In a bid to ease growing pressure on London’s air transport hubs, MPs have voted overwhelmingly in favour of expanding Heathrow with a third runway. But even with support from the Commons, the project still faces more than a few challenges, as the debate shows no signs of slowing down.

 

On June 25th, MPs were granted a free vote to determine their support for proposed plans around a third runway at Heathrow airport. With a majority of 296 – 415 votes to 119 – approval for the project was firmly secured. But despite the support from MPs, the storm around Heathrow’s third runway refuses to quieten.

With high profile figures – including Home Secretary Boris Johnson and John Sauven, Executive Director of Greenpeace UK – coming out against the plans, and emotions stirred in Parliament itself, developers and supporters have more than a few hurdles to cross before they can begin to celebrate the approval.

And even with all the governmental backing, one question still remains: will the project take off after all?

 

Behind the Debate

The proposed third runway comes 15 years after Alistair Darling declared “doing nothing about airport capacity is not an option”, and as both Heathrow and Gatwick feel the strain of operating beyond design capacity, Darling’s words ring truer than ever before.

In 2016, Heathrow alone served 75,671,863 passengers, a 1% rise from the previous year. This startlingly high figure is in line with the airport operating at 98% capacity for over a decade, and highlights the fact that something needs to be done.

The runway is just one of three potential solutions, with the other two – an extended second runway or a second runway at Gatwick – rejected in favour of the £14bn project. If that sounds like a sky-high cost estimate, the original quote came in at £2.5bn more. No one can agree, however, where these savings have been made, with some suggesting the cancellation of terminal 6 in favour of expanding T2 & T5 instead.

Even though it’s clear that Heathrow and its millions of passengers need a solution delivered in a timely manner, there are more than a few reasons for critics of the project to be unhappy.

 

Counting the Environmental Cost

 

“The UK government won’t be able to tackle illegal levels of air pollution, never mind leaving a healthier environment to the next generation, if a new Heathrow runway is built.”

John Sauven, Greenpeace UK’s Executive Director

Via Sky News

 

The expansion has been at the centre of a raging debate for some time now. Even during the vote – which unfolded in the midst of a passionate four-hour debate – there were cries of ‘vote no, Heathrow’ from protesters in the lobby of the House of Commons. Meanwhile, in the highest ranks of the cabinet, Boris Johnson’s promise to lie in front of the bulldozers became a rallying cry for protesters.

Now that the project has the backing of MPs, the threat has arguably increased, prompting the likes of Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth and cross-party London councils to stand against the result in defence of the environment.

Although aviation only contributes 2% of global carbon emissions (or 7% of the UK’s), that figure is soon to change in the wake of a third runway. As the Committee on Climate Change reminded the government ahead of the vote, the UK is legally obliged to slash carbon emissions by 80% by 2050 – a task which becomes much more difficult in the wake of increased aviation activity.

Aside from emissions, the third runway will also increase noise pollution in the area, potentially disturbing wildlife, and increasing the effect on our health and environments. But it’s not just the planet which critics are concerned about.

 

Changing the Game

 

“Evicting entire communities so that foreign leisure transfer passengers can bypass Britain more conveniently seems like a confused set of priorities to me.”

Clive Lewis, MP

Via The Independent

 

Despite these plans unfolding in the South East of England, the repercussions of Heathrow’s expansion are set to reach much further afield, and be cause for a myriad of concerns.

Writing for the Independent, Clive Lewis argues that the expansion plans will also expand the class divide felt in the area. This is due to the perceived sacrifice of security for working class individuals in favour of allowing for increased passenger transfers – an action which, Mr Lewis argues, benefits wealthier individuals.

Along the same lines, there’s also the impact of the expansion on house prices. Back in 2016, when the proposed expansion was sitting uncertainly on the shelf, homeowners were offered compensation in return for living in the so-called ‘expansion zone’. But even that compensation didn’t offset the lagging behind of house prices in the area ever since the plans were announced. Indeed, this too could be a problem which lingers as work begins, with buyers less enticed to live close to the airport’s noisy new runway.

Meanwhile, members of the SNP abstained from the vote due to a perceived failing in the government guaranteeing how the scheme will benefit Scotland. Although they may feel like a disconnect between what happens in Heathrow and in Scotland, there are actually a few strong points to be made on the topic. Not only does the expansion mean more investment and more jobs for locals, it could also impact domestic flights.

According to the government’s own research, regional airports are set to be hit hard in the coming years. By 2030, Manchester is set to see 20,258 fewer direct international flights a year, followed by Birmingham with 17,100 fewer, and Leeds’ output dropping by 4449 flights.

Tying in with Clive Lewis’ own argument, these statistics show a deepening economic divide between north and south – one which counters movements like the Northern and Midlands Powerhouses.

 

The Bright Side

Although there are many criticisms currently being levelled at the government and developers, there are of course some advantages to this proposed solution – namely that Heathrow will no longer have to run so close to capacity.

The team behind the expansion have also expressed the benefit of the runway in terms of increased employment with 40,000 local job opportunities, and the potential for a legacy of skills through 5000 additional apprenticeships and further training with the Heathrow Employment and Skills Academy.

Even with the potential for local experts, increased employment, and a level-footing with busy European airports post-Brexit, Heathrow’s proposed third runway has more than a few hurdles to clear before it receives the backing of the public.

With the vote for approval out of the way, the project’s supporters must now turn their attention to securing the support of the people, and find a responsible way to compromise between environmental catastrophe and resolving Heathrow’s capacity issue. Only then can the project – and the UK – really soar.

Kaleida is a bespoke software development house based in Manchester and servicing businesses across the country. To find out how our solutions can benefit your business, explore our website – or feel free to get in touch directly with our team for a software review.