TRANSPORT Secretary Geoff Hoon has rubbished arguments against a third runway at Heathrow as he indicated the Government was set to press ahead with controversial expansion plans.

Although he paid lip service to the official line that no decision has been made, Mr Hoon's hard-hitting comments suggested campaigners against a third runway are set to lose their fight.

The Transport Secretary insisted jobs would be lost and the price of a holiday would increase if the Government said no to Heathrow owner BAA's expansion plans.

And in a comment which will surprise many campaigners, he claimed a new runway would actually help the environment - by reducing delays at the airport.

But the planned runway was also condemned by MPs from all parties, including his Labour colleagues, in a House of Commons debate.

Mr Hoon insisted Government policy remained as set out in the 2003 Aviation White Paper, which supported a third runway "subject to the clear environmental conditions".

But he added: "There are now more than 1 million flights a year. That is what has changed - the need for new capacity has got greater."

Mr Hoon said: "The problem is that Heathrow's runways are already full. The airport is operating at around 99 per cent capacity, compared to between 70 and 75 per cent at airports such as Charles de Gaulle, Schiphol and Frankfurt, whose spare capacity provides an attractive alternative for any future business if the United Kingdom cannot provide it.

"That will mean the steady erosion of Heathrow's position and the loss of British jobs, which will be exported to continental airport hubs following the long-haul flights."

The Transport Secretary attacked alternative proposals backed by many Labour backbenchers and the Conservatives for high speed rail links as a replacement for Heathrow expansion, saying: "Positing airport growth and high-speed rail as alternatives is an entirely false and bogus choice."

The country actually needed both, he said.

And he ruled out proposals backed by London Mayor Boris Johnson for a new airport on the Thames Estuary, saying it would be too expensive and the number of birds in the area would present a danger to planes.

Blocking expansion would not help the environment because flights would simply move to other airports in Paris or Frankfurt instead, he said.

Mr Hoon added: "We should also remember that as Heathrow is now full and operating at 99 per cent capacity, there is a good chance that without further development we will actually add to the environmental burden."

He said: "The current congestion and lack of capacity wastes fuel and increases carbon emissions."

But Labour MP and former Transport Minister Nick Raynsford (Lab Greenwich and Woolwich) warned that expansion would lead to more night flights, creating "unacceptable noise nuisance, which would have an horrendous impact on the lives of people living around the airport."

John McDonnell (Lab Hayes and Harlington) said: "At least 1,500 of my constituents will be forcibly removed from their homes in the village of Sipson.

"Another 4,000, in the villages of Longford, Harmondsworth and Harlington, will have their homes virtually surrounded by the airport or the road network.

"Noise and air pollution will render their homes unliveable in, and they will lose not only their homes but their communities."

Alan Keen (Lab Feltham and Heston) said he was taking his grandson to Middlesbrough to watch a football game, and the pair were flying from Heathrow as a treat.

He told MPs: "The trip will cost £4 each, which shows that another runway at Heathrow is absolutely unnecessary. The seats are being filled to display to everybody that Heathrow is full."

Bookmark This:
                                       

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Write comment

Name

Website

Title

Comment

smaller | bigger

Subscribe via email (Registered users only)

Add Comment