Corbyn win the next GE
What have you been taking Cliff
All this legal bolony will be going on for years though so I could well imagine the next government launching another review on the never never.
With the lawyers set to have a field day, why not just sanction plan b for the time being.
Corbyn personally is against it on environmental grounds but he might allow a free vote.
SNP seems keen on the third runway as they think it might mean better links to Scotland.
Overall there might be enough political will for it to happen. Eventually.
Political will or not, this is going to be snarled up in the courts for years to come. So it
might never be built. Even if we went for a new airport (Thames Estuary crazy plan springs to mind), even that will likely get snarled up in the courts. Just another creeking step on the same path we've been on for 20-30 years.
It will be interesting to compare timescales and costs against Manchester Airport runway 2, about which Wikipedia says:
"As demand and aircraft movements both increased during the mid-1990s, mainly due to the newly completed Terminal 2, the airport studied the option of a second full-length runway. A consultation process began and planning permission was approved in 1997, with construction work starting the same year.The second runway, initially designated 06R/24L, became operational on 5 February 2001 at a cost of £172 million"
Manchester Airport - Wikipedia
I think we might have run out of oil to fuel the planes before these runways are built 
Why crazy? Is it because of your view of Boris?
An airport proposal in the Thames estuary is not new, and has been proposed before (Foulness) It was cancelled because of the effect on wild life breeding grounds and the usual dithering and over funding.
.
There is going to be disruption, whether it is a village that gets knocked down and people have to relocate or birds that have to find a new breeding ground.
I don't know when you last visited Heathrow, but it is a hotchpotch of buildings extensions and enlargements. The terminals are not properly connected- to get to T4 from another terminal you have to get back on to normal roads. T5 is separate, and T1,2 and 3 and jammed into a small space with an confusing road maze. One tube from London does not access all the terminals. One train for T4 and another for T5. Heathrow Express train is fine for an expensive ride to Paddington.
I have used it four times in the last 4 weeks and Stansted 2 times and believe me Heathrow is a mess. Its a mistake to throw money at it.
We do need a newly designed airport. Just like Hong Kong did in double quick time.
While we still argue about Heathrow getting a third runway, airports like Frankfurt and Charles de Gaulle have four.
Yup.
If they could build Heathrow again, you can bet it would look much different to now.
It staggers me that the so called best option is to extend this spaghetti junction of an airport.
A brand new airport (designed from the ground up with 4 runways, connected terminals etc etc) is a no brainer going forward.With Heathrow slowly winding down over the next few decades.
Screw the birds.They'll find a new home.Just like everyone else has to from time to time.
Why is this going to cost more than the channel tunnel to construct?
It can't be as difficult an engineering project as that, surely.
I'd like to see a breakdown of the estimated costs.
Just to see how much is actually going on materials/construction and how much on other fees
£20odd billion seems incredible for a runway (and new terminal etc).