Decision on London Heathrow Airport third runway put off until at least summer 2016
David Cameron has delayed the decision on whether to allow a third runway at Heathrow airport until summer 2016 over environmental concerns.
The government said it was supporting more airport capacity in the south-east by 2030, as recommended by the Airports Commission. However, it delivered a setback to Heathrow’s hopes of building a third runway by neglecting to mention the airport by name in its statement and making clear other viable options – such as expansion at Gatwick – were still on the table.
Although the delay was widely expected, Cameron immediately faced fury from business groups and accusations from Labour that he had ducked a difficult decision on infrastructure to help the chances of Zac Goldsmith, the Tory London mayoral candidate, who is a fierce opponent of Heathrow expansion.
The British Chamber of Commerce said it was “gutless”, while the CBI group for big business called the decision “deeply disappointing”.
Sadiq Khan, the Labour London mayoral candidate, said the Tories were “kicking the decision into the long grass to avoid embarrassing” Goldsmith.
The prime minister had previously indicated there would be a final decision before the end of this year, after the Airports Commission led by Howard Davies recommended a third runway at Heathrow.
But more recently, the Commons environmental audit committee produced a parliamentary report saying final approval should not be granted until the airport demonstrated it could meet key environmental conditions on climate change, air quality and noise. It warned that a failure to deal with environmental concerns could lay the scheme open to legal challenge.
The new statement from the government, released after a meeting of the airports subcommittee, stressed the need for further environmental work, including testing the Airports Commission’s air quality analysis using the latest predicted concentrations of nitrogen dioxide.
Those present at the meeting included Cameron; the chancellor, George Osborne; the transport secretary, Patrick McLoughlin; the environment secretary, Liz Truss; the chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, Oliver Letwin; the communities secretary, Greg Clark; and the chief whip, Mark Harper.
A statement from the Department for Transport said the “location decision” for extra airport capacity would be “subject to further consideration on environmental impacts and the best possible mitigation measures”. It said the government agreed with the Airports Commission that the south-east needed more runway capacity by 2030 and agreed with its shortlist of options, which kept Gatwick open as a viable possibility.
McLoughlin said: “The case for aviation expansion is clear but it’s vitally important we get the decision right so that it will benefit generations to come. We will undertake more work on environmental impacts, including air quality, noise and carbon.
“We must develop the best possible package of measures to mitigate the impacts on local people. We will continue work on all the shortlisted locations, so that the timetable for more capacity set out by Sir Howard is met.
“At the first opportunity I will make a statement to the house to make clear our plans.”
Lilian Greenwood, Labour’s shadow transport secretary, was scathing about Cameron having “broken his clear promise to make a decision before the end of the year”. She said: “Tonight’s statement owes more to political calculations than genuine concern for the environment or residents who now face another year of blight and uncertainty. This shambolic announcement is an embarrassment and no-one will be convinced that the government is taking our runway capacity or environmental needs seriously.”
The London mayor, Boris Johnson, not a fan of expanding Heathrow, claimed that expansion had been “officially grounded” despite airport officials putting a “superhuman effort into bouncing the government into a quick decision in their favour”.
He said: “The prime minister and his colleagues have refused to allow themselves to be hustled. The wheels are falling off the Heathrow fuselage and I think that, now the government has hit the pause button, they will begin to understand with ever greater clarity that, due to the environmental impacts, the legal obstacles and the cost to the public purse, this bird will never fly.”
Johnson added that the chances of his favoured project – a new airport in the Thames estuary – going ahead have been boosted by the delay.
Cameron did not please green groups, either. Oliver Hayes, a campaigner with Friends of the Earth, said: “It’s absurd that UK government ministers are touting ‘green Britain’ in Paris while beating the drum for more climate changing pollution through a new runway back home.
“With the majority of flights taken by a small number of frequent flyers, it’s time the government taxed those who are contributing most to the air pollution and carbon problems that aviation exacerbates.”
Cameron may have put off the resignation of Goldsmith, which would have led to a difficult byelection, and temporarily avoided the loss of several cabinet ministers who are opposed to Heathrow expansion. But he incurred the ire of other Tory MPs whose constituencies are near Gatwick. Crispin Blunt, the Tory MP who is
chair of the Gatwick Coordination Group, called it “disgraceful vacillation by government over Heathrow”. “They will richly deserve opprobrium to be poured all over this shocking non-decision,” he said.
Among others to respond was Rob Gray, the campaign director of the Back Heathrow group, who condemned Cameron’s “dithering and delaying”.
“The government has created more uncertainty for local residents, more uncertainty for workers in the local area and the potential loss to the UK economy of more than £5bn,” he said.
“There is massive support for Heathrow expansion: from across all political parties, the majority of UK businesses, international airlines, local firms and most importantly, from local residents.
“It’s time for the government to get off the fence, commit to Heathrow expansion and seize this golden opportunity to grow the economies of west London, the Thames valley and the UK as a whole.”
John Longworth, the director general of the British Chambers of Commerce, said businesses would see it as a “gutless move by a government that promised a clear decision on a new runway by the end of the year”.
He said: “Business will question whether ministers are delaying critical upgrades to our national infrastructure for legitimate reasons, or to satisfy short-term political interests.”
Terry Scuoler, the chief executive of EEF, the manufacturers’ organisation, said: “By avoiding a tough decision, despite a well evidenced shortlist, the government has again dithered and avoided the issue. Industry is fed up and dismayed by the continued excuses and political dilly dallying.”
Meanwhile, Carolyn Fairbairn, the CBI director general, said delaying the decision “on an issue of critical importance to the future prosperity of the UK is deeply disappointing”.
“We urgently need to increase our runway capacity to spur trade growth, investment and job creation. Just eight new routes to emerging markets could boost our exports by up to £1bn a year,” she said.
“But by 2025 – the earliest a new runway would be built – London’s airports could already be operating at full capacity and the longer we wait the further we fall behind the likes of Amsterdam and Paris. If we don’t have a new runway up and running by 2030 the cost to the UK will be as much as £5.3bn a year in lost trade to the Brics [Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa] alone.
Khan said the country “could not afford more dithering over aviation capacity”.
“Businesses desperately need more airport capacity around London, and the Tories are letting them down. Gatwick stands ready to deliver it sooner, at a lower public expense and without the damaging impact of Heathrow expansion,” he said.
“We already know Heathrow can’t be the solution. The additional damage from air and noise pollution would mean more years of delay, while protracted legal battles are fought. It must be Gatwick – and we need to get on with it.”
Source: The Guardian
