Jet II
11th Nov 2002, 07:15
From the Times
BRITISH AIRWAYS is to attempt to break the deadlock over the expansion of Heathrow by proposing a legal agreement promising nothing bigger than a short third runway.
Thousands of people living near the airport fear the Government’s proposal for a short runway is a ruse for a much longer runway capable of handling jumbo jets. A full-length runway would require the demolition of thousands of homes in West London.
BA believes that residents will be placated if a legal guarantee is given that the short runway, costing 260 homes, will never be extended. Ministers are understood to be interested in the idea, but recognise the difficulty of persuading residents that the guarantee will never be broken.
While a 2,200 yard short runway could handle an extra 27 million passengers a year, a full-length one could accommodate double that. The short runway is fettered by the need for aircraft to reach it by crossing the north runway, a problem that would be resolved by an extension eastwards.
The history of Heathrow’s development is littered with broken promises and revoked planning conditions. In July the Government said that it was prepared to breach the strict limit on the number of flights imposed by the Terminal 5 public inquiry.
BA believes that a formal legal undertaking would carry more weight and has been giving secret briefings to the leaders of councils to garner support. The airline has also recruited Mike Brundell, the deputy planning inspector from the Terminal 5 inquiry, to promote the merits of a short third runway.
BA is desperate to prevent any other airport from eclipsing Heathrow, where it has 40 per cent of all take-off slots and its £200 million headquarters. Other options proposed by the Government for a predicted trebling in air travel by 2030 include three more runways at Stansted and a new airport with four runways at Cliffe in north Kent.
The wording and signatories of the legal agreement are not decided, but it is likely to be similar to the 1979 agreement on Gatwick between BAA (formerly the British Airports Authority) and West Sussex County Council. In that, BAA pledged not to build another runway at Gatwick until 2019. The deal could be revoked only by Parliament
As stated by the reporter, many promises have been broken in the past at LHR and you would have to be very naive to believe anything the BAA promise in the future.
As for the comparison with the LGW agreement, I could never see the point of promising not to build a runway until a certain date - if there is to be a new runway it doesn't matter whether it is built next year or in 10 years time - the end result is the same.
BRITISH AIRWAYS is to attempt to break the deadlock over the expansion of Heathrow by proposing a legal agreement promising nothing bigger than a short third runway.
Thousands of people living near the airport fear the Government’s proposal for a short runway is a ruse for a much longer runway capable of handling jumbo jets. A full-length runway would require the demolition of thousands of homes in West London.
BA believes that residents will be placated if a legal guarantee is given that the short runway, costing 260 homes, will never be extended. Ministers are understood to be interested in the idea, but recognise the difficulty of persuading residents that the guarantee will never be broken.
While a 2,200 yard short runway could handle an extra 27 million passengers a year, a full-length one could accommodate double that. The short runway is fettered by the need for aircraft to reach it by crossing the north runway, a problem that would be resolved by an extension eastwards.
The history of Heathrow’s development is littered with broken promises and revoked planning conditions. In July the Government said that it was prepared to breach the strict limit on the number of flights imposed by the Terminal 5 public inquiry.
BA believes that a formal legal undertaking would carry more weight and has been giving secret briefings to the leaders of councils to garner support. The airline has also recruited Mike Brundell, the deputy planning inspector from the Terminal 5 inquiry, to promote the merits of a short third runway.
BA is desperate to prevent any other airport from eclipsing Heathrow, where it has 40 per cent of all take-off slots and its £200 million headquarters. Other options proposed by the Government for a predicted trebling in air travel by 2030 include three more runways at Stansted and a new airport with four runways at Cliffe in north Kent.
The wording and signatories of the legal agreement are not decided, but it is likely to be similar to the 1979 agreement on Gatwick between BAA (formerly the British Airports Authority) and West Sussex County Council. In that, BAA pledged not to build another runway at Gatwick until 2019. The deal could be revoked only by Parliament
As stated by the reporter, many promises have been broken in the past at LHR and you would have to be very naive to believe anything the BAA promise in the future.
As for the comparison with the LGW agreement, I could never see the point of promising not to build a runway until a certain date - if there is to be a new runway it doesn't matter whether it is built next year or in 10 years time - the end result is the same.