An influential group of Conservative backbenchers has reopened the debate on whether extra runways should be built at London’s airports.

The Coalition scrapped proposals for a third runway at Heathrow when it came to power in 2010, and chancellor George Osborne has since reaffirmed that this option is ruled out in any consideration of airport capacity in the south east.

But the Free Enterprise Group of MPs argues that runways could be built were fair compensation paid to those affected, and that the potential size of this compensation would drive commercial decisions as to where expansions should occur.

In a paper The Case for Aviation, the group says Heathrow could either have a new runway, or the RAF base at nearby Northolt airport could be incorporated into Heathrow to provide more capacity.

Main author Kwasi Kwateng, MP for Spelthorne on Heathrow’s southern boundary, writes: “The UK’s shortage of aviation capacity is growing urgent.

“Hub airports depend on economies of scale. If London loses its position as Europe’s business hub, it will not be easy to regain. Britain will need at least one new runway within the next ten years.”

Admitting that one of the main objections to a new Heathrow runway is the destruction of the village of Sipson, Kwateng says: “One means of avoiding this would be to create a new runway by augmenting other already existing infrastructure, such as the runway at RAF Northolt.”

He says Northolt’s runway is 1,687m, only 513m shorter than that proposed for Heathrow’s third.

“Northolt is only around 10km north of Heathrow. Other airports such as Amsterdam Schiphol have already demonstrated that situating new runways several miles from the control tower is perfectly workable.”

Kwateng argues that governments have a poor record of making decision on infrastructure and instead proposes: “Decisions should be made by the price mechanism and free competition rather than special interests and political grandstanding.

“Each new development should have to directly negotiate adequate compensation for affected locals, rather than lobby through politics and the press.

“This would leave the industry free to respond to market demand, and able for itself to judge the relative costs and benefits of the different options. This does not, incidentally, necessarily imply more development everywhere. In the case of Heathrow, for example, adequate compensation with the residents could easily prove so expensive that relocating to another location such as Stansted or the estuary becomes more attractive.”

According to the paper, Heathrow is already slipping far behind international competitors in the number of flights it offers.

It says Paris and Frankfurt have 1,000 more flights a year to China’s three largest cities than does Heathrow, while 21 emerging market destinations are not served.

 Print This Post