Heathrow expansion ‘bad for UK economy’

Until recently, the only people arguing against expansion of Heathrow Airport were protest groups campaigning against climate change or the increased flight noise west of London. Following the debacle that was the opening of Terminal 5, the tide now seems to be shifting.

Bob Ayling, the chief executive of British Airways from 1996 to 2000, came out against expansion of Heathrow in today’s Sunday Times.

The UK government has long argued that the expansion of Heathrow is necessary for the future competitiveness of the UK economy. But recent reports indicate the BAA and the government bent the facts to make the case.

Ayling argues that building a third runway would be a “costly mistake” and that BAA is pursuing a flawed business model by chasing transfer traffic, since most transfer passengers buy little more than a cup of tea and therefore cost the airport more than they bring in revenue.

Meanwhile, the new London mayor Boris Johnson is apparently in favour of building a new airport in the Thames estuary, a plan that has been on the cards for decades but never come to fruition. That wouldn’t do anything to deal with the underlying questions on aviation policy in an era of climate change, but it would potentially ease congestion and it would give long-suffering residents of west London and villages and countryside around Heathrow a break from the incessant noise and pollution. (Most of the flights would take off and land over the sea).

Of course, London already has four other airports – Gatwick, Stansted, Luton and London City – and yet Heathrow remains inexplicably popular for both airlines and passengers.

Related posts: