A monopoly that should never have existed

The airports operator should never have been allowed to be privatised as a monopoly owning London's three main airports. An opportunity that was lost in the selloff scramble of the late Eighties is finally being realised.

In recommending that Gatwick and Stansted are effectively to be put into separate ownership, the commission has gone to the other extreme - from no competition at all to an open playing field in one fell swoop. The trouble, however, is that it will by no means be level.

It's all very well hiving off the other airports in the expectation that the washrooms will be cleaner and the conveyor belts will run more smoothly, but that doesn't address the heart of the problem. While Heathrow continues to be so much bigger - and may even be allowed to expand - London's air transport will still be dominated by one airport.

Gatwick and Stansted must be encouraged to match Heathrow in terms of size and usage. Unless that happens, Heathrow will carry on being the centre of choice for the major scheduled airlines and will remain the international hub, while Gatwick and Stansted will still be also-rans - better run and managed but little more than air charter terminals. In effect, Heathrow's preeminence will be assured.

That cannot be the result that the commission envisages. But on its own, the break-up of BAA is not enough. What is required is a wholesale restructuring of London's air services and a recognition that planning laws at Gatwick and Stansted need to be relaxed. That is bound to lead to major disputes and upset the inhabitants of Essex and Sussex.

Without further change, the pro-Heathrow lobby will be able to cling to the argument that the airport is the only one capable of serving the needs of the economy, the UK airport that any airline worth its salt wants to use. That isn't competition - so, welcome as it is, the decision of the commission can only be regarded as a first step.