General News
Below are links to stories of general interest in relation to aviation and airports.
Gatwick area MPs warn Rail Minister of rail chaos if Gatwick gets expansion go-ahead
Gatwick Coordination Group (GCG) MPs have written to the Rail Minister, Paul Maynard, to warn him that rail services along the Brighton Main Line would go into “complete meltdown” if Gatwick Airport were to be allowed to build a second runway. The GCG includes the 8 MPs from constituencies nearest to, and affected by, Gatwick. They have highlighted the inability of the railway to cope with the increased demand that Gatwick expansion would entail, and they say: “Gatwick expansion would result in over 140,000 public transport trips to the airport each day. Given the limited public transport options to Gatwick, the vast majority of these will be via rail. To meet this added demand, TfL estimate that the cost of required upgrades is £10bn. There is, however, no plan to deliver this"… “Gatwick have not committed to contribute a single penny towards any cost, leaving commuters and taxpayers to foot any bill for work that would address the chronic lack of capacity that would result from Gatwick expansion" … a 2nd Gatwick runway would "pile impossible pressure on Southern Rail…” The Brighton Main Line is already operating over capacity and is one of the busiest and worst performing rail lines in the country, and already needs new capacity to cope with rising commuter demand. Gatwick has just a single rail connection to London, and a single motorway - both already under strain.
Click here to view full story...
Times reveals, from leaked document, members of Cabinet sub-committee on runway issue
The Times says it has seen a leaked document showing the membership of the Cabinet sub-committee, the "Economy and Industrial Strategy (Airports)" sub-committee, that would make a decision on a runway. The list omits Ministers most critical of Heathrow's expansion, Boris Johnson, (Foreign Secretary, and Justine Greening, Education Secretary). But Sajid Javid (Communities Secretary), who is a Heathrow supporter, keeps his place on the sub-committee, as does Patrick McLoughlin, (Conservative Party Chairman) - who as Transport Secretary was a strong supporter of Heathrow. Theresa May herself will chair the sub-committee, (David Cameron chaired it previously). Other Ministers on the sub-committee are Philip Hammond, (Chancellor), Greg Clark, (Business and Energy Secretary), Andrea Leadsom, (Environment Secretary), David Mundell, (Scottish Secretary), and the chief whip Gavin Williamson. [The previous members were: David Cameron, George Osborne, Sajid Javid, Patrick McLoughlin, Liz Truss, David Mundell, Greg Clark, Amber Rudd, Oliver Letwin and Mark Harper.] It is not known if there will be a free vote on the issue, suspending the normal Cabinet "collective responsibility" as was suggested last week, to overcome the problem of so much opposition to Heathrow. The Times believes that the announcement might be on Tuesday18th October.
Click here to view full story...
Possible resignation of Zac Goldsmith as Richmond MP over Heathrow threatens May’s slender majority
Theresa May's slender Commons majority risks being cut even further if she backs a third runway at Heathrow, because Zac Goldsmith may resign the Tory whip and fight a by-election as an independent in his Richmond Park seat. Zac has said in the past that he might resign if the government favoured a Heathrow runway, as the airport has highly negative noise impacts on his constituency. Zac has a majority of more than 23,000, but he voted for Leave in the EU Referendum. His popularity could be reduced by a Brexit backlash or if the Tory vote splits. While Zac's views on Heathrow expansion are in tune with many voters in his seat, almost 70% of people who voted in Richmond upon Thames on June 23 backed Remain. The Lib-Dems - who held the seat before Zac - said they would put Brexit at the centre of any by-election contest in the constituency. Brexit and Heathrow are two of the most important issues in Richmond. Mr Goldsmith is understood not to have made up his mind yet whether to stand as the Tory contender, an independent or quit Parliament. Mrs May has a Commons majority of twelve.
Click here to view full story...
Steelworkers and their MPs press for Heathrow expansion, to save steel industry jobs
Heathrow has had a new report done by a consultancy called QUOD, on the amount of steel that would be needed for its new runway and terminals - and the number of jobs this might create directly and indirectly, for the steel industry. Heathrow says they would be using 370,000 tonnes of steel ( this would not be the smaller scheme now in prospect, to cut costs, but the original). There are hopes that this might generate around 400 direct steel jobs - if Heathrow used only UK steel - over 2 - 3 years. There might be another 300 indirect jobs - making a total of 700 jobs. This would be some time around 2021 to 2026. The 370,000 tonnes of steel would be the equivalent of nearly 10% of UK steel produced for domestic use in 2015. Seven Labour MPs (Kevin Barron, Tom Blenkinsop, Sarah Champion, Kevan Jones, Jonathan Reynolds, Angela Smith and Anna Turley) representing steel communities (such as Scunthorpe, and Teesside) across the North and south Wales have called on Business Secretary Greg Clark to "get on with" Heathrow expansion. Steel workers have for years lived with the threat of devastating job losses as firms threaten to close down unprofitable UK steel plants. The UK steelworkers’ union Community backs the 3rd Heathrow runway, hoping it gives respite to their industry for many years. The MPs' letter says: "By backing Heathrow you will be making a statement of intent, a decision in the national interest, and a first step in reviving a modern and sustainable British steel sector."
Click here to view full story...
Legal & General’s Nigel Wilson suggests government “should abandon all the big infrastructure projects beginning with the letter H”
Legal & General chief executive Nigel Wilson has suggested that the government "should abandon all the big infrastructure projects beginning with the letter H" - ie. Hinkley, HS2 and Heathrow. He thinks that instead of these, the UK would get much better value spending its limited resources in areas such as social housing, renewables and more mundane but much-needed projects. Legal & General, an insurance company, is a large and important investor, and accustomed to assessing the prospects of long term projects. Anthony Hilton, writing in the Standard, says Theresa May's head of policy at No.10 is John Godfrey, who was until July 2016, the head of policy at Legal & General, and thinks along the same lines as Nigel Wilson. He considers HS2 is probably the easiest to ditch, as there are better ways to increase rail capacity between London and Birmingham - and the saving of 25 minutes is not vital. "If, for prestige reasons, we need another high-speed train, then let’s put it where it is needed and link Liverpool toManchester, Leeds and Newcastle, with a southern spur through Sheffield and Nottingham to Birmingham." There are numerous reasons not to to ahead with Hinkley. And Heathrow costs far too much, with the final sum being perhaps £36 billion, of which around £18 -20 billion to be paid by taxpayers. It is also fiercely opposed and "resisted to the bitter end by some very vociferous people." There would be inevitable years of legal wrangling and planning to secure it.
Click here to view full story...
Heathrow’s compensation pledges may be too low to match its claims
The difference between Heathrow Airport’s pledges to residents and its commitment to funding those pledges could be hundreds of millions of £s. Campaign group Stop Heathrow Expansion has checked up on the figures and found a funding shortfall in the airport’s compensation proposals for local residents. With what little information Heathrow has provided, and using best estimates to fill in the blanks, it seems likely there would be a HUGE shortfall. Heathrow has said there would be "over 160,000" homes eligible. But the Airports Commission found that over 220,000 households could be in the Lden 55 db zone. Heathrow’s property compensation has already been criticised as inadequate, offering little potential for those displaced homeowners to find similar alternative accommodation further away from the airport where property prices have relentlessly increased. Heathrow's “Our Manifesto for Britain” dated 23.5.2016 has the figure of £1 billion, but that is - Heathrow has confirmed - to cover both property sales, as well as noise compensation. The £1 billion consists of the £700 million Heathrow has often said it will spend on noise insulation - and just £300 million for home loss compensation. And if (Heathrow's own figure) this was up to 3,750 homes, as well as the 780 being demolished, that does not work out as much for each. Heathrow presumes it will make a lot of money by re-selling the homes it buys up.
Click here to view full story...
Possible re-consideration of expanding Birmingham airport, to rebalance UK airport capacity
The FT reports that Theresa May is considering expansion of Birmingham after, after the city is linked to London by the high-speed HS2 rail line. Jim O’Neill, the Treasury minister, has encouraged Number 10 to look at the growth potential at Birmingham airport, which would be about 40 minutes away from London when HS2 reaches the Midlands in 2026. Lord O’Neill, whose brief covers infrastructure and regional development, believes Birmingham would also offer good inks to the Northern Powerhouse cities of Leeds and Manchester once the HS2 northern extension is completed, perhaps by 2033. He thinks it would send “a massive signal on rebalancing the British economy,” away from just the south east. The Airports Commission very quickly narrowed down the sites it was considering for a runway to just Heathrow and Gatwick. Many believe this was a serious error, and they did not consider all the options fully. Now it appears there may be a free vote on the runway issue, as it is so contentious and many Cabinet members are against a Heathrow runway. The FT considers that though Mrs May’s administration believes it is too late for a Birmingham to be considered at this stage (why not?) expansion at Birmingham airport could be part of a longer-term airports strategy, for yet more future UK air travel.
Click here to view full story...
GACC denounces the “obscene” bonus of up to £5 million for Wingate if he gets the 2nd runway
GACC is appalled to read the Sunday Times report that Gatwick boss, Stewart Wingate, is in line to receive a bonus of up to £5 million. Brendon Sewill chairman of GACC commented: "If Gatwick gets a new runway, he walks off with an obscene bonus while hundreds of thousands of people will suffer more noise; 50,000 will suffer worse pollution; thousands of motorists will be stuck in traffic jams; thousands of rail passengers will have to stand; Sussex countryside will be diminished by a new town the size of Crawley; 17 historic buildings will be demolished; and worse climate change damage will cause misery across the world." All that misery and Wingate swans off with his bonus - but with the curses of thousands ringing in his ears. GACC is also fascinated to learn that Gatwick has spent almost £40 million on its runway publicity campaign, on advertising, planning for the 2nd runway and undermining its rivals. Brendon Sewill says: "An American company has been using American style advertising and lobbying tactics But all the evidence is that British Cabinet Ministers, British MPs and British civil servants are not easily bought. We have a proud tradition that Government decisions need to be taken on a rational analysis of the evidence. So all those expensive lunches may actually prove counterproductive."
Click here to view full story...
Wingate again “prepared to give assurances” (ie. but not yet) on GIP not selling Gatwick soon
The Times - which actively supports a Gatwick runway - has a feature on Stewart Wingate. This repeats (uncritically) Gatwick's claim that it can build a 2nd runway without public subsidy. The reality is that at least £12 billion of public money would be needed to upgrade surface access, which struggles now, let along with 35 million more passengers. The Times repeats Wingate's claims (very dubious) that the runway can be added while capping airport charges. He blames “Treasury orthodoxy” by the Airports Commission, stemming from George Osborne, which favoured Heathrow “from the very beginning” for not backing Gatwick. Wingate admits he has spent almost £40 million on advertising, planning for the 2nd runway and trying to undermine Heathrow. If Gatwick got a 2nd runway, he would personally get up to £5 million for a sale of the airport (there would be a total of £10million for senior managers, and he gets half of that). Mind you, he has a "£475,000 salary plus up to 100% bonus." GIP only paid £1.5 million for Gatwick, but gave big dividends, of £48m in 2015 and £133m in 2014. Wingate says GIP is "prepared to give the government reassurances that it would not sell out immediately should it get the green light for a second runway." ie. no assurances yet. And “The shareholders are very much open to having a discussion on structures that satisfy the government.”
Click here to view full story...
Grant Shapps says allowing a free vote (un-whipped) on Heathrow would be ‘a fudge and dodge’
Channel 4 has obtained evidence from a document photographed on the London Underground, that the Cabinet may be considering a free vote on the runway issue. This was a printout of an email to Sue Gray, the director general of the Cabinet Office's propriety and ethics team. A free vote would enable Ministers to vote according to conscience, and speak out against a runway choice, rather than having to share collective Cabinet responsibility. Now Grant Shapps, who was for several years a minister but had to resign earlier (over the Tory bullying accusations) has said this would be "a fudge and a dodge". He now heads the British Infrastructure group (BIG) of cross party MPs, and wants a decision to expand UK airport capacity as fast as possible. The group put out a report, which has been strongly criticised on facts, in July to that effect. Mr Schapps says a free vote would be "entirely wrong because it would be leaving the future of our infrastructure pretty much to chance" if some Ministers did not back government policy. The decision could be open to criticism if the Cabinet and the Conservative government do not make a collective decision, and take on full responsibility. John McDonnell asked whether we would now have free votes on virtually every infrastructure issue.