Heathrow Expansion Debate at the RGS

On the 7th October, there was a debate at the Royal Geographical Society on Heathrow expansion. From the ABTN Report this was an interesting evening (too say the least). The 'great and good' from both sides argued the Case for and against expansion and I am sorry I missed it!

Liberal Democrat Shadow Chancellor Vince Cable (a politician I normally respect) spoke out against Heathrow’s third runway:
“The business case is weak and overstated, and politically, in any case, it is not going to happen.”
Well I am sorry sir, Heathrow is too important to the country for Politics (see High Speed Trains and Heathrows Third Runway) and the Business Case is unfortunately overwhelming.

Staying with those who oppose the expansion

Sir Peter Hall, Professor of planning at University College London: Denounced Heathrow as a “war time mistake” with a design flaw since 1949. Sir Peter briefly presented a plan for a new airport in the Thames Estuary, complete with high-speed rail links and motorways.
Well Sir Peter, 20/20 hindsight is a wonderful thing, especially when it is remembered that limitations of Heathrow were recognised quite early on and there have been many opportunities to alleviate, if not rectify the problem. Starting with a more aggressive expansion of Gatwick in its early years, or actually building one of the projects for a brand new London Airport proposed during the 1970's/1980's. Some of these mirror the Thames Estuary Airport you propose.

Moving to those in favour:

Lord Soley, a former Labour MP and campaign director of the Future Heathrow coalition, made his political prediction.
"The Tories will have an enquiry,” he said. “They’ll decide that they can’t cover Stansted in concrete because there are too many Tory seats there, and that a new airport in the Thames Estuary would cost £36bn.”

Lord Soley also highlighted the need for Heathrow to integrate road, rail and air travel in order for both the airport and the UK to remain competitive.

Hmm. I wouldn't bet against that prediction, the sad thing is that whilst a third runway at Heathrow has become a necessity, a new Airport for London to replace Heathrow (eventually) should form part of a long term (20 year) Transport Infrastructure Plan. I would however dispute the cost of £36bn as even if started today any new Airport would cost at least 50bn to do properly. My views on the need to fully integrate at least rail and air travel is covered in:
High Speed Trains and Heathrows Third Runway

Tom Kelly, BAA’s corporate and public affairs director, also spoke in favour of Heathrow’s expansion.
“A new world order is emerging,” he said. “In a new world order global connections is what it’s all about.”Mr Kelly described the advantage Paris and Amsterdam have over Heathrow, each with at least one more runway.

He added: “It does mean that year on year Heathrow loses its position.”

Well that sums it up from a competitive viewpoint!

According to Colin Stanbridge, chief executive of the London Chamber of Commerce:
94% of businesses said Heathrow was vital.“We know that business is in favour of the expansion of Heathrow,” he said. “They are going to improve the connections that will allow business to flourish, and if business flourishes then society will too.”

That deals with the Business viewpoint. So what's Missing. ah the environmental issues. So over to: Mark Lynas, author of three books on climate change, who put forward the
environmental argument against, after stating that:

“there is nothing evil about aviation.”
Quoting the UK’s commitment to reducing carbon emissions 80% by 2050,
Mr Lynas claimed that by then “three quarters of all our emissions will come from aviation if we carry on this way.”
Mr Lynas said the only option left is demand management,
This was seen by both Mr Stanbridge and Lord Soley as a risk to job security in the West London area.

Lord Soley also took on the emission arguement by covering the progress made by Aircraft such as the A380 in reducing carbon footprint.

The bottom line is not altered by this debate. Due to Political ineptitude by governments since the mid-1960's Heathrow is the primary Air Gateway for the UK. To remain Competitive and therefore to help the national economy it needs a third runway. What should be put in train now is a 20 year Integrated Transport Plan for Air, Road and Rail, including a New Airport to replace Heathrow.

From the Political track record this appears unlikely, but even Politicians sometimes have to face reality.