Tonight:
4°c
GATWICK airport is set for a multi-million-pound makeover after it was sold today for £1.5billion.
The new owners are planning to challenge Heathrow for holiday makers with a major overhaul of services and new routes to long-haul destinations.
Under the new plans Global Infrastructure Partners are also set to call for a second runway, increasing flight capacity by 40 per cent.
Gatwick, which handles 32million passengers every year, is the busiest single-runway airport in the world. The new moves would take the airport to a point where it would handle 45million passengers a year.
Under an agreement with residents living near Gatwick, a new runway cannot be built at the airport until 2019.
However, given long planning lead times, it is understood the airport's new owner will begin the planning process now to deliver a new runway as soon after 2019 as possible.
That will cause a storm of protest across the South, from householders blighted by more airline noise to environmentalists attempting to curtail the carbon-intensive activities of the aviation industry.
The head of the Gatwick area's conservation group said today that the new owners must not “ride roughshod” over local concerns.
Brendon Sewill, chairman of the Gatwick Area Conservation Campaign, said there were fears that “a faceless international consortium will squeeze every pound it can out of the airport rather than addressing local worries”.
Global Infrastructure Partners is a joint venture between the American conglomerate General Electric and the international bank Credit Suisse.
GIP bought the business trafficoriented London City Airport in Docklands for £700 million two years ago. It is understood GIP plans to shake up Gatwick and make it the airport of choice for holidaymakers by keeping its biggest airline, easyJet, and all the European package tour airlines but also developing more far-flung international destinations.
Gatwick was put up for sale by Spanish-owned BAA after the Competition Commission ruled its ownership of Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted gave it too much market power. It is challenging a ruling that it must also sell Stansted and one of either Edinburgh or Glasgow airports.
“Gatwick and its people have long been a central part of BAA,” said BAA chief executive Colin Matthews.
“But BAA is changing and today's announcement marks a new beginning for both Gatwick and BAA. BAA will focus on improving Heathrow and our other airports.”
Reader views (9)
I am afraid Gatwick has been bought by the worst possible buyer.
At London City Airport we are familiar with Global Infrastructure Partners (GIP). As a taste of what to expect:
London City Airport has not carried out Noise Monitoring for the last 8 years and has NEVER been prosecuted by Newham Council. Why is that?. This has saved the airport millions in sound insulation of homes as the noise figures is 8 years old.
The airport has broken its promise not to expand. Unlike say Gatwick which is out of town, London City Airport is surrounded by houses and schools as it is in a residential. School children will have to contend with 1 flight every 90 seconds and schools results around the airport are some of the worst.
London City Airport even got Boris Johnson to support expansion, even though Boris is against expansion at Heathrow due to noise.
London City Airport has already costs £2bn in regeneration and that does not even include the cost of mitigating against flood risk from Climate Change.
You can read more about dealings with London City Airport in the Fight the Flight web site which is residents campaign group opposed to expansion at London City Airprt.
- W.L., London, 23/10/2009 03:20
Report abuse
Duncan and Jade, apart from the revolting feelings your disregard for others engenders in me (Heathrow causes premature death, is a significant contributor to asthma rates in CHILDREN and makes life for 2 million people a misery due to NOISE)- All of this backed up by Government or World Health Organisation findings, the truth is only UK plc has allowed its airports to be sighted where it is patently absurd to site any business with growth plans. Heathrow is not in a sustainable location, unless you wish to concrete over most of West London and turn The Thams Valley into a noise canyon - Duncan 'no sympathy' i guess you are happy with that. Jade LHR could and should be relocated as its competition already has done - Charles de Gualle, Schipol and Frankfurt all relocated out of the urban sprawl to support growth and REDUCE human misery. Its only in UK plc that this hateful cavalier attitude to others (I am glad I do not know either of you personally) finds resonance. Heathrow is 30 years of backsliding at the hands of politicians, ugly compromise and short term event horizons. If this country wants to compete it needs NEW facilities - not lipstick on a pig. One last question Duncan/jade, when an aircraft does fall out of the sky and land on an area of the most densley populated place in Europe, will you both along with Willie, BAA, Hoon, Kelly, Brown and Solely - will you all go to proison on manslaughter charges?
- Christian Ball, London, UK, 21/10/2009 13:31
Report abuse
Jade, how kind your words are!
I chose to live about 12 miles from Gatwick in 1987 because I knew that a second runway could not be planned until 2019.
It is noisy at 12 miles away when they change the landing pattern
So I will join all those who try and stop another runway...are you aware that nearby is Biggin Hill and Redhill aerodrome, the sky is very busy down here, yes I am a NIMBY
Perhaps solve this by four or five runways at Heathrow and expand City airport..better still build two more airports in London, one South and One North...not a nice thought is it Jade
- Andy, surrey, 21/10/2009 12:16
Report abuse
And Boris still wastes more money on the Sheppey project. The runways are and always were going in at Heathrow and Gatwick.
They might upset the imcumbent Tory voters in Richmond Windsor and Crawley but I'm afraid thats just tough we've got the Channel tunnel rail link and we have to pay for that as well. At least you won't get charged for the new runways.
You chose to live near an airport no sympathy for you
- Duncan, Kent, 21/10/2009 12:14
Report abuse
Sorry those who 'choose’ to live in the surrounds of an Airport & cannot expect it to be nice & quiet. Airports are very important to this country & expansion is necessary, I hope planning permission is granted ASAP for that second runway.
- Jade, London, 21/10/2009 11:22
Report abuse
What difference will it make to passengers? None. Gatwick is and will remain an over priced inadequate pigsty.
- Thomas, London, 21/10/2009 09:59
Report abuse
Having just arrived again for my weekly experience with Heathrow - I would have said the least our weak government could have done is take over Heathrow "airport". It truly is a joke and especially Terminal 5 with the worst service with them loitering around and the long marches through endless corridors.
- Steveo, London NW1, 21/10/2009 09:55
Report abuse
What GIP have done at London city Airport is push bigger and bigger jets down the runway is a desperate bid to make profit. They have also increased massively the security bill to the taxpayer which now stands at £5.5 million up £3 million since they took over.
Manchester Airport would have been the best choice. Profits would have stayed in the UK as would have the taxes and investment. Now GIP will move the taxes and profits to their offshore accounts.
- Darren, Newham, 21/10/2009 09:02
Report abuse
What actually do the British own? Our original Gas, water, electric, telephone, car manufacturers, transport and postal services. All this has been bought by overseas companies. What have we left?
- Lee, middlesex, 21/10/2009 07:57
Report abuse
