Originally Posted by
bernardd
Sorry, that's a huge simplification. BAA is a quasi-private monopoly formed by privatization and allegedly heavily regulated because of its monopolistic position. What alternative does the travelling public have? Where is the competition? For that matter, if the story is to be believed, what genuinely private company would have the audacity to propose surcharging surrounding roads?
I think you are missing my point, which was replying to the statement by
DV that this is an attempt at revenue generation masquerading as environmental concern. My point was that the reasons that might have motivated BAA do not matter one jot. Who cares WHY BAA put forward the proposal?
What matters is whether it is likely to achieve its purpose and whether it is a reasonable way of achieving it or not. What goes through the dark recesses of the minds of BAA execs is, imo, irrelevant in assessing this.