Sometimes, just sometimes, I really do have some sympathy for politicians. I am always conscious as I scribble out these blog posts providing you all with quick but brilliant solutions (sorry, didn't quite catch that ...) to the problems that beset us that were I actually in power and had a dozen 'courtiers' whispering in my ears things might not appear as simple as they do from the comfort of my garret.
Take this extra runway problem for London as an example. I will take on trust (for the moment) that the 'experts' are correct in saying that there is a real need for an extra runway. When I heard the suggestion put forward that it could be built at the far end of the Thames estuary I thought that was rather an intelligent solution given that it would disturb few people and presumably transport links could quickly be connected to the eastward reaching links made and improved for the Olympics. However, according James Forsyth at The Coffee House, that plan is stillborn because it would depend on Dutch permission being granted because they control, by international treaty, most of the North Sea air space. And anyway, they are unlikely to be helpful given that London airport(s) are competition to Schiphol.
The only other two possibilities are Heathrow or Gatwick. Both are subject to massive NIMBY re-actions likely to cause the government grief. Indeed, the current Transport Minister, Justine Greening, is MP for Putney, one of the constituencies already plagued with aircraft noise. And of course, rural Sussex is stuffed full of natural Tory supporters who moved there from London partly, no doubt, to avoid, er, noise pollution! Also, Dave is firmly and undeniably on the record for opposing another Heathrow runway.
To me the solution is simple - build it at Heathrow. This giant airport has been there for decades and anyone who lives around it knows the score by now. Also, I need the laughs watching Dave eat his words!
Bit near to Chequers, though?
P.S. An interesting article in the Tel.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/jeremy-warner/8913884/Death-of-a-currency-as-eurogeddon-approaches.html
Posted by: dearieme | Friday, 25 November 2011 at 14:09
David
Chicago has two major airports - O'Hare and Midway. Reportedly there was a study a number of years ago looking at airport congestion and such. They determined that Midway had the best configuration for take offs, and O'Hare for landings, and proposed the obvious solution - land them all at O'Hare and have them take off at Midway.
The study was never implemmted.
Posted by: Hank | Friday, 25 November 2011 at 15:06
Thanks for the link, DM, but please don't tell me she's going to prove me wrong. Bloody wimmin!
Hank, you were obviously laughing so much you made a few spelling bloopers which I have corrected despite my laughter!
Posted by: David Duff | Friday, 25 November 2011 at 15:11
David
I looked at Earth Google.
Heathrow does not look good. A new runway would displace a lot of occupied structures, some of which seem to be owned by commercially significant companies. Plus hydrographic problems on a south side expansion, Gatwick would just absorb some farmlands.
Posted by: Hank | Friday, 25 November 2011 at 15:37
Yes, Hank, but they are Tory farmlands!
Posted by: David Duff | Friday, 25 November 2011 at 16:44
The UK inland solutions involve upsetting a lot of English people. (Especially me, if Sussex is involved - this is definitely a non-starter!!)
The Thames solution involves upsetting Dutch people.
Why do we bother with a Prime Minister at all if he can't represent our interests?
He could use the ensuing row with the Flatlanders to engineer a withdrawal from the EU. Chris Huhne might object on the grounds that he has a few windmills in the Thames Estuary, but he might not be at liberty for much longer.
It's a wonderful life.
Posted by: Whyaxye | Friday, 25 November 2011 at 18:28
That's why I like you, 'W', you always find the up-side to everything, cheers me up enormously!
Posted by: David Duff | Friday, 25 November 2011 at 19:14