Morning:
8°c
Comment: listen to London not BA and BAA
Evening Standard21 May 2008
Today's verdict from the Sustainability Commission that the costs and benefits of aviation expansion are not properly understood adds significantly to the Government's difficulties in planning airport capacity. As celebrities and other mothers demonstrated outside Parliament against the increased noise, air pollution and CO2 emissions a third runway would bring at Heathrow, the Commission's report raises serious doubts about the arguments for expansion.
There is no doubt that Heathrow is under huge strain. This has been made worse by the bungled opening of Terminal Five and the heavy debts of the airport's owner, Ferrovial. Last month the Competition Commission said that BAA's near-monopoly over airports in the South-East, including Gatwick and Stansted as well as Heathrow, might need to end. At the same time, former BA chief executive Bob Ayling has criticised BA's emphasis on using Heathrow as a hub for transfer passengers. These passengers, who account for more than a third of traffic, help BA keep its routes busy but never leave the airport, so their contribution to Britain's wider economy is minimal. The mayoral candidates who all came out against a third runway and the London councils and MPs who resist expansion do not see why their residents should suffer from intolerable noise and traffic levels for the sake of travellers who do nothing for the British economy - or of leisure travellers who take their holiday spending abroad.
The economic case for a third runway has not been proven. It is time for Transport Secretary Ruth Kelly, who appears in an Evening Standard debate tomorrow night on airport expansion to show that she can think creatively about how air traffic can be redistributed around the South-East's airports following a break-up of BAA. Making Heathrow the premiumpriced choice for direct business travellers to and from Britain, rather than a hub for transfer passengers, could free up capacity there while avoiding the political costs of a third runway or runway alternation. Exposure of BAA's manipulation of Department of Transport air and noise pollution figures has increased public suspicion. Ms Kelly must show she cares about protecting Londoners from environmental damage - and not just about what BA and BAA want.
