Thursday, 16 August 2012

More Tripe with your Estuary Airport press release?

Stop putting it in your press releases
I've been reading some absolute rubbish about Boris Island/Estuary airport and Government (esp. Libdem) involvement from... yep you've guessed it... the Labour transport twitter feed again.

I cannot believe that what is being published is actually sanctioned by their Party machine as it is populist and alarmist, playing on people's fears and concerns for party political gain which is one of the lowest forms of Politics.

So what has been said? Surely you have proof to the contrary?

Well Yes... as a matter of fact I do.

Just to help, that article address is here

Lets look at the first accusation:

Why has LibDem transport spokesman today backed new hub airport replacing Heathrow?

The quote referred to is:

"We recognise, however, that a single, hub airport - rather than a constrained Heathrow with multiple satellite airports - would be better for the environment and better for the economy in the long term. Even three runways at Heathrow would only be a medium term solution."

So lets dissect this...

Earlier in the article Dr Huppert MP had been stating about the party's stance on not expanding Heathrow and why such a move is totally out of the question - both environmentally and for the local residents.

There is research that shows that the UK's airport capacity is at a dangerously low level and that if a new airport or expansion of existing facilities are not undertaken then there will be a serious problem. Economically a new HUB airport somewhere in the UK would be a great idea. It would boost trade, show that the UK is serious about transportation links, business and trade as well as create many jobs. To not act could see the locus of trade shift to the continent and away from British jobs/business.

This is a serious proposition that needs to be considered yet  as you can see, @Labourtransport is trying to make it look like the Libdems want Boris Island which is something that isn't the case.

Right, lets move onto the Second tweet (the top one) and look at this...

Wow, OK. Good governance means that you seek opinion and who better to look into that than an Independent body?

What if the Independent body find in favour of the Estuary airport?

Holy floating island in the estuary Batman! For Pete's sake the Government don't have to go through with constructing the damn thing.

Also... This hurts to admit this but... If it will benefit the nation as a whole and boost British Business for many decades then... well... can it really be a bad thing?

Which leads me onto... No Independent body will favour the Thames Estuary what with the environmental damage, bird strikes and also the unexploded ordinance in SS Robert Montgomery or out on the peninsula where the Army and Engineers used to practise. There's the added problem of the wreck of HMS Bulwark which is a listed War grave and must not be disturbed.
There is also Birmingham which needs to be considered. As Dr Huppert mentioned in his article, Birmingham is ripe for expansion. It is in a prime location to get commuters to other parts of the country by plane or by rail and if you were to link it up to HS2 then you're really cooking on gas.

Lets be honest Labour, I know that given my recent posts that that may be against your nature but, a HUB in the UK would be a good thing and it doesn't have to be in the Southeast of England. Nothing is set in stone, annoyingly so stop making it look like it is. Further to that why are you arguing semantics and twisting this around to blame the Libdems?

Its fear mongering and mud throwing. That's all.

1 comment:

  1. Indeed, Birmingham makes a lot of sense for various reasons, if we really do still need the somewhat 20th-centuury concept of a hub airport.

    I'm not so sure it's the best model for this century – but even if it is, a hub is primarily for those going from to be via C. C is where the hub is, and very few are actually aiming to go there(!)

    If they were, though, a more central (and less air-cluttered) location such as Birmingham – which has plenty of spare capacity and wishes to expand anyway – would be a sensible and workable choice.

    It could (indeed ought to) spread our business/economy about more, over time, rather than having so much crammed into this corner of what is hardly a large nation anyway.

    If it's the future towards which we are looking, then here isn't the right place, and a hub isn't necessarily the best model either – but they are two aspects that will be looked at fully in the review; and at least we should have closure this time, rather than having it all left hanging as happened under Labour...