Tonight:
4°c
Heathrow 'needs rail links as well as third runway'
Dick Murray, Transport Editor23 Oct 2008
Airport owner BAA today launched an ambitious campaign for a third runway at Heathrow and a high-speed rail network across Britain.
A government decision on the airport, expected to back a third runway, could be announced next month.
But BAA fears environmental and financial concerns might see ministers back away from expansion and opt for allowing more flights from the existing runways.
The Conservatives have already come out against a third runway. Instead, they support a high-speed rail link so Heathrow passengers can easily reach other parts of the country.
But BAA says that improving rail services without adding a new runway would prove a "false and dangerous" decision which would leave Britain at a severe disadvantage.
At a conference BAA urged the rail industry to work with the aviation sector to generate a "once-in-a- generation opportunity to create a world-leading air and transport hub at Heathrow". BAA said its aim is for a "third runway built within strict environmental limits and a high-speed rail network that will connect the UK's hub airport with every major centre of population across the country".
Stuart Condie, BAA's director of planning and surface access, said: "Our vision is simple; it is one where, in the next decade, a three-runway Heathrow airport strengthens the UK's connections with global markets, particularly those in China and India."
He admitted it was an "ambitious plan, but it is achievable and sustainable and the work to bring each strand together hopefully starts today".
Mr Condie highlighted Paris and Frankfurt, which have both developed high-speed rail links and have more runways than Heathrow.
"Choosing rail capacity over airport expansion, or air over rail for that matter, is a false and dangerous choice that will leave the UK at a competitive disadvantage at precisely the wrong time," he said.
"It is widely accepted that investment in strategic infrastructure projects is a fundamental element of the country's long-term economic recovery package and to force choices where the answer is clearly both runway three and high-speed rail is at best short-sighted."
The Government is still "considering" the future of Heathrow. It has had to contend with highly-organised opposition to expansion from environmental groups, councils and residents. They oppose both a third runway and more frequent landings.
Last month the Conservatives unveiled plans for a 190mph rail link between Heathrow and Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds.
Reader views (16)
Yes Yes Yes Oui Oui Oui Ja Ja Ja Infrastructure is key. The UK needs both a new runway and a comprehensive high speed rail network linking Heathrow with other large population centres in the UK and continental Europe. You can't force people to take trains but you can offer an alternative so that as a nation we invest in our rail infrastructure for shorter haul National and some European journeys and our airport infrastructure for longer haul European and intercontinental travel. Look at what the French have done. They are copying the things that we have done well such as a more flexible economy, we should look at the things they have done well and follow suit. If not we are destined for long term decline.
- Julian Rolfe, Paris, France, 22/12/2008 12:35
Report abuse
How laughable that a private organisation thinks that it can persuade us that a massive grab for passengers is an 'eco-policy'! We don't want a high-speed link to Heathrow, thanks. We have Manchester down the road for our long-haul, a local airport for European travel, and if we ever feel an urge to go to that London, we just go get our heads tested and save ourselves the £150.
I feel sorry for London in how things have turned out, but we want an east-west high speed link, not one heading south sorry chaps.
- James, Liverpool, 27/10/2008 12:23
Report abuse
Carol if you want a quiet life I wouldn't have thought London was the best place for that, at least it wasn't when I lived there.
- Isabel, woking, 24/10/2008 15:09
Report abuse
Let's make London, within the M25, a no fly zone altogether. That would allow everyone to get a decent night's sleep and be able to sit in their gardens and chat to their friends. The development of children is already adversely affected by constant noise and lack of sleep, and adults are additionally stressed by it. It's about time the human rights of Londoners to a quiet life are given priority over nebulous business claims.
This should be a condition of any further development of Heathrow. Planes must fly immediately beyond the zone and go ROUND London instead of over it. This would also be a major safety factor - no potential crashes from overcrowded skies.
- Carol,, London, UK., 24/10/2008 02:41
Report abuse
What Heathrow needs first is for it to clean its act up first. The service and standards at this so-called airport - especially the "new" terminal 5 - are very poor. It brings more shame on the UK and its government.
- Jacqueline, Hampstead, London., 23/10/2008 21:55
Report abuse
This isn't about need, it's about want. "Heathrow" doesn't "need" anything. It's owners "want" the thumbs up to wreck West London to increase their profits. They should be told to push off (or something similar).
- Austen, London, UK., 23/10/2008 20:34
Report abuse
One problem people forget about BOJO's estuary airport is FOG which tends to occur on coastal areas in winter.
Besides which why build an airport where relatively few people live and therefore increase the number of journeys to reach the airport, not the most greenest solution.
- Melvyn Windebank, Canvey Island, Essex., 23/10/2008 19:55
Report abuse
More lies the rich get richer and the working class lose their homes, They only want the runway because that's the money earner for them they don't care about families I should know.
- Maxine Payne, Sipson Village, West Drayton ( The proposed village to be demolished at Heathrow by BAA ), 23/10/2008 19:50
Report abuse
Heathrow is a pig's breakfast of bad planning over many years. As the saying goes "you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear". Stop patching-up the Heathrow site and develop a world beating airport in the Thames Estuary.
- David James, London, UK., 23/10/2008 18:07
Report abuse
There is absolutely no need for more runways at Heathrow.
Build an effective, affordable high-speed rail network with countrywide links direct from the airport. (i.e. not via the London termini)
Prohibit any domestic flights to points south of Glasgow / Edinburgh.
Move all freight operations to one or more of the under-utilised airports along the M1/M6 corridor.
Move all VIP flights (yes, even the likes of George Dubya) to Northolt, Brize Norton or Lakenheath.
Problem solved - and billions saved.
- Mike, Canada, 23/10/2008 15:41
Report abuse
Just build it.From where I'm sitting every person from all over the world seems to be living here and reaping the benefits (quite literally)so get on with it and keep 'em coming.
I'd be quite happy to flatten this godforsaken place and turn it into a ghetto personally.
What am I talking about,it already is.
- Steve, London, 23/10/2008 14:50
Report abuse
The on-going dithering about Heathrow and third runway or otherwise is a further sad example of the lack or real vision in this country. It is surely best once and for all to go ahead with the London Mayor's plan for a Thames Estuary new airport site with full rail capacity too; then close Heathrow and turn into a prime housing/industrial site with good trasnport links.
- Bernard Lockett, Folkestone, Kent., 23/10/2008 14:40
Report abuse
Lets just concrete over this country. We are just building things to keep the econmy/jobs moving. White elephants spring to mind
- Grim Reaper, Hell, 23/10/2008 13:29
Report abuse
World class transport hub? You know what they do at hubs? Someone in country A wants to go to country C so they stop for 4 hours in an airport at Country B(ritain) and spend lots of money in the airport shops.
Don't believe for a minute this is anything to do with boosting the UK economy this is about boosting the Spanish owned BAA's profits.
- Ian, London, 23/10/2008 12:12
Report abuse
Paris and Frankfurt airports are relatively in the middle of nowhere and do not impose aircraft noise on surrounding residents.
Forget more runways; forget rail links. Close Heathrow down. Sell the land and use the profits to build Boris Island in the Thames Estuary.
- Nobby Clark, Perth, Scotland, 23/10/2008 11:34
Report abuse
Why not start by building a rail link to Northolt? Then there is no need to build a 3rd runway, it already exist.
- Bill Jones, Reading, UK, 23/10/2008 11:18
Report abuse
