For some time now, speculation has been mounting over the potential construction of a brand new UK Hub airport. Industry experts have argued that Heathrow no longer has the capacity to cope with an ever-increasing number of passengers, while suggestions regarding the expansion of other London airports have been met with protests from environmentalists.
Now it appears that plans for the Boris Johnson-backed Thames Estuary Airport have run into difficulties. This is because the House of Commons Transport Select Committee has claimed the cost will outweigh any possible benefits, and are therefore calling upon the government to reject the plans.
Other concerns cited in the report included the harming of estuary wildlife and the potential repercussions on the local aviation industry, possibly leading to the closure of Heathrow.
In the report, MPs appear to throw their support behind one of the original ideas for the improvement of the UK’s aviation industry – to build a third runway at Heathrow. In fact, they go a stage further and suggest that a fourth runway could be added in the future in order to match the four-runway ideal proposed by the Thames Estuary plan.
However, Mr Johnson, who has been one of the most prominent advocates of the Thames Estuary scheme, has highlighted a number of issues the government would have to face if taking the advice of the HoC Transport Committee. He believes that a three-runway airport would be “obsolete”, while adding a fourth runway to Heathrow would be “politically undeliverable” and would “consign millions of Londoners to unacceptable levels of noise pollution.”
He continues; “The committee is bang on the button in saying we need a proper hub airport.
“But, by suggesting that Heathrow should double its runways from two to four, the committee is putting four fingers up to hundreds of thousands of Londoners.
“London and the wider UK do need a hub airport that can operate 24 hours a day without constraint and the only place that is possible is to the east of London.”
Yet Transport Committee chair, Louise Ellman MP, believes that the only solution which is financially viable is the extension to Heathrow outlined in the report.
She says; “Research we commissioned made plain that building an entirely new hub airport east of London could not be done without huge public investment in a new ground transport infrastructure.
“Evidence to our inquiry also showed a substantial potential impact on wildlife habitat in the Thames Estuary.
“The viability of an estuary hub airport would also require the closure of Heathrow – a course of action that would have unacceptable consequences.”
It appears, then, that this argument is far from over. However, this report has certainly made one thing clear – whether financial, environmental or audial, the city of London and its inhabitants is sure to face certain sacrifices in order to gain a hub airport.
Which option do you believe would be best for London and the wider UK – additional runways added to Heathrow as suggested by the Transport Committee, or a Thames Estuary airport backed by Boris Johnson? Is there an alternative option which could pacify both parties?
Previous Post
Sainsburys Profits Fall Despite Increase in Sales
