Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Boris Johnson: Thames Estuary Airport 'best For Whole Of Uk'


Recommended Posts

I think he may mean that the project will be viewed as UK spending rather than London/south-east spending which it actually is. That means there is no what they call 'Barnett consequential'. It's similar with the High Speed rail link from London to the north of England; there is no Barnett consequential for places which it doesn't pass through or even near-by.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only non-starter about it is the cost. - there is no wrong side of London, but new quick links to central London would need to be set up. It would provide a huge amount of new residential possibilities when Heathrow was closed, and get rid of a lot of noise pollution in London.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Boris doesn't care about the rest of the UK......the airport should be in a place like Bristol or Gatwick or the Midlands....far too much traffic goes into London...spread it out a bit....look at the wonderful places and new opportunities that you are missing out on. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess the whole global warming thing can be completely debunked now if there are serious plans to build in the middle of the Thames, barrier or not. Perhaps we're supposed to let him off for being a buffoon, but in my mind the hymn sheets aren't quite matching up anymore.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Think it would be a shame to destroy the tranquil Kent shoreline which was a back drop to 'Great Expectations' (Isle of Grain). Oh dear I'm sounding like a NIMBY now.

Seriously this has come about due to putting all your eggs in one basket. Eg: London. The UK really needs to bring up its second Cities whether Manchester, Birmingham etc and spread the air traffic load out a bit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously this has come about due to putting all your eggs in one basket. Eg: London. The UK really needs to bring up its second Cities whether Manchester, Birmingham etc and spread the air traffic load out a bit.

And making the prime airport a more obviously London airport would help things. At the moment Heathrow sucks demand away from Birmingham International. An estaury airport would give Birmingham much more chance of gaining passengers and everything that follows from that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

I guess the whole global warming thing can be completely debunked now if there are serious plans to build in the middle of the Thames, barrier or not. Perhaps we're supposed to let him off for being a buffoon, but in my mind the hymn sheets aren't quite matching up anymore.

They never have. If there were the slightest degree of honesty in the politician's green policies then they wouldn't be printing money to get us out borrowing and buying shit.

The biggest proponent Gore is a jetsetting freeloader riding on the consciences of millions, absolute disgrace of a human being.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only non-starter about it is the cost. - there is no wrong side of London, but new quick links to central London would need to be set up. It would provide a huge amount of new residential possibilities when Heathrow was closed, and get rid of a lot of noise pollution in London.

No one lives in London because of its quiet serenity. Besides, the airport was there before most of the current residents.

Kent on the other hand is quite quiet. Why spoil a quiet area when London is already noisy, the airport just adds a bit to its noisiness.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not London centric at all then.

Odd why he is standing for Uxbridge bearing in mind just how many people in Uxbridge work at Heathrow and presumably would be out of a job or have to locate to the other side of London if he had his airport way.

The reality of London today is that millions of people commute from one side to the other for work. Boris Island wouldn't make that any better or worse.

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/transport/vision-strategy/new-aviation-capacity-for-london

Apparently increasing flight capacity is essential to our economy.

Fast forward 100 years.

Plans for Heathrow 27th runway to be approved following advice by a bloke to the government. It is essential for the growth of the economy and must proceed.

Cobblers. We don't need a third runway now and we won't need it then. Joe public will enjoy no benefit from it whatsoever just a decrease in the quality of more peoples lives by noise and air pollution. But the proles won't listen until one lands on their house by mistake.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's nothing new about Boris Island. In the 1970's Maplin Sands in Essex was the lead alternative to Heathrow expansion. Hong Kong and Amsterdam had both built airports on land reclaimed from the sea "so why shouldn't we" went the argument, and that was before the 1980's big boom pushed London's centre of gravity many miles to the east.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 415 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.