Tory Greenies and NIMBYs shoot each other in foot (Part 94)

You may remember a few weeks ago, when the Tory Greenies were still in ascendance..?

Mrs Villiers revealed at the Conservative conference last month that a Tory government would scrap a third runway in favour of a £20billion, 180mph North-South [railway-] link. She said the line would take 66,000 domestic flights a year out of the UK's skies and avoid 'considerable' environmental harm from a new runway.

Right. Fast forward to last weekend ...

Shadow transport secretary Theresa Villiers said the number of international connections [at Heathrow] grew by nearly 4,000 between 2000 and 2006. Over the same period, the number of international flights terminating at Heathrow grew by 919, while domestic terminations fell by 1,394, she said...

"It is startlingly clear that that the growth in passenger numbers at Heathrow Airport has been fuelled by the use of our national airport by people who do not even stop to visit the country. The benefits conferred on the economy by transfer passengers are by no means clear. While the environmental and social cost of a third runway is high, the facts revealed by this report confirm that the economic case is looking thinner and thinner."

Reality check:

1. The figures she mentions - 4,000 more international connections, 919 fewer terminations, 1,394 domestic terminations are absolutely insignificant compared to 480,000 aircraft movements per annum.

2. "The benefits conferred on the economy by transfer passengers..." are quite simple. Six aircraft movements per annum equate to about one job. If it's transfer passengers, so much the better - they create jobs without clogging up local tranport.

3. If it were true that expansion at Heathrow were solely down to international transfer passengers (which it clearly isn't - see point 1. above) then why on earth would The Tories suggest that a "£20billion, 180mph North-South [railway] link" is a viable alternative to a third runway? (Don't get me wrong - I am a big fan of railways and public transport and so on, but you have to see it in context.)

Or is this maybe, just maybe, an unholy alliance between the Greenies and the NIMBYs, and right now, it's difficult to say who's worse?