Skip to main content
8 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jun 28, 2018 at 6:49 history tweeted twitter.com/StackPolitics/status/1012226571938222081
Jun 26, 2018 at 16:18 answer added Giter timeline score: 7
Jun 26, 2018 at 16:16 answer added Jeremy French timeline score: 2
Jun 26, 2018 at 15:58 comment added phoog @Eremi it's certainly a political question; I don't mean to imply that it isn't. JonathanReez I agree that the high cost deserves explanation. My point is that getting the facts straight will probably take you much closer to the answer than you are at this point, and I suspect that it may help identify more interesting aspects of the plan to call into question. The more of that you can do in your question, the less work your answerers will have to do.
Jun 26, 2018 at 15:52 comment added Eremi +1 I think that even though a private company is supposedly funding it, this question relates to politics because it was approved by Parliament specifically at this high amount.
Jun 26, 2018 at 15:51 comment added JonathanReez @phoog still, 16 billion pounds is an insane amount of money even if you're building a brand new airport.
Jun 26, 2018 at 15:49 comment added phoog Your question seems to misstate the facts. First, the UK treasury is not paying for the expansion, so I suspect that the approval was not of the cost, but of something else. I haven't been able to find the details online, however. Second, the question equates the approved project with "adding a single runway to an existing airport" but as I understand it the project comprises much more than simply adding a runway; there is also a need for new terminal construction and improvements to transportation and other infrastructure. I do not know whether these are included in the current approval.
Jun 26, 2018 at 15:38 history asked JonathanReez CC BY-SA 4.0