Afternoon:
15°c
'Boris island' airport is the only option, ministers told
Nicholas Cecil, Deputy Political Editor26 Aug 2011
Ministers were today urged to look again at plans for a "Boris island" Thames Estuary airport as figures showed that London's main airports will be full by 2030.
Former planning minister Nick Raynsford, MP for Greenwich and Woolwich, said France, Holland and Germany all had airport expansion plans. He claimed the Government had a "do-nothing policy", saying: "This is a disaster and unsustainable."
He argued that the "only option" was for a Thames Estuary airport, backed by Boris Johnson, and claimed the Government's sole response to Britain's aviation needs was to push for a high-speed rail line that faced "difficulties on costs and planning" grounds.
Senior Conservative backbencher Bernard Jenkin, who chairs the all-party Thames Estuary Airport Parliamentary Group, said it was "no surprise" that airports were expected to run out of capacity.
He added: "We don't want more runways around London at Gatwick, Stansted or Heathrow.
A Thames Estuary airport is the only viable solution."
Passenger numbers using UK airports will soar from 211 million a year in 2010 to 335 million by 2030 because of an 80 per cent rise in business travel, the Department for Transport says.
It adds: "Forecasts suggest that, without new runways, the three largest London airports will be at capacity by 2030, and all growth beyond 2040 will be at regional airports."
Aviation Minister Theresa Villiers said: "We are committed to developing a new policy framework for aviation which supports economic growth while also reflecting the environmental impacts of flying.
"As part of this process, we are currently seeking views from the industry on the key issues we need to address and these latest forecasts will be valuable in informing this debate."
"We have already announced proposals to reform the economic regulation of our major airports - providing a regime in which the passenger comes first."
Reader views (29)
It's disappointing hearing of Boris Island raising its ugly head again. After Boris has championed so many good, green projects - cycle hire, electric cars, tree planting - he is now ready to scupper all his carbon savings by laying out the tarmac in the Estuary. Surely he realizes that a new airport would encourage even more people to take to the skies. Now's supposed to be the time to start cutting down on air travel, not boosting it. At least let's level it off. With climate change on the march, what more incentive do we need?
- John Repsch, Mortlake, 31/08/2011 23:26
Report abuse
I thought the whole point behind Stansted was the potential for expansion.
- John, Battersea, 30/08/2011 16:50
Report abuse
Remember years ago when the new airport and docks were going to be on Maplin Sands, after spending a fortune, the government of the day chickened out.
- shallotman, Basildon, 30/08/2011 09:28
Report abuse
Mayor Boris will be history in a few months so will be this estuary airport nonsense - well where will the workers at this airport live?
The simple solution is a 2nd runway at either Gatwick or Stanstead whhich would cost a fraction that Boris "the waster" fantasy island would cost!!
The reality is if we ont do something soon airlines will move to airports on the continent and you will soon find that instead of using a London airport you will have to get to Amsterdam or Paris for your trans-continental flight!!!
- Melvyn Windebank, Canvey Island, Essex, 29/08/2011 17:08
Report abuse
I think airplanes in and out and over the UK should all be banned
to protect our safety, environment and the air we breath.
- albert hall, hove england, 28/08/2011 16:43
Report abuse
Boris's original idea was to have an offshore airport, built on sandbanks in the Thames Estuary. These are not breeding grounds for birds, as they are covered by the tides twice a day.
If people are opposed to an increase in air flights, then they should say so - along with their reasoning.
- Windsorian, UK, 28/08/2011 08:32
Report abuse
RSPB.....if you were the NSPCC instead, Joe Public might take you seriously.....
In reality every developed area whether it be to build homes or any other structure etc has environmental consequences......but the need to satisfy "human" contentment and prosperity will always overcome these challanges
The birds natural instinct to survive will force them to re-locate....with the UK being an Island, they should not have to migrate too far.....
As for the Internationally protected Marshes.....with climate change causing coastal sqeeze, the birds will have to migrate to survive sooner or later anyway, as the marshes will cease to exist in years to come....JAYBEE
- jaybee, Medway..Kent, 28/08/2011 06:58
Report abuse
Still flogging the same dead horse then Boris!
We are appalled that the Mayor of London has yet again seen fit to raise the spectre of an airport in the Thames Estuary. We have been here before and find it sad that Boris and his team are so ill-informed about the Thames Estuary and its internationally protected wildlife habitats. Perhaps Boris should consult his father, environmentalist Stanley Johnson, who as an MEP and vicechairman of the European Parliament Environment Committee was involved in most of the pioneering EU conservation laws such as the key directives on Habitats and Birds
- Friends of the North Kent Marshes, North Kent, 27/08/2011 22:00
Report abuse
Still flogging the same dead horse then Boris!
We are appalled that the Mayor of London has yet again seen fit to raise the spectre of an airport in the Thames Estuary. We have been here before and find it sad that Boris and his team are so ill-informed about the Thames Estuary and its internationally protected wildlife habitats. Perhaps Boris should consult his father, environmentalist Stanley Johnson, who as an MEP and vicechairman of the European Parliament Environment Committee was involved in most of the pioneering EU conservation laws such as the key directives on Habitats and Birds
- Friends of the North Kent Marshes, North Kent, 27/08/2011 21:40
Report abuse
Alongside the RSPB and a broad coalition of millions, we 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. It would potentially be the single biggest piece of environmental vandalism ever perpetrated in the UK.
Friends of the North Kent Marshes
- Friends of the North Kent Marshes, North Kent, 27/08/2011 21:35
Report abuse
THAMES ESTUARY AIRPORT.....
UK AIRPORT EXPANSION IS VITAL FOR THE UK ECONOMY TO PROSPER....
LET BORIS LEAD THE WAY TO CREATE A LONG TERM SUSTAINABLE UK AVIATION INDUSTRY....
TO BENCHMARK "BRITISH" INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY, CREATIVE DESIGN AND EXTREME ENGINEERING.....JAYBEE
- jaybee, Medway..Kent, 27/08/2011 20:14
Report abuse
THAMES ESTUARY AIRPORT......UK AVIATION EXPANSION IS VITAL FOR THE UK ECONOMY TO PROSPER.....
LET BORIS LEAD THE WAY TO CREATE A LONG TERM UK SUSTAINABLE AVIATION INDUSTRY.....
TO BENCHMARK "BRITISH" INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY, CREATIVE DESIGN AND EXTREME ENGINEERING....JAYBEE
- jaybee, Medway..Kent, 27/08/2011 20:05
Report abuse
Very sensible idea. Cancel HS2, huge expenditure for limited gain. Construct a 24hr, four runway airport to the east of london. Link it to CTRL/HS1 and establish a fast ferry service into london and canary wharf. The whole thing could be funded by closing heathrow to building several thousand new houses within an easy commute to London.
The project would take 20 years but would be a huge stimulus to the economy, improve the quality of lives of millions, reduce pollution, reduce the chronic shortage of housing in SE england while establishing the UK at the forefront of international aviation.
Only these kinds of bold steps will move us forward as a country
- The truth, London, 27/08/2011 17:16
Report abuse
It seems to me you could utilize the slum wasteland already in East London - Tower Hamlets. By doing this you could avoid any disturbance to the Thames Estuary wildlife.
- Pete, Northumberland/Iraq, 27/08/2011 11:03
Report abuse
We loss the race years ago to Frankfurt, Europe's major hub! It how has four runways operating, and all the big aircraft can land. Little England, always a step behind reality.
- Fredrick, London, 27/08/2011 09:50
Report abuse
Why not use Manston?
- Frank, BONCATH, WALES, 27/08/2011 09:06
Report abuse
I'm confused.
According to They Work For You, Nick Raynsford MP "voted moderately for laws to stop climate change".
According to this, he's actively campaigning in favour of a new - and extra - London airport that will accelerate climate change.
Has Nick changed his mind over the environment or was he never that sincere in his concern? Read on.
Apparently as well as being paid to represent the good people of Greenwich & Woolwich, he has a number of outside interests. One is being vice-chairman of the Construction Industry Council, for which he's been paid over £29,000 since May last year for 169 hours of "work" - that's £171 an hour. Given his pro-Boris island statements, I'd say they're getting good value for money.
- Arfur Towcrate, Staffycher, 26/08/2011 20:02
Report abuse
I'd like to see the graph projecting this increase: did it also project the 20% DROP in traffic through Stansted over the last three years, I wonder? Or is the theory to take priority over the reality?
John Smith, London EUSSR is spot-on. When already you can have face-face-communication anywhere in the world with Skype and a £10 webcam, in your own home, FREE, you can surely settle 90% of business issues in less time than it takes to order the plane ticket for a meeting, let alone get to the airport.
- mdj e10, london uk, 26/08/2011 17:29
Report abuse
Once Boris has organised this airport could you move him down there please.
- Davey_Buoy, Chertsey, 26/08/2011 17:16
Report abuse
By 2030 the logic and harsh arithmetic judgements of the and the Hubbert Curves will have caused air travel to shrink - not to expand.
Think again ....
- Anglo, The Heart of England, 26/08/2011 16:43
Report abuse
I backed a Thames estuary airport three decades ago when it came up and they looked at Maplin sands, an estuary airport will open up a whole new business on the Thames, fast access to London using the river so taking traffic away from the roads, drop off points along the river and access to the M25 and all roads off of it, fast coastal sea transport up the east coast to reach big cities much quicker, to me it always was a win win and the best thing for future air travel in the UK.
- James, Grays, 26/08/2011 16:24
Report abuse
"Passenger numbers using UK airports will soar from 211 million a year in 2010 to 335 million by 2030 because of an 80 per cent rise in business travel, the Department for Transport says"
More hot air from the DfT!
By 2030 communications will be so incredibly advanced, to make most business travel redundant, let alone increase it by 80%.
Then, if green taxes and the cost of oil continue to go up in leaps and bounds, flying will only be affordable by Victoria Beckham and by the politicians.
Boris island airport is a duff idea.
- John Smith, London, EUSSR, 26/08/2011 15:41
Report abuse
Superb idea. It works really well with the Hong Kong airport rather than the dreadful old one they used to have. WHY NOT?
- suz, surrey, 26/08/2011 12:32
Well Sue, for one Suz, if Boris says it will cost 40billion we can rest assured it will be nearer 60 billion. Large parts of the Thames Estuary are protected as bird sanctury's ..unlike Surrey, and thirdly, I wouldnt believe any statistics the Government or Boris tell us..just look what they said about immigration...there numbers never stack up!
- Glen, Dartford Kent, 26/08/2011 14:29
Report abuse
Why not, suz of surrey?
Erm, the SS Richard Montgomery, that's why not.
Cough, cough, ministers. Try solving the ever so small problem of the SS Richard Montgomery first.
While you are doing that, keep it secret in case the terrorists hear about it.
I cannot believe these island airport enthusiasts are so clueless of the SS Richard Montgomery. That's a far far bigger problem than a few wild birds flying into engines.
- Seymour Bwana And His Stick That Spoke Thunder., Surrey, 26/08/2011 13:59
Report abuse
Far easier would be to build a third runway at Heathrow, or another runway at Gatwick. Failing that, Boris island might make sense, but what options such as Maplin Sands and Isle of Grain etc? If we do build out more airports to the south east of London then we'd need to upgrade the roads as not everybody is going to want to take the train. Surely this also means we finally need to upgrade the South Circular as part of this plan?
- H Morgan, London, 26/08/2011 13:55
Report abuse
As long as our airports meet UK needs, what does it matter that France and Germany have bigger ones? People and cargo should fly from the most logical place, whether that's the UK or not.
- Wispy Wonder, London, 26/08/2011 13:08
Report abuse
More growth, more traffic, more pollution, more noise, more, more, more. How about less, less and less. Enough is enough.
- Had Enough, London, 26/08/2011 13:06
Report abuse
Wonder where Foggy got this idea from, surely it's not his, IS IT.........
- John Hardon, Watford Herts, 26/08/2011 12:46
Report abuse
Superb idea. It works really well with the Hong Kong airport rather than the dreadful old one they used to have. WHY NOT?
- suz, surrey, 26/08/2011 12:32
Report abuse
