On Jan 16, 11:54*am, wrote:
My inside source (golf partner) is telling me that the Tories are
deliberately hiding their light under a bushel over Heathrow
expansion, at the moment, purely so they can play the politics of all
those marginal constituencies, nearby, to the maximum effect.

Certainly their opposition is hardly typical for them.

However, all is not lost because Boris is actually out there playing
devils advocate and temperature taker on behalf of the party, rather
than as reported just being a loose cannon, with his Thames estuary
proposal.

The Thames estuary proposal has been knocking about for years and
would certainly be a, once and for all, best solution to Heathrow’s
problems.

Here’s how my source expects it to play. The Tories plan to come out
nearer, or during, the election campaign with the following proposal.

First they promise to cancel all those New Labour new towns in the
sticks (big vote winner), for which the transport infrastructure does
not exist, secondly they propose closure of Heathrow and selling of
the land for housing (mega vote winner), for which the transport
infrastructure already exists, thirdly they use the money so raised to
pay towards a brand new airport in the Thames estuary with a rail
link.

Watch this space.

OK, I'll be watching on April 1.

1506 wrote:
On Jan 16, 11:54 am, wrote:
My inside source (golf partner) is telling me that the Tories are
deliberately hiding their light under a bushel over Heathrow
expansion, at the moment, purely so they can play the politics of all
those marginal constituencies, nearby, to the maximum effect.

Certainly their opposition is hardly typical for them.

However, all is not lost because Boris is actually out there playing
devils advocate and temperature taker on behalf of the party, rather
than as reported just being a loose cannon, with his Thames estuary
proposal.

The Thames estuary proposal has been knocking about for years and
would certainly be a, once and for all, best solution to Heathrow’s
problems.

Here’s how my source expects it to play. The Tories plan to come out
nearer, or during, the election campaign with the following proposal.

First they promise to cancel all those New Labour new towns in the
sticks (big vote winner), for which the transport infrastructure does
not exist, secondly they propose closure of Heathrow and selling of
the land for housing (mega vote winner), for which the transport
infrastructure already exists, thirdly they use the money so raised
to pay towards a brand new airport in the Thames estuary with a rail
link.

Watch this space.

OK, I'll be watching on April 1.

Wouldn't it be easier to just build the new housing in the Thames estuary?

John Rowland wrote:
1506 wrote:
On Jan 16, 11:54 am, wrote:
My inside source (golf partner) is telling me that the Tories are
deliberately hiding their light under a bushel over Heathrow
expansion, at the moment, purely so they can play the politics of all
those marginal constituencies, nearby, to the maximum effect.

Certainly their opposition is hardly typical for them.

However, all is not lost because Boris is actually out there playing
devils advocate and temperature taker on behalf of the party, rather
than as reported just being a loose cannon, with his Thames estuary
proposal.

The Thames estuary proposal has been knocking about for years and
would certainly be a, once and for all, best solution to Heathrow’s
problems.

Here’s how my source expects it to play. The Tories plan to come out
nearer, or during, the election campaign with the following proposal.

First they promise to cancel all those New Labour new towns in the
sticks (big vote winner), for which the transport infrastructure does
not exist, secondly they propose closure of Heathrow and selling of
the land for housing (mega vote winner), for which the transport
infrastructure already exists, thirdly they use the money so raised
to pay towards a brand new airport in the Thames estuary with a rail
link.

Watch this space.
OK, I'll be watching on April 1.

Wouldn't it be easier to just build the new housing in the Thames estuary?


Possibly not. Why did what are now the estuarine boroughs move away
from the river? Danger of flooding? Visit, eg, East Ham church and you
will see what I mean.

--
Corporate society looks after everything. All it asks of anyone, all it
has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with management
decisions. -From “Rollerball”

On Jan 17, 7:41*am, Martin Edwards wrote:
John Rowland wrote:
1506 wrote:
On Jan 16, 11:54 am, wrote:
My inside source (golf partner) is telling me that the Tories are
deliberately hiding their light under a bushel over Heathrow
expansion, at the moment, purely so they can play the politics of all
those marginal constituencies, nearby, to the maximum effect.

Certainly their opposition is hardly typical for them.

However, all is not lost because Boris is actually out there playing
devils advocate and temperature taker on behalf of the party, rather
than as reported just being a loose cannon, with his Thames estuary
proposal.

The Thames estuary proposal has been knocking about for years and
would certainly be a, once and for all, best solution to Heathrow’s
problems.

Here’s how my source expects it to play. The Tories plan to come out
nearer, or during, the election campaign with the following proposal.

First they promise to cancel all those New Labour new towns in the
sticks (big vote winner), for which the transport infrastructure does
not exist, secondly they propose closure of Heathrow and selling of
the land for housing (mega vote winner), for which the transport
infrastructure already exists, thirdly they use the money so raised
to pay towards a brand new airport in the Thames estuary with a rail
link.

Watch this space.
OK, I'll be watching on April 1.

Wouldn't it be easier to just build the new housing in the Thames estuary?

Possibly not. *Why did what are now *the estuarine boroughs move away
from the river? *Danger of flooding? *Visit, eg, East Ham church and you
will see what I mean.

--
Corporate society looks after everything. *All it asks of anyone, all it
has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with management
decisions. *-From “Rollerball”- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You ve got to hand it to those Tories, first they play the environment
card to stop expansion at Heathrow whilst Boris goes off and builds
another airport in the Thames flood plain.
All this works perfectly because they saw one plane landing on the
River Hudson.
Brilliant.

"JP" wrote in message

On Jan 17, 7:41 am, Martin Edwards wrote:
John Rowland wrote:
1506 wrote:
On Jan 16, 11:54 am, wrote:
My inside source (golf partner) is telling me that the Tories are
deliberately hiding their light under a bushel over Heathrow
expansion, at the moment, purely so they can play the politics of
all those marginal constituencies, nearby, to the maximum effect.

Certainly their opposition is hardly typical for them.

However, all is not lost because Boris is actually out there
playing devils advocate and temperature taker on behalf of the
party, rather than as reported just being a loose cannon, with
his Thames estuary proposal.

The Thames estuary proposal has been knocking about for years and
would certainly be a, once and for all, best solution to
Heathrow’s problems.

Here’s how my source expects it to play. The Tories plan to come
out nearer, or during, the election campaign with the following
proposal.

First they promise to cancel all those New Labour new towns in the
sticks (big vote winner), for which the transport infrastructure
does not exist, secondly they propose closure of Heathrow and
selling of the land for housing (mega vote winner), for which the
transport infrastructure already exists, thirdly they use the
money so raised to pay towards a brand new airport in the Thames
estuary with a rail link.

Watch this space.
OK, I'll be watching on April 1.

Wouldn't it be easier to just build the new housing in the Thames
estuary?

Possibly not. Why did what are now the estuarine boroughs move away
from the river? Danger of flooding? Visit, eg, East Ham church and
you will see what I mean.

--
Corporate society looks after everything. All it asks of anyone, all
it has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with
management decisions. -From “Rollerball”- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You ve got to hand it to those Tories, first they play the environment
card to stop expansion at Heathrow whilst Boris goes off and builds
another airport in the Thames flood plain.

Not on the flood plain, but on an artificial island, like Hong Kong.

Recliner wrote:

Not on the flood plain, but on an artificial island, like Hong Kong.

Hong Kong is an artificial island? :-)

"John Rowland" wrote in
message
Recliner wrote:

Not on the flood plain, but on an artificial island, like Hong Kong.

Hong Kong is an artificial island? :-)

OK, OK, Chep Lap Kok airport. Actually, the airport isn't quite an
artificial island, as it's actually an landfill extended version of two
small existing islands. Many other airports also start on the land, with
much of the taxiways and runways built on landfill extensions.

Also Kansai and Kobe airports, which really are artificial islands.

In message , at 13:22:01 on
Sat, 17 Jan 2009, Recliner remarked:
Not on the flood plain, but on an artificial island, like Hong Kong.

Also Kansai and Kobe airports, which really are artificial islands.

And Incheon (aka Seoul International)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ye...g_location.svg

Maybe we could do something similar - fill in the whole Thames Estuary?
--
Roland Perry

"Recliner" writes:
Also Kansai and Kobe airports, which really are artificial islands.

Isn't the Kansai airport sinking? A bit of miscalculation etc.

-Miles

--
Liberty, n. One of imagination's most precious possessions.

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 13:22:01 on
Sat, 17 Jan 2009, Recliner remarked:
Not on the flood plain, but on an artificial island, like Hong
Kong.

Also Kansai and Kobe airports, which really are artificial islands.

And Incheon (aka Seoul International)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ye...g_location.svg

Maybe we could do something similar - fill in the whole Thames
Estuary?

Why, when we have the whole of the Isle Of Grain to build an airport on?
(Just noticed there's a munitions store near Cliffe... that's only about 8
miles from the SS Richard Montgomery.)