Morning:
10°c
Boris's 'fantasy island' not credible option, says minister
16 Jan 2009BORIS JOHNSON'S plan to build an alternative airport in the Thames Estuary was "not a credible option", Lord Adonis said.
"The problem there is we're starting from where we are. Immediately post-war it would have been very sensible to build an airport in the Thames Estuary. Indeed all the way through until the Seventies this was regarded as a credible option."
He revealed the Government consulted on the idea, dubbed "fantasy island" by Mr Johnson's critics, in 2003 but it had been "heavily" recommended against because of the cost, risk of bird strike and the impact on existing job and the environment.
Reader views (9)
We have Kent int airport - why not use that. The Channel rail link passes that.
If we were to build an island surely the debris from the tunelling of cross-rail would be put to good use.
The expansion of LHW is in BAA/BA's interest. Developing another airport would be in London's UK economic interest.
The consultation was a sham. The Government Report indicating that people didn't suddenly get annoyed by 52db of noise but rather got more annoyed as the noise increased was buried. Most people don't realize they will be on the new flight paths.
We have a chance to build something for the future rather than compound a mistake.
Surely we have found privitising public utilities that lead to a monopoly in private hands is worse for the UK e.g. BAA and Railtrack.
Failing this can we pay BAA to loby Government for our NHS - after all they get what they want when they want it.
- Terry, wandsworth, London, 19/01/2009 01:30
Report abuse
'Bird Strike" - Yeah! This is what BAA and their mates are thinking about 
They know it's rubbish.
Their concern is entirely PROFIT PROFIT PROFIT - I wonder if their Boards of Directors are also "working for" South West Trains?
And as for environmental vandalism - has Miss Moore considered the planes' fumes that are going to be affecting human health when Heathrow is extended?
Birds! Birds? Far too many already - and they are not People. They are birds. Vile mindless creatures that make us look - well - humane. There will always be too many of the damn things.
There are zilllions of these birds in Siberia, northern Canada and all the wastelands of the earth. A few less will be no catastrophe.
- Alex McKenna, Manchester, 17/01/2009 23:55
Report abuse
'Fantasy Island' more like 'Bird Strike International'
- david, London UK, 17/01/2009 11:39
Report abuse
There are plenty of large airports near the sea. Or in it.
They carry on with extremely rare bird problems.
Anyway - I'm sure there are lots of ways to get rid of the stupid things.
The day sea-birds take priority over human beings is the day we deserve to be replaced as major species on the evolutionary ladder.
They could replace Heathrow - one runway at a time - with additional runways at Manston if required - until it was a little rump and could be sold off for housing. With excellent railway connections!
- Alex McKenna, Manchester, 16/01/2009 22:23
Report abuse
Alongside the RSPB, Friends of the North Kent Marshes are wholly opposed to the construction of an airport anywhere in the Thames Estuary because of the immense damage it would cause to the area’s internationally important wildlife and the wider environment.The whole issue was exhaustively investigated between 2002 and 2005 in the Government’s Aviation White Paper. All the key players, including the aviation industry, contributed. The idea of an airport in the Thames Estuary was conclusively ruled out and upheld by the High Court. In addition to the unprecedented environmental damage and the resulting massive legal implications, the investigation found that an estuary airport did not make sense economically, would not meet the requirements of the aviation industry and presented a significantly higher risk of ‘bird strike’ than at any other major airport in the UK evenEven with an aggressive bird hazard management programme (i.e. shooting or scaring the birds away), the bird strike hazard would be up to 12 times higher than at any other major UK airport. The governments own birdstrike hazard report from the 2003 SERAS study stated that "It is difficult to envisage a more problematic site anywhere in the UK'' It would potentially be the single biggest piece of environmental vandalism ever perpetrated in the UK
- gill moore, Cliffe Kent, 16/01/2009 21:32
Report abuse
Why should there be a "fantasy island" in the Thames Estuary? It wouldn't be much of a fantasy for the birds who flock there. It would be a nightmare, apart from the actual fact that birds can bring planes down. Haven't you all read the news today - plane brought down by birdstrike in Hudson River, USA? And - destroying the natural beauty of Cliffe in Kent (which is where your "fantasy airport" is proposed by Boris (who won't get my vote again) would be sheer vandalism. I value all the creatures of creation and value the fewer and fewer places that humans are leaving for them in the world. Aren't there enough airports for goodness sake with the massive pollution, destruction and noise they all cause? Or does this make no sense at all to 'plane travellers' who can only see what they themselves want - more and more inhalation of poisoned air in plane cabins, more and more noise, more and more pollution - and to hell with everyone and everything else. And, Brown, where's your 'green' agenda now? Just hogswash, like everything else you do and say!
- Judith C, London, England, 16/01/2009 15:01
Report abuse
There is a huge runway at Alconbury just short trip from London on the A1 that could be used - or maybe this is just too easy and obvious.
- Rob, Rochester, 16/01/2009 14:05
Report abuse
Oh, but in fairness to Lord Adonis, he can't be expected to keep up with things that have happened since 1980.
That's not his way.
- Matt, Telford UK, 16/01/2009 12:10
Report abuse
Hong Kong, Osaka, Nagoya, Seoul all have "fantasy islands" that were built in the 1990s. What a same that England, the birthplace of the industrial revolution is so weak and poor that it cannot even imagine an off shore airport.
- Sam, London, 16/01/2009 11:27
Report abuse
