My thanks as ever to Sunny for picking up on this. The original, with an interesting comment submitted overnight, is here:

http://zelo.tv/MnK83C

It may be that any option involving Northolt would include two new parallel runways there on the same orientation as those at Heathrow. But, with the future of the RAF presence “under review”, it is something to watch.

Looks like the Boris Island scheme could have been a way of distracting attention.

The Tories were dead-set against expanding Heathrow at the last election – but their anti-business reputation amongst large parts of the business sector is spooking them and this would go some way to addressing it.

There is a massive conflict between the Tory instinct to play on localism and thus play to nimby sentiment – and the business need to build stuff, and in particular build infrastructure if the UK is going to remain at all competitive over the next 50 years.

The revival of Heathrow expansion plans reflect a growing awareness of this in government and may well happen one way or another.

I thought you guys were in favour of growth-boosting capital projects?

Not many votes will be lost as it looks like a lot of the people around vote Labour. They may lose Putney but that is all.
The dithering of HS2 is down to the fact that it will pass through some very solid Tory constituencies.

@cjcj – yes growth boosting capital projects are needed but it is not just about building willy nilly here and there. A lot has to be thought about, like the impact on the environment, the impact on people, potential job creation and losses, competition, noise and what alternatives are available that could be a lot better.
What is happening is exposing the U-Turns, the hypocrisy and the wishy washy excuses the Government is coming up with. This is politics.

Whilst no one would sensibly ignore the potential growth that might come from this, if only in the short term.
It’s a ‘big’ policy and might easily command a big bung – never to be discounted where politics is involved.

Building a third runway at Heathrow will probably be the least damaging and least expensive of the options. If one looks at aerial photography or an OS map, one will see that most of the land to the north of Heathrow has not been built on, and only the old villages of Harmondsworth and Sipson exist. The land has not become part of the West London sprawl south from Hayes and Southall and west from Hounslow. Indeed, the original plans for Heathrow included another runway to the north of the Bath Road.

It will be a shame to see two old villages disappear; one hopes that the historic buildings will be rebuilt elsewhere and the villages’ inhabitants properly rehoused, but the amount to be spent must be a lot less than building a new big airport on the Isle of Grain with all the necessary connections. Turning Northolt into a proper airport from a little-used RAF aerodrome would require lengthening the runway, a bit difficult when its western end almost touches the A40, and building decent transport connections — there is no nearby railway, and using the Piccadilly underground line wasn’t a bright idea for Heathrow let alone increasing airport traffic by having a station near Northolt. However, I doubt if many houses would need to be demolished when developing the place.

Those complaining about aeroplane noise should think back 30 or 40 years to when jet airliners were really noisy; they are much quieter today despite being a lot bigger. I live near Heathrow and a giant Airbus A380 has just taken off over the top — I could hardly hear it.

I’m sure that a donation to the Conservative Party will get you a private meeting with David Cameron and a policy change.

The queue will be longer than that at the post office I should imagine.

The Tories’ cynical opportunism in opposing a 3rd runway at LHR (which basically forced Labour into doing the same, because yes, obviously, Labour cynical opportunists too) was a massive disappointment in the run-up to 2010; delighted to see they’re reversing it.

The Estuary airport is complete unworkable balls, and London without LHR3 fails as major international centre. And LHR3 is payable for entirely from private money, unlike the “all of the money there is” while elephant that Estuary would be.

Hopefully, out of the vast deluge of Tory u-turns, this is one of the few that’s worth making, and Labour will return to their pre-2009 position of sanity on the same topic.

There will be, Fenton. It’s just common sense.

There’ll also be a u-turn coming on your precious train set though #massive failure #pathetic

“I thought you guys were in favour of growth-boosting capital projects?”

Nah. Unless they’re *snort* wind turbines. *guffaw*