Analysis

ICE Big Debate supports Heathrow expansion to boost UK aviation capacity

Delegates at ICE London event urge government to “act quickly to increase airport capacity” with new runway at Heathrow – although Gatwick insists parallel development remains possible.

Heathrow NW runway

The recommendation made last July by the independent Airports Commission to develop Heathrow’s north-west runway option must be confirmed now by government to enable airport capacity in the UK to be increased as quickly as possible.

At the end of last week’s ICE London Big Debate on UK aviation policy, the overwhelming conclusion was that the UK must draw a line under the discussion and press forward with construction of a new runway at Heathrow.

“We have lost sight of the bigger prize which is to stimulate investment and we are actually stifling our own economic growth. Other airports have overtaken us - this race is on and we are falling behind,” said Rachel Skinner WSP|PB director and chair of the ICE London Transport Panel.

“We have delayed this for a very long time and this is about getting a great hub airport for the 21st century that will keep us going for at least the next generation,” Andrew McMillan, Heathrow

“It feels that we need to make a decision collectively about whether or not we want to be a major player in this future world of global connectivity - and I am guessing that most people would say that we do,” she added. “So we need to get on with it – focus positively on what we will do rather that endlessly debating what we won’t do or shouldn’t be doing.”

The debate, chaired by Infrastructure Intelligence editor Antony Oliver, tackled the motion “This house believes that the Government must act quickly to increase airport capacity in the South East”. 

However, in reality the debate centred on the definition of precisely how “acting quickly” could be achieved.

As the debate made clear, this meant government either heeding the recommendation of the Howard Davies Commission and ploughing on with development of Heathrow’s third Runway or choosing to ignore it in favour of revisiting the debate over development at Gatwick or elsewhere.

“For reasons of predictable traffic flows, strategic fit, flexibility, cost and the human factor that I recommend that the Prime Minister should remain true to his original decision to rule out Heathrow and award the additional capacity to London Gatwick,” Alex Kirby, Gatwick Airport

The debate was preceded by an interview with Andrew McMillan, Heathrow Strategy & Q6 Delivery Director who insisted that a fast decision by government to embrace the recommendations of the Davies Commission to develop a third runway at Heathrow was critical for the UK economy . 

“We have delayed this for a very long time and this is about getting a great hub airport for the 21st century that will keep us going for at least the next generation,” he said pointing out that the critical issue was for the UK to have a vision for the next generation. 

“If you have the ability to see beyond that then fabulous, but 30-40 years ago we wouldn’t have been talking about high speed rail,” he said. “There is a very wide basis of support and a sense of momentum [behind Heathrow development]. Certainly there are many powerful people who oppose expansion but there are also many powerful people that support it.”

As Davies points out in his report. no new full-length runway has been laid down in the South East of England since the 1940s. Other developed and developing countries have tackled this problem and built infrastructure to keep pace with the growing demands of an expanding aviation market. 

The independent Airports Commission was set up in late 2012 with a brief to find an effective and deliverable solution, and to make recommendations which will allow the UK to maintain its position as Europe’s most important aviation hub. 

Over the last two and a half years the evidence was reviewed by Sir Howard Davies Commission and its final report was published in July with the anticipation that government would make a decision rapidly after. A decision which remains outstanding. 

"We need to get on with it – focus positively on what we will do rather that endlessly debating what we won’t do or shouldn’t be doing.” Rachel Skinner WSP|PB, ICE transport panel chair

Davies backed expansion at Heathrow. Gatwick, by contrast, he said. “presented a plausible case for expansion and  is well placed to cater for growth in intra-European leisure flying, but is unlikely to provide as much of the type of capacity which is most urgently required”.

However, Alex Kirby, senior advisor to Gatwick Airport insisted that Davies’ conclusions did not tell the full story and pointed out that Davies’ recommendation left the option open for Gatwick. 

“It is very a straightforward engineering project and the government is there to make a decision,” he said adding that although not his preferred solution, if the government wanted it could have development both Gatwick and Heathrow. 

“I am not sure that that is the way that government would want to go,” he said. “What this is really about is a vision for the future of aviation in Britain – it is about how to connect Britain to the rest of the world in the fastest and most effective way,” he added, pointing out that regardless of the Davies recommendation, development of a new runway at Gatwick was still very much a reality. 

“We will see a trend of growing numbers flying into London as a destination not as a point of transit. Gatwick will provide a cheaper cleaner, simpler, and more deliverable solution to cope with demand out to 2030 and beyond. And as it is not a hub, we will not stifle demand from the regional airports,” said Kirby.

“For reasons of predictable traffic flows, strategic fit, flexibility, cost and the human factor that I recommend that the Prime Minister should remain true to his original decision to rule out Heathrow and award the additional capacity to London Gatwick,” he added.

“We have been debating this since the 1960s. I think that the government should decide in favour of and accept the airport commission recommendations. We need to now focus on delivery.” Robbie Owen, Pinsent Mason

“It is the greatest happiness of the greatest number that is the measure of right and wrong,” he concluded, quoting 18th Century philosopher Jeremy Bentham.

However, Robbie Owen, head of Infrastructure Planning and Government Affairs at Pinsent Masons, disagreed that Gatwick provided a realistic solution to the UK’s airport capacity connundrum.

“I believe that the time for debate has gone,” he said. “We have been debating this since the 1960s. I think that the government should decide in favour of and accept the airport commission recommendations. We need to now focus on delivery.”

The commission, he said, did a really thorough job in scrutinising the huge number of proposals and pointed out that delaying further will only see costs will go up and the benefits will not be accrued.

In addition he said that further delay would show that the UK is either “unwilling or unable to take the steps needed to maintain our position in a globally connected economy of the 21st century”. 

“That matters – we rely on global investment to support our infrastructure,” he said.

“If the government was to reject the Davies recommendation for development at Heathrow in favour of Gatwick they would have quite a job on their hands to make that decision stack up,” Owen added. “I’m not saying it wouldn’t be possible but it would certainly be hard for government in the face of overwhelming evidence to do that.”

For further details of the event visit the ICE website here 

If you would like to contact Antony Oliver about this, or any other story, please email antony.oliver@infrastructure-intelligence.com.