Kelly reveals plans for third Heathrow runway
Allegra Stratton and agencies
Thursday November 22, 2007
Guardian Unlimited </u>
The transport secretary, Ruth Kelly, today announced plans for a third runway and a sixth terminal at Heathrow airport.
In a written statement to parliament, she outlined the need for expansion of the airport and possible relaxation of current runway restrictions. It is thought realising the plans could cost as much as £9bn.
In the consultation paper, Kelly said: "Heathrow supports 170,000 jobs, billions of pounds of British exports and is our main gateway to the global economy. But for too long it has operated at nearly full capacity, with relatively minor problems causing severe delays to passengers.
"If nothing changes, Heathrow's status as a world class airport will be gradually eroded. Jobs will be lost and the economy will suffer. London and the UK's nations and regions alike are reliant on the good international connections the Heathrow hub provides."
Flights would increase from 480,000 a year to more than 700,000, under the plans.
The proposed expansion is controversial. Heathrow's fifth terminal - the subject of a costly four-year public inquiry - will finally open in March 2008. For the planned third runway the public will have until February 27 2008 to make their views known.
Environmental groups have condemned the proposal. They say the extra flights will contribute to global warming, increase pollution and blight the lives of millions of people living under the flightpaths.
In the consultation Kelly argues that the expansion would breach neither the EU's air pollution limits nor the government's own noise pollution controls.
The airport operator BAA, part of Spain's Ferrovial group, said greater capacity at Heathrow would bring huge economic benefits to Britain through tourism, job creation and relocation of businesses near the airport.
The expansion would be "a very considerable economic powerhouse", the BAA chief executive, Stephen Nelson, told BBC radio.
The British Airways chief executive, Willie Walsh, said the plans could bring benefits worth more than £9bn a year.
Green campaigners question that figure. John Stewart, chairman of the anti-airport expansion group Hacan ClearSkies, told the BBC: "There's a mantra here that it's important for the economy. What has never been worked out is how those figures are arrived at."
The Liberal Democrat transport spokeswoman, Susan Kramer, said the plans "make a mockery of any attempts to tackle climate change.
"It is time for ministers to listen to the public and stop any further Heathrow expansion."
Third runway at Heathrow is vital to UK's economic future, says BA chief
By Nic Fildes
The Independent
Published: 21 November 2007
Willie Walsh, the chief executive of British Airways, has warned that Britain faces a low-growth future if the Government fails to allow a third runway to be built at Heathrow.
In a strongly worded speech to the Guild of International Bankers last night, Mr Walsh said building the runway would benefit the UK economy to the tune of £9bn a year without increasing carbon emissions.
"If we as a country turn our back on expanding Heathrow, we are throwing in the economic towel – and must prepare ourselves for the consequences of a low-growth, or perhaps no-growth, economy in the future," he said.
Mr Walsh argued Heathrow has lost its position as Europe's number one airport with the number of destinations served by the London hub falling to 180 from 227 in 1990 because of a "chronic shortage of runway capacity".
Mr Walsh said that a public consultation over a third runway at Heathrow is expected to be launched within days and added that building it would prove crucial to ending "the Heathrow hassle of queues and flight delays". His comments come on a day when the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) warned consumers that the cost of flying into Heathrow and Gatwick will rise over the next five years.
The regulator proposes allowing BAA, owner of the two airports, to increase prices by around £12 per passenger at Heathrow next year and £6 at Gatwick to cover increased security costs. The price caps proved bad news for BAA as it represents a cut to the permitted return on investment it can make at the airports. The CAA also proposed that BAA will have to pay fines of up to £75m if it fails to meet performance targets at the airports. The price caps could hit BAA hard with its parent company, Spain's Ferrovial, thought to be considering refinancing the airport operator's £10bn debt.
BAA said it would consult with the CAA over the price caps which it says will inhibit its ability to provide a world-class service at its airports. "We believe the regulator has not recognised the significant challenges we all face in transforming passengers' daily experience and the new security reality in which we operate," BAA said.
From The Times
November 22, 2007
Stansted runway plan scrapped in favour of Heathrow growth
Ben Webster, Transport Correspondent
The Government has abandoned its commitment to making Stansted the first airport to gain a new runway and is focusing instead on almost doubling the number of flights at Heathrow. Today it will present a new plan to build a third runway at the country’s biggest airport by 2020.
Ruth Kelly, the Transport Secretary, has given the clearest indication yet that the plan to build a second runway at Stansted will be abandoned.
She told The Times that it was much more important to expand Heathrow than Stansted because of the economic benefits of adding capacity at Britain’s only “hub airport”, which has flights to all the major countries. This reverses the Government’s policy, stated in a White Paper in December 2003, that Stansted should gain a new runway before Heathrow.
Ms Kelly said: “If Stansted doesn’t go ahead then the argument for Heathrow is even stronger than it is at the moment.” Asked which runway should take priority if only one could be built, she said: “We need extra capacity in the South East, but fundamentally we need a global hub airport.”
Ms Kelly will publish proposals today for building a new runway at Heathrow dedicated to short-haul flights by 2020. In the interim, she intends to allow up to 60,000 more flights a year on the existing two runways.
The Department for Transport (DfT) also plans to abolish the practice of giving residents under the flight paths respite from the worst noise for half of the day. At present, one runway is used for take-offs and another for landings, with their roles switching at about 3pm. Under the new arrangement, planes will land and take off from both runways for several hours each day from 2010.
Today’s consultation document will also claim that Heathrow can be expanded without breaching the European Union’s limit on air pollution and the Government’s limit on noise.
Using information supplied by BAA, which owns Heathrow, the DfT has revised its estimate of 2003 that 35,000 people would be exposed to excessive levels of nitrogen dioxide if the third runway were built. It now accepts BAA’s optimistic assumptions about the introduction of cleaner engines in aircraft and cars.
Ms Kelly refused to guarantee that there would be no increase in the number of people who were subjected to noise above 57 decibels – the level that the Government deems to be a significant annoyance. Under the DfT’s plan, up to 20,000 more people than at present will be affected.
The total number of passengers using Heathrow is expected to grow from 67 million last year to 120 million by 2020. The DfT will propose various measures to reduce the extra congestion expected around Heathrow, including building a new rail link – known as Airtrack – to the airport from Staines.
The expansion will be fiercely resisted by environmental groups, which have said they will make Heathrow the focus of their campaign against the increase in carbon dioxide from air traffic.
The Government is also likely to face a challenge in the High Court from the 2M group – 12 local authorities in West London that have two million residents.
Serge Lourie, the leader of Rich-mond council and spokesman for the 2M group, said: “The Government is claiming that this will be a public consultation but it has already made its mind up that Heathrow capacity will almost double. By prejudging the outcome, it is laying itself open for a judicial review.”
The campaign to Stop Stansted Expansion said that more than 400 people had moved from villages around the Essex airport because they feared the impact of a new runway, which was now unlikely to be built.
Carol Barbone, the campaign’s co-ordinator, said: “The Government supported a new runway Stansted to distract opponents when their real intention was to expand Heathrow. This deception has blighted the lives of thousands of people.”
BAA has repeatedly delayed applying for planning permission for the second Stansted runway and new terminal. The Spanish-owned company may submit an application in the spring, but only to raise the airport’s value in the event of a sale.
Government go-ahead for Heathrow expansion
Last Updated: 2:01pm GMT 22/11/2007
Heathrow is set to dramatically grow with a new runway and a sixth terminal, reports Ben Farmer.
The Daily Telegraph
Heathrow airport is set to dramatically grow with a new runway and a sixth terminal under proposals released by the Government.
Transport Secretary Ruth Kelly appeared to pave the way for the controversial expansion of the UK's busiest airport as she said there was "a strong case for introducing further capacity".
However local authorities and residents around Britain's busiest airport reacted angrily and said they doubted her claims the huge expansion could be completed within noise and pollution targets.
In proposals announced for consultation on Thursday, the west London airport would get a third runway 2,400 yards (2,200m) long and a new terminal which would require the destruction of an entire village.
With the expansion Heathrow would be able to handle around 700,000 flights a year by 2030, half as many again as current levels.
Mrs Kelly said the expansion could be made without increasing the overall area of surrounding land which suffers from annoying levels of flight noise.
But opponents said they doubted the Government's calculations and said the case that Britain needed to enlarge Heathrow had not been made.
Wandsworth Council leader Edward Lister, speaking on behalf of the 12 local authorities in the Heathrow area, said: "The Government is asking us to trust that, by the time the runway is built, there will be an entirely new fleet of quieter aircraft flying.
"They are so hell-bent on expansion that they are not stopping to count the environmental costs.
"They will not even take into account their own noise study which they had promised would be used to underpin Government policy."
He went on: "The more flights there are, the more people get annoyed. People living under the flightpath will be outraged by this lack of basic regard for their quality of life.
He added: "Expanding Heathrow may be good business for BAA but that's small comfort to the two million people living around the airport who will pay the environmental price."
Serge Lourie, leader of Richmond Council, accused the Government of having already made up its mind before the consultation had been carried out and said his council was investigating taking legal action.
Unveiling the consultation, which closes in February, Mrs Kelly said: "Heathrow supports 170,000 jobs, billions of pounds of British exports and is our main gateway to the global economy. "But for too long it has operated at nearly full capacity, with relatively minor problems causing severe delays to passengers.
"If nothing changes, Heathrow's status as a world-class airport will be gradually eroded - jobs will be lost and the economy will suffer."
But Greenpeace executive director John Sauven said: "The aviation industry pulls these figures out of the air with no evidence to back up their inflated claims. They want the country to believe that our national economic well-being relies on a mile-long strip of tarmac covering a local village in west London.
He added: "The economic costs of climate change will dwarf any profits business might make from a third runway. Global warming is the greatest threat we face and requires a response that radically changes the way we think about airports."
The document also included proposals that the existing runways are used for both take-off and landings rather than the alternation method currently in use. Opponents say under the changed flightpaths tens of thousands more residents will suffer louder noise.
The plans could mean the number of people in the area where noise is measured at 57 decibel or above, a level classed as an "annoyance", increasing from the 2002 number of 257,800 to 261,900 in 2015, but falling back to 142,200 by 2030.
700 properties would need to be demolished, including the village of Sipson and a number of listed buildings, including four grade I buildings, and 100 acres of green belt land.
Business leaders welcomed the plans.
Richard Lambert, director general of the CBI, said: "Good air links are vital to UK businesses operating in a global economy, and Heathrow, as our national hub, has been constrained for too long. The Government needs to move forward swiftly so that extra capacity at Heathrow can become a reality."
