, especially given the problems with LH3 + more.
Theresa May continuing to live up to her emerging reputation as a micromanaging ditherer. Though it's a smart decision if she's going for an early election after all (which she should).
Making a recommendation with a final decision next year isn't dithering. Its a logical process. You dont let the contract the day you announce the preferred bidder.Its just due process.
All sorts of background preparatory work will go on over the next year so no time will be lost
No, because they're apparently not deciding between the options.
The fastest decision would be to give the go ahead to Heathrow and Gatwick and get on with it and declare that Britain is open for Business. The right decision 5 years ago was a "Boris Island".
Why would a hub airport in the middle of nowhere be a good idea?
Space is an advantage when it comes to airports.
It should be noted that Hong Kong International Airport has been rather a success, and that was similarly 'in the middle of nowhere'. And a rather nice bridge leads to it as well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsing_Ma_Bridge
But if you have been to Hong Kong you'll know that almost everyone lives in tower blocks within a few square miles of the central city. So it is easy to use the same high speed transit system for passengers to get the workforce back and forth from the airport. In London, the airport workers live in Hounslow, Hillingdon, Ealing and Slough. There is no way they can work in a Thames Estuary airport without moving house. En masse. To somewhere where there isn't sufficient housing or infrastructure in the first place, even if they are willing to go there.
I've made that very point on here in the past, including the other day. Staffing is a big problem for BI. But not an insurmountable one, especially given the problems with LH3 + more.
Given it will take about a decade at least to build Boris Island would it not be possible to build new homes in areas around Boris Island that staff can move to? Kills two birds with one stone, a new fit for purpose 21st century high capacity airport ... and new homes which the country and London/South East specifically are desperately in need of.
Hmm. The media management is so horrendous it is a serious problem. That said, I think similar things happened early in Cameron's time in office.
Ultimately, May will be judged by her extrication of the UK from the EU. This will be a footnote [I *may* have been over-hasty in my condemnation early. Maybe].
Anyway, I am off to do some work, and (after that) to discover whether the PS4 is going to play more nicely.
To answer the question from 2 thread's back "if these two examples of very close referendum results can be respected by the losing “teams”, at least in the long term, why not the result for the UK’s EU Ref in June 2016?"
The answer because we know Sunil_Prasannan that if the result had been the other way round you'd have been in the firfro t of all the wgingers and moaners which you have been doing constantly about the EU for years
The fastest decision would be to give the go ahead to Heathrow and Gatwick and get on with it and declare that Britain is open for Business. The right decision 5 years ago was a "Boris Island".
Why would a hub airport in the middle of nowhere be a good idea?
Space is an advantage when it comes to airports.
It should be noted that Hong Kong International Airport has been rather a success, and that was similarly 'in the middle of nowhere'. And a rather nice bridge leads to it as well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsing_Ma_Bridge
But if you have been to Hong Kong you'll know that almost everyone lives in tower blocks within a few square miles of the central city. So it is easy to use the same high speed transit system for passengers to get the workforce back and forth from the airport. In London, the airport workers live in Hounslow, Hillingdon, Ealing and Slough. There is no way they can work in a Thames Estuary airport without moving house.
Ealing Broadway to Stratford on Crossrail, HS1 from Stratford to Kent.
Or
Hillingdon to St Pancras on the tube, then HS1
You prove my point. At the times airport workers are required to work, these twice daily journeys are non starters.
Crossrail will open in 2018, however.
And I forgot about the Abbey Wood branch, change there for Dartford, Gravesend etc.
Crossrail...which Boris always championed....and whose Heathrow station would have opened at around the same time the airport was to be shut down, under Boris's original plan. Another reason why it was always a nonsense.
If you use the Central line often, like I do, you will want Crossrail to open yesterday
The glass inside the train was almost hot to the touch a few weeks ago. It was roasting. Wouldnt want to do it every day. Give me nice aircon circle line trains even if its a long way round
The right hon. Gentleman is afraid of an election is he? Oh, if I were going to cut and run I'd have gone after the Falklands. Afraid? Frightened? Frit? Couldn't take it? Couldn't stand it? - M. H. Thatcher, PMQs, 19/4/1983
Theresa May continuing to live up to her emerging reputation as a micromanaging ditherer. Though it's a smart decision if she's going for an early election after all (which she should).
Making a recommendation with a final decision next year isn't dithering. Its a logical process. You dont let the contract the day you announce the preferred bidder.Its just due process.
All sorts of background preparatory work will go on over the next year so no time will be lost
No, because they're apparently not deciding between the options.
Ah. Not so good. This is beginning to look as likely to happen as the Northern part of the M23 and Ringway 2
Are we reading different articles? That suggests the decision will be made next week.
decision recommendation
I was apparently reading a version of the page from 3 hours ago. I refreshed it and the wording totally changed.
Rightly or wrongly, the impression I have received from these few posts is that the BBC changed a factual report so that it reads more damagingly for Mrs May. But they wouldn't do a thing like that, would they?
This is very confusing about Heathrow. Has a decision been made and now its going to consultation as that's a legally required next step, or has this been kicked into the long grass AGAIN?
I don't understand how we've gone about a decade discussing this already under three Prime Ministers and with a major report if there hasn't been a consultation yet. Surely that should have been done by now already and should have fed into the Airports Commission's recommendation?
A decision has been made (the government is going to announce it's in favour of the third runway next week) and it's going out for consultation as the next week.
Of course, it could be "halted" at consultation of a variety of reasons...
Didn't they just have a big consultation exercise?
A general election is bad news for all the Eurofanatics hoping to prevent the UK leaving the EU. May will win a comfortable majority.
There has been some real idiocy posted on here recently. I am sure I have seen several people claim that the Tories will struggle to fund an election campaign. A few Eurosceptic mega donors will ensure the Tories have more than enough money.
The fastest decision would be to give the go ahead to Heathrow and Gatwick and get on with it and declare that Britain is open for Business. The right decision 5 years ago was a "Boris Island".
Why would a hub airport in the middle of nowhere be a good idea?
Space is an advantage when it comes to airports.
It should be noted that Hong Kong International Airport has been rather a success, and that was similarly 'in the middle of nowhere'. And a rather nice bridge leads to it as well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsing_Ma_Bridge
But if you have been to Hong Kong you'll know that almost everyone lives in tower blocks within a few square miles of the central city. So it is easy to use the same high speed transit system for passengers to get the workforce back and forth from the airport. In London, the airport workers live in Hounslow, Hillingdon, Ealing and Slough. There is no way they can work in a Thames Estuary airport without moving house. En masse. To somewhere where there isn't sufficient housing or infrastructure in the first place, even if they are willing to go there.
I've made that very point on here in the past, including the other day. Staffing is a big problem for BI. But not an insurmountable one, especially given the problems with LH3 + more.
Given it will take about a decade at least to build Boris Island would it not be possible to build new homes in areas around Boris Island that staff can move to? Kills two birds with one stone, a new fit for purpose 21st century high capacity airport ... and new homes which the country and London/South East specifically are desperately in need of.
Indeed. It opens up massive areas to development (and in the case of Cliffe Marshes, good riddance!)
Theresa May continuing to live up to her emerging reputation as a micromanaging ditherer. Though it's a smart decision if she's going for an early election after all (which she should).
Making a recommendation with a final decision next year isn't dithering. Its a logical process. You dont let the contract the day you announce the preferred bidder.Its just due process.
All sorts of background preparatory work will go on over the next year so no time will be lost
No, because they're apparently not deciding between the options.
Ah. Not so good. This is beginning to look as likely to happen as the Northern part of the M23 and Ringway 2
Southern part of Ringway 2. The A406 (northern part of ringway 2) is largely dual carriageway, though notably not so through Ealing Common.
Theresa May continuing to live up to her emerging reputation as a micromanaging ditherer. Though it's a smart decision if she's going for an early election after all (which she should).
Making a recommendation with a final decision next year isn't dithering. Its a logical process. You dont let the contract the day you announce the preferred bidder.Its just due process.
All sorts of background preparatory work will go on over the next year so no time will be lost
Except if it isn't a final decision, it means she could change her mind so any preparatory work will be lost.
Are we reading different articles? That suggests the decision will be made next week.
decision recommendation
I was apparently reading a version of the page from 3 hours ago. I refreshed it and the wording totally changed.
Rightly or wrongly, the impression I have received from these few posts is that the BBC changed a factual report so that it reads more damagingly for Mrs May. But they wouldn't do a thing like that, would they?
Good evening, everyone.
They could have at least mentioned that an earlier version of the article suggested the decision would be next week.
Theresa May continuing to live up to her emerging reputation as a micromanaging ditherer. Though it's a smart decision if she's going for an early election after all (which she should).
Making a recommendation with a final decision next year isn't dithering. Its a logical process. You dont let the contract the day you announce the preferred bidder.Its just due process.
All sorts of background preparatory work will go on over the next year so no time will be lost
Wasn't the recommendation made years ago by the Airport Commission though? How many recommendations and consultations do we need before a decision can be made?
Theresa May continuing to live up to her emerging reputation as a micromanaging ditherer. Though it's a smart decision if she's going for an early election after all (which she should).
Making a recommendation with a final decision next year isn't dithering. Its a logical process. You dont let the contract the day you announce the preferred bidder.Its just due process.
All sorts of background preparatory work will go on over the next year so no time will be lost
Except if it isn't a final decision, it means she could change her mind so any preparatory work will be lost.
If there is any preparatory work it would suggest that the decision is unlikely to change. Of course the decision could be to build both runways!
It doesn't augur well for Brexit. May is simultaneously dithery and a bit clueless. And she has a terrible tin ear. She doesn't understand how things sound to others. She gives off the wrong signals, often unwittingly. Pff.
I think she needs to bring Osborne back. The government has completely lost any kind of focus.
I suggest you can completely forget the nonsense about a general election, looks like Witney will finally kill that off. Information is that the Labour vote is collapsing and that there could be a high turnout for a by election. Looks as if Farron may be smiling on Friday. Not cheering but at least smiling, media recognition at last he might think.
It doesn't augur well for Brexit. May is simultaneously dithery and a bit clueless. And she has a terrible tin ear. She doesn't understand how things sound to others. She gives off the wrong signals, often unwittingly. Pff.
I think she needs to bring Osborne back. The government has completely lost any kind of focus.
The fastest decision would be to give the go ahead to Heathrow and Gatwick and get on with it and declare that Britain is open for Business. The right decision 5 years ago was a "Boris Island".
Why would a hub airport in the middle of nowhere be a good idea?
Space is an advantage when it comes to airports.
It should be noted that Hong Kong International Airport has been rather a success, and that was similarly 'in the middle of nowhere'. And a rather nice bridge leads to it as well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsing_Ma_Bridge
But if you have been to Hong Kong you'll know that almost everyone lives in tower blocks within a few square miles of the central city. So it is easy to use the same high speed transit system for passengers to get the workforce back and forth from the airport. In London, the airport workers live in Hounslow, Hillingdon, Ealing and Slough. There is no way they can work in a Thames Estuary airport without moving house.
Ealing Broadway to Stratford on Crossrail, HS1 from Stratford to Kent.
Or
Hillingdon to St Pancras on the tube, then HS1
You prove my point. At the times airport workers are required to work, these twice daily journeys are non starters.
Crossrail will open in 2018, however.
And I forgot about the Abbey Wood branch, change there for Dartford, Gravesend etc.
Crossrail...which Boris always championed....and whose Heathrow station would have opened at around the same time the airport was to be shut down, under Boris's original plan. Another reason why it was always a nonsense.
If you use the Central line often, like I do, you will want Crossrail to open yesterday
It doesn't augur well for Brexit. May is simultaneously dithery and a bit clueless. And she has a terrible tin ear. She doesn't understand how things sound to others. She gives off the wrong signals, often unwittingly. Pff.
I think she needs to bring Osborne back. The government has completely lost any kind of focus.
Why didn't Osborne green-light HR3 at any time during the SIX YEARS he was Chancellor?
The fastest decision would be to give the go ahead to Heathrow and Gatwick and get on with it and declare that Britain is open for Business. The right decision 5 years ago was a "Boris Island".
Why would a hub airport in the middle of nowhere be a good idea?
Space is an advantage when it comes to airports.
It should be noted that Hong Kong International Airport has been rather a success, and that was similarly 'in the middle of nowhere'. And a rather nice bridge leads to it as well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsing_Ma_Bridge
But if you have been to Hong Kong you'll know that almost everyone lives in tower blocks within a few square miles of the central city. So it is easy to use the same high speed transit system for passengers to get the workforce back and forth from the airport. In London, the airport workers live in Hounslow, Hillingdon, Ealing and Slough. There is no way they can work in a Thames Estuary airport without moving house.
Ealing Broadway to Stratford on Crossrail, HS1 from Stratford to Kent.
Or
Hillingdon to St Pancras on the tube, then HS1
You prove my point. At the times airport workers are required to work, these twice daily journeys are non starters.
Crossrail will open in 2018, however.
And I forgot about the Abbey Wood branch, change there for Dartford, Gravesend etc.
Crossrail...which Boris always championed....and whose Heathrow station would have opened at around the same time the airport was to be shut down, under Boris's original plan. Another reason why it was always a nonsense.
If you use the Central line often, like I do, you will want Crossrail to open yesterday
Working on it!
Yes you are! I visited Abbey Wood on Saturday (for the first time in a couple of months), doing the new eastbound platform for Southeastern trains - which was actually the old westbound platform. Saw that the old eastbound platform is completely dug up now!
I suggest you can completely forget the nonsense about a general election, looks like Witney will finally kill that off. Information is that the Labour vote is collapsing and that there could be a high turnout for a by election. Looks as if Farron may be smiling on Friday. Not cheering but at least smiling, media recognition at last he might think.
If May let's a strong performance by the LDs in Witney stop a GE in which she would (by default) win a massive majority against Corbyn's Clowns, then she should probably resign now and have done with it.
Theresa May continuing to live up to her emerging reputation as a micromanaging ditherer. Though it's a smart decision if she's going for an early election after all (which she should).
Making a recommendation with a final decision next year isn't dithering. Its a logical process. You dont let the contract the day you announce the preferred bidder.Its just due process.
All sorts of background preparatory work will go on over the next year so no time will be lost
Except if it isn't a final decision, it means she could change her mind so any preparatory work will be lost.
It IS a decision, as I see it. The only way it could likely be changed is if the Commons votes it down, which is highly improbable.
It doesn't allow initial investment and detailed planning with any confidence.
Basically: it'll delay. If the government made a decision on their favoured option, and it passed parliament, business could invest in the preparatory work with some confidence that it will go ahead.
They cannot at the moment. And there's a heck of a lot of preparatory work to be done: as an example, preparatory work for HS2 on the ground has been going on for two or three years now (e.g. archaeological investigations).
Theresa May continuing to live up to her emerging reputation as a micromanaging ditherer. Though it's a smart decision if she's going for an early election after all (which she should).
Making a recommendation with a final decision next year isn't dithering. Its a logical process. You dont let the contract the day you announce the preferred bidder.Its just due process.
All sorts of background preparatory work will go on over the next year so no time will be lost
Wasn't the recommendation made years ago by the Airport Commission though? How many recommendations and consultations do we need before a decision can be made?
Theresa May continuing to live up to her emerging reputation as a micromanaging ditherer. Though it's a smart decision if she's going for an early election after all (which she should).
Making a recommendation with a final decision next year isn't dithering. Its a logical process. You dont let the contract the day you announce the preferred bidder.Its just due process.
All sorts of background preparatory work will go on over the next year so no time will be lost
Wasn't the recommendation made years ago by the Airport Commission though? How many recommendations and consultations do we need before a decision can be made?
The difference is, I suppose, that this is the Cabinet's "decision" to build LHR3. It's obviously not going to be Gatwick. After that, dissenting Ministers will have some leeway to oppose, and then the Commons will give its approval (presumably) to LHR3 in in a vote in 2017/18.
So it is a "decision", but a bloody long winded and silly way of doing it, and sends out the wrong signals.
Why wait a year or more? Make it the Spring of 2017 FFS.
Start a war with Syria then get the MoD to requisition the land without compensation supposedly for long range bombers and make sure its well on the way to completion before wars end.
Theresa May continuing to live up to her emerging reputation as a micromanaging ditherer. Though it's a smart decision if she's going for an early election after all (which she should).
Making a recommendation with a final decision next year isn't dithering. Its a logical process. You dont let the contract the day you announce the preferred bidder.Its just due process.
All sorts of background preparatory work will go on over the next year so no time will be lost
Wasn't the recommendation made years ago by the Airport Commission though? How many recommendations and consultations do we need before a decision can be made?
The difference is, I suppose, that this is the Cabinet's "decision" to build LHR3. It's obviously not going to be Gatwick. After that, dissenting Ministers will have some leeway to oppose, and then the Commons will give its approval (presumably) to LHR3 in in a vote in 2017/18.
So it is a "decision", but a bloody long winded and silly way of doing it, and sends out the wrong signals.
Why wait a year or more? Make it the Spring of 2017 FFS.
It's been debated and delayed for years, how much more is there left to discuss?
Theresa May continuing to live up to her emerging reputation as a micromanaging ditherer. Though it's a smart decision if she's going for an early election after all (which she should).
Making a recommendation with a final decision next year isn't dithering. Its a logical process. You dont let the contract the day you announce the preferred bidder.Its just due process.
All sorts of background preparatory work will go on over the next year so no time will be lost
Except if it isn't a final decision, it means she could change her mind so any preparatory work will be lost.
It IS a decision, as I see it. The only way it could likely be changed is if the Commons votes it down, which is highly improbable.
It doesn't allow initial investment and detailed planning with any confidence.
Basically: it'll delay. If the government made a decision on their favoured option, and it passed parliament, business could invest in the preparatory work with some confidence that it will go ahead.
They cannot at the moment. And there's a heck of a lot of preparatory work to be done: as an example, preparatory work for HS2 on the ground has been going on for two or three years now (e.g. archaeological investigations).
I am expecting Goldsmith to take the view that it is NOT a decision, merely a recommendation that he and his residents can oppose in the consultation. Therefore, conveniently, he doesn't need to resign for at least another year.....
It doesn't augur well for Brexit. May is simultaneously dithery and a bit clueless. And she has a terrible tin ear. She doesn't understand how things sound to others. She gives off the wrong signals, often unwittingly. Pff.
I think she needs to bring Osborne back. The government has completely lost any kind of focus.
Why didn't Osborne green-light HR3 at any time during the SIX YEARS he was Chancellor?
Theresa May continuing to live up to her emerging reputation as a micromanaging ditherer. Though it's a smart decision if she's going for an early election after all (which she should).
Making a recommendation with a final decision next year isn't dithering. Its a logical process. You dont let the contract the day you announce the preferred bidder.Its just due process.
All sorts of background preparatory work will go on over the next year so no time will be lost
Wasn't the recommendation made years ago by the Airport Commission though? How many recommendations and consultations do we need before a decision can be made?
Comments
The problem with Soft Brexit is not the EU, it's us. Soft Brexit implies a passive, acquiescent UK. We didn't vote Leave to be passively acquiescent. It's not realistic.
Hard Brexit is what it will be. It could be a damage limited Hard Brexit. For example we could sign up to the Customs Union without making concessions on anything that is important in practice and it would give us some useful if limited benefits.
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/kind-hearted-boy-asks-mum-105539540.html
But according to some Welsh politicians I was meeting recently, Plaid's close association (or obsession, if you prefer) with the language issue is the single reason why it has not, and cannot, emulate what the SNP has achieved in Scotland. It means they can never break through in the most populous parts of Wales where almost everyone speaks only English. For whatever reason the Scots Nationalists have never made their language the centrepiece of their campaign.
It should be noted that Hong Kong International Airport has been rather a success, and that was similarly 'in the middle of nowhere'. And a rather nice bridge leads to it as well.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsing_Ma_Bridge
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37692903
So she is indeed a stupid ditherer.
Or
Hillingdon to St Pancras on the tube, then HS1
Will Trump take the bait?
Some of us got a blizzard of manure thrown at for saying just this earlier this year. Some of us warned May was a vacillating fudger all along.
Firstly, Hong Kong is a City State whereas London serves a large hinterland. London's airport needs to be positioned for that hinterland, while Hong Kong Airport can be anywhere accessible by public transport.
Secondly, the decision to place Hong Kong Airport on Chek Lap Kok Island was a political one. The most practical location would be an expansion of Shenzhen Airport on the Chinese border. I suspect nowadays they would do just that. The airport decision was taken in the dying days of the British colony when confidence was fragile. China initially objected to the building of the airport but didn't push it.
Clinton 47
Trump 40
Johnson 7
https://t.co/Ke0IQfnoRT
And I forgot about the Abbey Wood branch, change there for Dartford, Gravesend etc.
Had Boris not been ambushed he would have been a candidate in the final 2, he would have won the membership vote, he would have put in a populist "Brexit but lets not throw the baby out with the bathwater" position and the growing inept chaos of the May administration would have been avoided. I know Boris is Marmite but he WON LONDON. Twice. Non-Tories like him. Hell I like him and am smart enough to know that behind the buffoonery is a smart man.
Instead what do we have? An unelected by anyone PM unable to command a split party to make any decisions about anything. So scared of doing anything at all she won't even call an early election to secure a big majority and actually have a mandate to do all this.
Frit I tell you. With a capital Frit.
ROFL
2) It was a political one (the Chinese saw it as the UK taking money out of HK before the handover, as a rather large proportion of UK firms won the contract). But at the time, Shenzhen was nowhere near what it is now. The offshore airport was the best location at that time.
Perhaps Boris would've won, then gone for a departure in name only, causing a Conservative civil war.
It's always tempting to look at a current situation and lament missed opportunities, but things can always be worse.
Philip Collins @PCollinsTimes 19m
@benatipsosmori @StewartWood You think trigger Article 50 and then hold an election two months later?
@PCollinsTimes @benatipsosmori @StewartWood Europe wd be busy working out their response to A50 & distracted by French elections so why not
Philip Collins @PCollinsTimes 10m
@SamCoatesTimes @benatipsosmori @StewartWood Are the smoke signals from the May team giving you that impression too?
All sorts of background preparatory work will go on over the next year so no time will be lost
Ultimately, May will be judged by her extrication of the UK from the EU. This will be a footnote [I *may* have been over-hasty in my condemnation early. Maybe].
Anyway, I am off to do some work, and (after that) to discover whether the PS4 is going to play more nicely.
The answer because we know Sunil_Prasannan that if the result had been the other way round you'd have been in the firfro t of all the wgingers and moaners which you have been doing constantly about the EU for years
- M. H. Thatcher, PMQs, 19/4/1983
Good evening, everyone.
Theresa has been PM for ONLY three months!
There has been some real idiocy posted on here recently. I am sure I have seen several people claim that the Tories will struggle to fund an election campaign. A few Eurosceptic mega donors will ensure the Tories have more than enough money.
They need to can-kick Heathrow until then to save seats in SW London.
I have said previously that the odds of a 2017 election at 50%. I now raise that to 65%.
Basically: it'll delay. If the government made a decision on their favoured option, and it passed parliament, business could invest in the preparatory work with some confidence that it will go ahead.
They cannot at the moment. And there's a heck of a lot of preparatory work to be done: as an example, preparatory work for HS2 on the ground has been going on for two or three years now (e.g. archaeological investigations).
https://twitter.com/BenjySarlin/status/788432570409181184
https://twitter.com/mitchellvii/status/772460287572185088
http://hidden-london.com/gazetteer/fairlop/
https://youtu.be/AbAal7jIWQ4
https://youtu.be/KXmpdJO9UOc