Better broadband is better for economy than bigger airports, says survey

Though it is only a survey (and AirportWatch is a bit sceptical of surveys, bearing in mind how they can be used to justify almost anything!) a survey has been carried out by MORI, asking over 2,000 adults in the UK, on behalf of the IET – the  Institution of Engineering and Technology. The survey showed  just 17% of respondents thought that building new airports would benefit the UK economy while only 12% said that building extra runways at existing airports would benefit the economy. But 43% of those asked thought extending superfast broadband to all UK households would deliver more economic benefit. “The public have told us that supporting the e-economy by rolling out universal superfast broadband will have more economic benefits for the UK than more traditional infrastructure projects like increasing airport capacity or high speed rail.” The survey, of 2,011 adults aged 16-75 in Great Britain, also showed that only 16% of respondents thought that building a high speed rail line would benefit the economy.
.

 

 

Better broadband is better for economy than bigger airports, says survey

By R
2013/12/23

ECOC2013-Optical-Connectinos-Sliding-ImageV1

People in the UK believe that extending the geographic reach of superfast broadband is more important to the economy than increased airport capacity.

A survey for the Institution of Engineering and Technology (IET) showed that just 17% of respondents thought that building new airports would benefit the UK economy while only 12% said that building extra runways at existing airports would benefit the economy.

While 43% of those asked thought extending superfast broadband to all UK households would deliver more economic benefit.

“The public have told us that supporting the e-economy by rolling out universal superfast broadband will have more economic benefits for the UK than more traditional infrastructure projects like increasing airport capacity or high speed rail,” commented Prof Will Stewart from the IET.

The survey, of 2,011 adults aged 16-75 in Great Britain, also showed that only 16% of respondents thought that building a high speed rail line would benefit the economy.

The survey was carried out between 13 and 18 December by Ipsos Mori on behalf of the IET.

http://www.electronicsweekly.com/news/business/market-research/better-broadband-is-better-for-economy-than-bigger-airports-says-survey-2013-12/

.


.

Earlier:

Over 100,000 residents of Hounslow, Hillingdon and Richmond vote in local polls against a 3rd Heathrow runway or more flights

21.5.2013

Three of the local council areas most affected by Heathrow aircraft noise – Richmond, Hillingdon and Hounslow – recently carried out referendums of their residents on the subject of Heathrow growth. All three ended on 16th May. In total, well over 140,000 people responded to the polls. They voted overwhelmingly against expansion of the airport, against a new runway, and against more flights over Londoners. In the Hounslow poll, 72% of residents said they are against expansion, but 64% said they did not want to see a new hub airport built if it meant losing Heathrow. 83% of Hounslow residents were in favour of a night flight ban (11pm to 7pm) and 94% wanted better noise insulation for schools and residents living under the flight path. In the Richmond and the Hillingdon polls combined, 72% were against a 3rd runway, and 73% were against increasing the number of flights. The Standard says the findings of the poll are bound to be exploited by councillors as they go to the voters in next spring’s local elections.  Heathrow sought vainly to rubbish the polls by saying they were voting on an outdated 3rd runway proposal.http://www.airportwatch.org.uk/?p=3548

.


 

.

There was also a poll, paid for by Heathrow airport recently, by Populus.  However, it has not published details of how the poll was carried out, exactly what the interviewers’ phone script was, who was interviewed etc.  ie. it has not been reported in a manner that makes its results useful or credible. There are reports of serious accusations of bias …. the  poll was paid for by the airport, which was interested in a result that was positive for its point of view.

Heathrow Poll


Fieldwork date: 2013-11-07 – 2013-11-30

Publisher: Heathrow

Download detailed results  [Only a very tiny part of the results are published]

This poll covered attitudes towards Heathrow and its possible expansion. Populus interviewed 1,000 adults in six Parliamentary constituencies and one London Borough local to Heathrow Airport. Interviews were conducted by telephone between 7 and 30 November 2013.  Populus is a member of the British Polling Council and abides by its rules. For a full description of the methods we use, please click here.Poll reported at   “All West Londoners hate Heathrow expansion? The polling suggests otherwise” (Conservative Home – which is pro-Heathrow growth)

http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2013/12/all-west-londoners-hate-heathrow-expansion-the-polling-suggests-otherwise.html

.


.

An earlier survey on the economic benefits of HS2:

 

Business leaders call on government to abandon HS2 “folly”

27 August 2013  (The Engineer)
Read more: http://www.theengineer.co.uk/opinion/comment/business-leaders-call-on-government-to-abandon-hs2-folly/1017005.article#ixzz2oId30nA5

,,,, excerpt ….

 

Last week, the Institute of Economic affairs  warned that the cost of the scheme could rise to more than £80 billion (almost double the government’s estimated 42.6bn price tag). The influential think-tank – which has long been critical of the scheme –  called for it to be scrapped and for the money to be spent on other transport projects.

Meanwhile, support within the Labour party – which has put a £50bn cap on the cost of the project – is looking increasingly fragile. Shadow Chancellor  Ed Balls isn’t thought to be a fan, whilst former Chancellor Alistair Darling  – who approved the project whilst in office – no longer supports the scheme, and fears that it could soak up the cash required for investment elsewhere in the rail network.

But this week’s survey from the Institute of Directors (IoD) – represents one of the strongest attacks yet. One of the chief arguments advanced by the government in favour of HS2 is the economic benefits it will bring; and yet around 70 per cent of those taking part in the IoD survey, business people at the sharp end of the UK economy, said the scheme would have no impact on the productivity of their business.

In a strongly worded attack, the IoD’s Director General Simon Walker described HS2 as “one grand folly” and called on the government to abandon the scheme and focus on smaller transport projects such as station upgrades, electrification and capacity improvements .

….. and it continues …

http://www.theengineer.co.uk/opinion/comment/business-leaders-call-on-government-to-abandon-hs2-folly/1017005.article

.

.