Rumours were flying around over the weekend that the government is planning a u-turn on its decision to rule out building a third runway at Heathrow. But the FT yesterday quoted one of George Osborne's aides as saying "there is no softening" of the government's position. So what's going on?
The rumours seemed to kick off (not for the first time) on Saturday after Tim Yeo, Tory chairman of the energy and climate change select committee, said he had "completely changed his mind" and now believed a third runway at Heathrow was the only way to tackle the UK's capacity issues.
Speculation was already growing: some had interpreted David Cameron's recent comments on the need to expand capacity in the southeast of England as a sign that the government's stance was weakening, even though he quite clearly excluded Heathrow from the list of options.
John Stewart, a transport and environmental campaigner, argues in the Guardian today that the rumours are simply spin on the part of the aviation industry - as if, by using the power of suggestion, lobbyists could somehow pave the way for a u-turn.
Perhaps he's right. Nevertheless, shouldn't the government listen to the third runway yay-sayers - some of whom are, apparently, senior Tories - and keep all options on the table?