Third Heathrow runway would just be start of a journey
The Cabinet will discuss plans to expand Heathrow airport on Tuesday but the decision to approve a third runway at the airport has been put off for another week.
The announcement is now likely to be next Tuesday, October 25.
That would be nearly 18 months after the Airports Commission recommended a third runway at Heathrow and nearly a year since the Cameron government delayed a decision until after the London Mayoral elections.
Theresa May is applying her usual caution to the decision - which has been postponed more times than a reheated in-flight dinner in a foil tray.
The Prime Minister must decide between a third runway at Heathrow, a longer runway at Heathrow or a second runway at Gatwick.
Most in government are agreed that the South East of England needs more air capacity - but they can't agree which option delivers the best return for the UK economy.
Boris Johnson has been a longtime opponent of Heathrow expansion. But I suspect a deal was done with Boris when he was offered the job as Foreign Secretary.
I am told it is the Education Secretary Justine Greening (another longtime opponent) who is causing Number 10 officials to have the greatest cause for concern.
If Heathrow's third runway is approved, a way ahead will need to be found so that Ms Greening (and Mr Johnson) can remain members of the government while disagreeing with what will be the biggest infrastructure project in Europe.
But in this post-Brexit landscape - and all the talk of connecting Britain to new opportunities and trade routes across the world - Heathrow does tick all the boxes.
It's not simply a question of extra capacity - but having a "hub" airport (where travellers can get connecting flights) to rival Heathrow's competitors: Paris Charles De Gaulle, Frankfurt and Schipol in Amsterdam.
But a third runway - which involves tunnelling the M25 so the runway can be built on top - is the most complex, most expensive and most disruptive of the three options.
And it will be bitterly opposed by many politicians and pressure groups who claim the increase in noise and air quality will further degrade the lives of those who live nearby.
This decision, when it is made, is likely to suffer massive turbulence so an approval next week would be only the start of the journey, not the end.