[Anonymous]

[Binman62]

If ever there was evidence that the UK has absolutely no commitment to transportation infrastructure or its development, it is the announcement that there is to be be yet another Minister Of State for Transport; following the move to Defence by the current inept and myopic minister. Justine Greening is to take over moving from the Treasury and cleary bringing a wealth of transport knowledge to her new brief…..not…..!

It would be laugable if it were not so pitiful and actually very serious for UK plc and those of us who live here……

[RichHI1]

I thought UK plc was becoming a management buy out…

[LuganoPirate]

It amazes me that UK Governments so often choose ministers that have absolutely no idea or experience in the portfolio they hold. Transport, Energy etc. it’s all the same.

It’s argued they have advisors who can brief them but my experience is that often those advisors do not come from industry but are graduates with textbook experience only. Why not appoint someone has a background inthe field for which they are being appointed and who know what they are talking about?

[Bucksnet]

It’s all done on purpose!

“It amazes me that UK Governments so often choose ministers that have absolutely no idea or experience in the portfolio they hold.”

Yep, that’s the plan!

[FlyingChinaman]

Have none of you ever watched Sir Humphrey in Yes Prime Minister?

If not you are not as British as you”d imigined!

I should find time to transfer the entire series into my Ipad.

[Tete_de_cuvee]

Judging by their history, I doubt if the new transport secretary, Justine Greening, and WW will be joining each others fan clubs anytime soon.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15333269

[VintageKrug]

Given her constituency is directly under the Heathrow flightpath, it would be madness for her, as a representative of those who voted for her, to support more expansion at Heathrow.

Anyway, she’s bright and energetic, and given very few people can come into a portfolio with deep knowledge of a particular brief, it’s best that she seeks the advice of those with decades of professional experience rather than pretends she is an expert herself.

Having Ministers who aren’t experts in their portfolio can make sense; the best sort of government is a hands off government which facilitates the market rather than driving policy itself; governments inevitably mess up whatever they get involved in so it’s better they don’t try any grand cohesive strategy, and the Civil Service (or what’s left of it) gets on with modest changes round the edges as required.

The splitting up of BAA (another disastrous entity originally designed by government) will help drive competition. We’re already seeing improvements at Gatwick and London City (same owners).

More private sector innovation should address some of the concerns, and it will be private sector demand and joint investment which will propose a viable and affordable alternative to the chaotic and short sighted approach to matters transportational which we have seen since Mrs T made sorely needed improvements the Motorways network in the 80s.

[LPPSKrisflyer]

Hopefully given the location of her constiuency hopefully she will be all in favour of and drive forward a new airport in the Thames Estuary which is suitable for London and its needs for the next fifty years.

[Bucksnet]

Greening was put into the position by David ‘Common Purpose’ Cameron for a good reason – she is useless.

She campaigned against a ‘third’ runway at Heathrow, but only flights landing on runway 27L would fly over her constituency. The ‘third’ runway proposal would have been a lot further north, and passed Putney by.

[NTarrant]

“given the location of her constiuency she will be all in favour of and drive forward a new airport in the Thames Estuary which is suitable for London and its needs for the next fifty years” Quite irrelevant, but an airport in the Thames would only serve those in London, certainly not those in the remaining parts of the country, e.g. South, West, Midlands.

Most secretary’s have no knowledge of the industry the serve. Whilst what VK says is right to a certain degree, it does depend on the support from the civil servants and their agenda in any matters. Local government is simular, but it does help to have people who have a good grasp of the subject.

[LPPSKrisflyer]

If a new airport had the correct ground infrastructure it would serve all parts of the country. There’s a lot more to building an airport than runways and terminals. LHR is about London and transfer traffic primarily so for the latter, where it is situated does not matter.

Hopefully hand in hand, you would see services from the regions developing. It occurs to me that if LH can manage three routes from Germany to Tokyo, BA must be able to manage something from Manchester or Birmingham if of course they want to.

[VintageKrug]

I think we’ve rehearsed the Thames Estuary argument ad nauseam here.

Whether or not you agree with that strategic leap, it is absolutely right that the regions and the existing airports in the UK can offer a considerable amount of additional capacity, as well as using the existing resources at LHR better with Mixed Mode and larger aircraft.

Financially disincentivising Private Jets and smaller regional aircraft from LHR would be a good start.

It’s also clear that adding a third runway would not solve the problem. I’ll repeat that – a third runway (and its associated sixth terminal) WOULD NOT SOLVE THE PROBLEM; LHR would remain capacity constrained, closed for 25% of the day, and the increased slots would make the aircfield itself even more crowded and add further to the woes of the struggling infrastructure around LHR.

[Bucksnet]

LPPS “where it is situated does not matter”

It does matter as it takes me 45 minutes or less to get to LHR, but the Thames Estuary would take more than double that. An airport that is 38 miles from central London will be 38 miles from central London no matter if it is north, south, east or west.

However, LHR has not just got passenger demand from central London, but also from all around it. Boris Island would have no demand from the east as it is only sea. Journey times from the centre could be the same where ever the airport is, if money is spent on rails links, but journey times from large parts of the south east would be much longer.

[Bucksnet]

VK, adding another runway to LHR would solve congestion in the air, as incoming flights would not have to stack all around the south east for 30-45 minutes.

FRA has a runway for landings only, but our German masters won’t allow us to have one.

[Author]

Posts