Afternoon:
13°c
Do we need the third runway?
Evening Standard15.01.09
NO, says Zac Goldsmith, Tory Parliamentary candidate for Richmond Park
Heathrow's third runway is the wrong answer to the wrong question, accompanied by the usual empty promises about "environmental tests".
It's an airport, and expansion will lead to a huge increase in flights and emissions. Whatever green promises are made should be taken with a huge big pinch of salt.
But what should infuriate even those for whom climate change is still just a possibility, is the manner in which this decision has been reached.
Residents beneath the flight path remember all too well the BAA chairman's promise in 1999 that: "Terminal 5 will not lead to a third runway", and the Government's condition that flight numbers would be capped at 480,000 per year, a figure that will be dwarfed as a result of the decision today. In addition to the lies and sham consultations, the Government's economic case for expansion is hopelessly flawed. It believes the net benefit willbe in the region of £5billion over 70 years. Even if that's true, it works out at £70 million a year, or just £35 per person living beneath the flight path.
If the Government had genuinely set out to find the best way to connect Britain, it would not have approved the expansion.
Instead, it would have planned a roll-out of high-speed rail which would create jobs and provide people with an alternative to short-haul flying.
YES, says Willie Walsh, chief executive of BA
IN these times of economic gloom the approval of Heathrow's third runway is tremendous news for London's long-term interests. You cannot be the world's business capital if you have trouble connecting with the world.
For years the lack of capacity at our national hub airport has squeezed the ability of London firms to fly directly to all parts of the globe to meet customers, attract investment, win contracts and secure jobs here.
Heathrow has seen its destinations fall from 227 in 1990 to just over 180 today. The multi-runway hubs of our closest rivals in Europe, meanwhile, have expanded their reach.
And Heathrow is not just another London airport. It has around 80 per cent of scheduled long-haul flights out of the UK, including 60 routes not flown from other British airports. It can offer this range of destinations only because of the flows of transfer passengers who make the routes financially viable.
It is six years since the Government proposed a third runway. Every consideration has been weighed meticulously. Safeguards on climate change, noise and air quality are rigorous, genuine and will be effective.
Let's put the debate behind us and show common purpose to create the environmentally sustainable, world-class hub airport that London and Britain need and deserve.
Reader views (5)
Heathrow does NOT need a third runway - end of!
What the New Labour government is doing is depriving the regions of extra jobs and the prosperity that accompanies them.
Why Heathrow? Because it's near London and that's where our government's HQ is based! So which current Cabinet Ministers are going to get Chairmanships, Directorships and/or plum Consultancy positions on the back of this latest ridiculous government decision?
Call the General Election now Crash Gordon, I dare you!
- Fraser, Telford Park
We need it and the people who live near the Airport knew what the environment would be when they moved there, I know as I lived in Hounslow for years always knowing we were in the flight path which made house prices cheaper, thats why we moved there from Shepherds Bush.
Without it Skipol and Frankfurt will dominate the European hubs as they are doing now.
It is for the National good not just the local minority unfortunately in the flight path but then again they have the choice as I did and move.
- John, London UK
So we once again have to deal with an inept government who can only listen to the bleatings of the aviation industry.
Hoon and all the others who support his stance should be ashamed of themselves.
To expand Heathrow is farcical and does little to address the issue of overheating the economy to the west of London.
As for the issue of jobs why is it that every time expansion at an airport inparticular Heathrow is mentioned jobs are threatened or the announcement of new short term jobs is used as a weapon.
The answer is clearly they have no support.
The answer is simple if capacity is to be met then it should be met at a state of the art airport and not the ridiculous carbuncle that Heathrow has become.
Quite simply built it in the Thames estaury and not destroy peoples homes and livelyhoods.
- Peter Black, Seaham ,County Durham
Once again we see a Labour government taxing the "hard working families" and wasting the money spent. Heathrow is a convenient airport to extend but by no means the only one available. Have a look at a map of southeast England, there are plenty of others to choose from. BA says that the number of destinations served directly has come down. Yes it has because BA cannot/will not fly to the regios of the UK from Heathrow because they can make more money from flying to other destinations.
London is not the centre of the commrcial world any more thanks to the gross misregulation of the banking system.
- Colin Macpherson, Gramat France
Such problems would not arise if Britain were to follow the example of the Hong Kong and China Government.
There they have built an Internationally famous Airport off of Hong Kong's coast line on rubbish waste from main land China.
If China can be successful in building such a project that has increased thier land mass which in turn has protected their coastline and allowed them to build and sell Mufti Million Pound Flats and Condos with marinas so should Britain.
We have a waste disposal problem so we are all told, so why not combine the two and Turn Junk into Billion Pound land Space?
New Labour has no respect for the Countryside or anything else, all they do is waste our resources all at ‘TaxPayers Expense’ I must add. The constant increases in Taxes and more red tape laws, are also playing a major roll in crippling Businesses in the UK.
Never in History has a Chancellor had so much money, spent so much money, and gained nothing but near bankruptcy, he is an absolute disgrace.
- Carl Barron, Christchurch, Dorset
