RE: Terminal 5 plans maybe shelved.

The total number of aircraft parked and using airbridges is only going to increase a small amount accross LHR. Therefore these fees will not be sufficient to pay for T5. Retail might give some more revenue, but I doubt it would be quite enough.

BAA will be looking for a return of at least 10% on the T5 project – that is, the “risk free” rate of return + 10%. Risk-free is taken to be the return you’d get by spending the cash on T-bills and government bonds.

RE: World Summit on sustainable development in Johannesburg

I’m basically in agreement – poor countries are poor because their leaders are either incompetent or they wish to use poverty as a control mechanism over their population.

If you ask a Zimbabwean why his country is poor he will tell you “because Britain raped us”. Same applies to Zambia, Malawi, Nigeria…..There is a complete inability to face up to reality and develop themselves!

RE: New Newark Name

GD, I think you’ve just stumbled accross one of the big differences between Americans and Brits. The British are equally as patriotic as Americans, but we don’t usually show it – it’s under the surface, and we tend to dislike overt patriotism.

I can’t bring myself to be critical just because of that fact, because it is after all your airport and not ours! But I do feel it is a little bit tacky. It would be like renaming LHR “Hope and Glory International” or “Fair Play Airport”. Saab’s suggestion of using an individual seems better to me personally. Guiliani looks a good bet.

RE: Windows XP

I use HSBC, and it has always worked fine. Why does your Bank want you to download software? Most Bank websites work from any computer.

RE: World Summit on sustainable development in Johannesburg

Bad luck Tomel, undeveloped countries should have got their act together more quickly!

There is plenty of industry which is sustainable and plenty of economic activity which can be undertaken. Remember, “sustainable” is a net term. It only applies to the net result, not indiviudal countries. So one country can pollute, as long as another cleans up. This is the basis for the old proposal of carbon trading, which I am still an advocate of.

RE: Heathrow

That is a poor excuse. NATS is owned by a consortium of the airlines! They can’t really blame their own joint venture for delays can they!!

It’s one of those situations where there is a big difference between “reason” and “excuse”.

RE: Islamic beverage threatens Coca Cola

I remeber as a kid living in Bahrain, Coke was illegal. We had to drink Pepsi instead! The reason was that Coke had a bottling plant in Israel.

RE: British withdrawal from Northern Ireland

The UK does lots of trade with ROI. In fact I think that the UK is ROI’s biggest trading partner.

Coanda is right about ROI indifference to the problem and they certainly used to have a constitutional clause about wanting NI “back”. Not sure if this is still the case though.

What it still boils down to is that large numbers of people still romanticise about the IRA and give them money and help – the ROI and the US are the two biggest culprits. They need to control their people. I mean hypothetically, would UK forces be justified in murdering US or ROI citizens who fund the IRA? I’d say yes, they would be. If I gave a few hundred K to Al’Qaeda I would expect the FBI to knock on my door at the very least…

It exposes the big problem that countries rarely agree on who are terrorists and who are freedom fighters. And the “war on terror” retoric has just brushed this one under the carpet, an ill advised media-friendly move IMO.