Even in the hectic world that is London Heathrow Airport, it's been quite a week.
Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) proposals to hike charges by a whopping 15%, squeals from the airlines, BAA protesting that it needs the cash and the usual gripes and moans from the hard-pressed passenger, all combined to make the airport rarely out of the headlines.
And then to cap it all, UK Secretary of State for Transport Ruth Kelly, set the cat among the green pigeons with her long-awaited ”Adding Capacity at Heathrow Airport” review, three years in the gestation and certain to add a heady dose of controversy into what is already a potent airport brew.
But it”s perhaps the first injection of long-term positive news that the beleaguered airport has had in what seems like an age and actually addresses some specifics ” unlike last week”s Department for Transport (DfT) document on further Heathrow development that was long on potential but short on detail.
Specifically, the review builds on the 2003 White Paper, ”The Future of Air Transport,” and urges public consultation on a third runway, mixed-mode operations on existing runways, a sixth Terminal north of the A4 and tweaking arrival traffic patterns.
And all this to cater for an increase in aircraft movements from the current 480,000 to 702,000 by 2030 and within European Directive limits on nitrogen dioxide and noise restrictions of 57dBA ” a zero net increase.
Oh and the small matter of improving the creaking public transport access to what is still one of the busiest airports in the world.
Just reading the document makes the head spin. How on earth is the government going to pull it off against a particularly hostile local community, neighbouring councils who fret about the noise of arrivals letting down across west London and the unusual rag bag collection of greens, environmentalists and publicity-seeking politicians?
It may be that the development of any new runway ” provisionally fixed at 2,200m (the current two are 3,902m and 3,658m) and the construction of a sixth Terminal will mean present housing around the airport will have to be purchased. It will undoubtedly mean enormous and long-term disruption.
But in a world of ever-tighter competition ” not a word our green friends seem to enjoy ” London is slowly haemorrhaging business and jobs overseas as the powerhouses of Paris (in particular), Amsterdam, Frankfurt and latterly Vienna, start to flex their muscles.
We can”t go back to living some sort of rural Turner or Constable idyll, in which we all work in cottage industries powered by windmills and solar energy. The 21st Century is approaching its second decade and the democratisation of air travel, i.e., its affordability, is a genie that can”t be put back into the bottle.
The aviation industry, the airport operators and the aircraft/engine manufacturers have bent over backwards to address their collective footprint. What other industry in the world has been so extraordinarily in the public eye with regard to its carbon implications, or has been so honest about it?
The latest environmental wheeze is the great vogue currently sweeping the UK ” whose voracious appetite for environmental scare stories seems to know no bounds - for doing away with plastic bags in supermarkets.
It”s even led to the Prime Minister thundering that the flimsy carriers be done away with. Yet what about all the other myriad elements that go into creating supermarkets” very own massive carbon footprint? It”s just too easy to identify one tiny element of carbon pollution and be it supermarket bags or aircraft CO2, they are only part of the dilemma.
Vastly improved technology, larger aircraft and more efficient use of runways at Heathrow, will actually lead to a neutral pollutant impact, should the aviation proposals go ahead. And if the massed ranks of the opposition ” who are articulate, powerful and increasingly active, even if some of their political motives can be questioned ” get their way and none of the proposals occurs, what will happen?
What will happen is that the market will decide it”s had enough and simply up sticks and move away. And much of the estimated ”10bn boost to jobs and the economy would melt across the English Channel to Paris or Amsterdam as business travellers shun Heathrow.
London”s status as a world-class business capital would start to erode, while links to UK regions could also suffer as airlines increasingly use precious domestic slots for longer-range services.
For once, the unions and management are united on this one. The Trades Union Congress estimates that some 500,000 UK jobs are dependent on aviation, while the Confederation of British Industry is urging capacity expansion as a means to cement the country”s position in the global economy.
This will shape into a titanic struggle between the forces of change, who want job security, economic prosperity and, can we say this, simply a hugely-improved passenger experience and those who view just about anything the industry does with innate and rampant hostility.
The consultation process is the first bit of genuinely good news that Heathrow has had in a very long time. It”s going to be a long and bitter battle, but the UK must grasp this opportunity like no other. The recent ”800m opening of St Pancras shows what can be achieved for the long term. Heathrow must not lose its nerve.
Simon Warburton
Editor - ABTN
