Airline passenger news and views
07 February 2012 | Sign In
No to Heathrow's 3rd runway
A very quick and definitive decision
|
Catriona Wells Thursday 13 May 2010 |
Well, I did ask for clarity and an end to the confusion over the future of Heathrow’s controversial new runway. I guess that yesterday’s NO is about as clear as it gets.
Overall, I think I am pretty pleased by what Cam/Clegg had to say. I admit that I had come round to believing in the economic necessity argument that, after much analysis and research, had been put forward by the Gordon Brown’s people. But I could never quite see how it fitted into the reality of actually getting to the airport on our overcrowded road network.
Anyway, I can stop worrying about it now as the decision has been made.
What does worry me is how one tells what is right and wrong in these big issues. I have to assume that the people that drew up the economic necessity argument, at not inconsiderable cost to ourselves, knew what they were talking about. I mean, they were not day-release students from the local Tech., but highly paid analysts and consultants, right?
Have we now suddenly discovered that they were wrong? Were the arguments about London losing its premier position mis-stated? Was the risk of Frankfurt and Amsterdam taking over as centres of European connectivity over-played?
If it took three or more years for the evaluation and public enquiry phase, how did Dave and Nick manage to make their decision inside 24 hours? Did they toss a coin?
At least we now have a decision and the money that we were spending on discussing the pros and cons can now be put towards something useful. And, if it was a coin, think of all the other difficult decisions that could be made in the same way.
| Comments | Post a comment |
I never did get the reason for trying to put in a third runway in an airport that is so damn small. OK, I am American and we have regional airports that are bigger than LHR. Each time I fly in (or out) I am amazed at how crowded and how small Britain is. This is not a criticism nor a complaint because I love it here but, the southeast is just so crowded. I do not know how you guys are going to fix the problem because even building a new road or railway train track takes space you just do not have without knocking down a bunch of houses. | |
| Rating (0) | |
|
Petra Cambourne, London 21 May 2010, 09:46AM | |
Good decision. It was always going to be too expensive and in the wrong place. Whatever happen to the Manston idea? Is that not near the Channel tunnel and all the new roads and infrastructure for the gateway to Europe etc? Let's put the airport out there and have baggage checkins and mega-fast rail connections from all kinds of places straight to the airport. | |
| Rating (0) | |
My comment is the same as for Stanstead, but with the obvious advatage that it is now easy to access London and other cities from Cardiff. Cardiff has a first class airport and can handle at least 747s so why not come to Cardiff instead of continually looking to build new runways at the expense of good agricultural land or houses? Keith, Bridgend | |
| Rating (0) | |
|
Graham Priest, St Albans 27 May 2010, 07:04PM | |
Good decision. We need fast transfers to an out of area airport. I am not so much bother about the green issues but just think that Heathrow (and the M25, M4, M40) are already too crowed. People laugh at the idea of an airport out in Essex or off the Kent coast but if you put in super-fast connection trains, I reckon it would be quicker overall. | |
| Rating (0) | |
|
David Martin 7 June 2010, 04:49PM | |
It would be naive to believe that this is actually a control on Heathrow expansion. Expansion will just happen by stealth instead like it always did. Back to the quiet game of the government "capping" flight quotas and BAA paying no attention whatsoever. Only a matter of time before we end up with even more intensive runway use and planes landing on top of those taking off. No word on the Cranford Agreement being restored by the new "environmentally friendly" government for precisely this reason. | |
| Rating (0) | |
|
Ken Howden, Andover 11 June 2010, 03:56PM | |
I am not sure of the exact details but one of the AirBus range (I think it is an A380 variant) will carry 1,000 passengers. This means that airports can get bigger and move more people without needing more runways. But, do you want to be on a 'plane with 1,000 people? I am in favour of the region airport idea and see that Bristol and Southampton have been mentioned on this flights site. I use Heathrow only because I have to for business travel but it is too big, busy and impersonal. | |
| Rating (0) | |
|
Frank, London 30 June 2010, 03:21PM | |
I think it is a missed opportunity with the cancelling of Heathrow’s 3rd runway. Unemployment is a serious problem in the UK. The expansion would have provided thousands of new jobs. | |
| Rating (0) | |
|
Terry Grainger, Exeter 30 June 2010, 03:51PM | |
Whilst I understand what Frank is saying, I do hate this type of argument. Yes we need jobs and yes it is far better to put people to work rather than pay them benefits to sit at home. But we have to be a bit selective. There are other things that need doing, and have needed doing for many years. Let us try and make the right use of our available man power. | |
| Rating (0) | |
