Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Business reignites call for third Heathrow runway

Business leaders have slammed the government’s decision to rule out the construction of a third runway at Heathrow airport as “negligent”.

The comments came as transport lobbyists published a hard-hitting report on deteriorating transport links in London and across the UK.

The report, compiled by a commission set up by business lobby group London First, says that decades of short term thinking and unstable transport planning has left the UK with no credible aviation policy, expensive railways and congested roads.

Shift in focus

Commission members told NCE that they were concerned that the recent shift in political focus toward a Thames Estuary airport — accepted by government to be at least two or three decades away from being a reality — distracted attention from dealing with more immediate problems facing the country in the next 10 to 15 years.

“There seems to be a growing consensus about the need for a [suitable] hub for the future,” said commissioner and consultant Aecom global director John Vincent. “But [the debate] is weighted towards one option that is way into the future. The imperative is to get an expanded Heathrow onto the agenda.”

The report, London, Britain and the World: Transport Links for Economic Growth, states that the “consequences of inaction” are being felt now in the guise of unacceptable transport infrastructure quality, diminishing access and poor resilience which represent an “immediate threat” to London’s ability to compete globally for investment and talent and extend benefits to the rest of the UK.

“London’s competitive position will be eroded”

John Vincent, Aecom

The commission makes several recommendations for road, rail and air transport improvements (see box). But it emphases that aviation poses the most immediate and large scale challenge.

Last week transport experts told NCE that plans for a third runway at Heathrow should be revisited because it would be funded by operator BAA.

But the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats are opposed to expansion at Heathrow.

Report commissioner and cost consultant CBRE’s executive director Peter Damesick said that this was not an insurmountable challenge. Damesick is also CBRE’s chief economist for Europe the Middle East and Asia.

Difficult position

“The danger is that unfortunately the coalition government has put itself in the difficult position of ruling out [a third runway], which makes it difficult to go back on,” he said. “But that’s not to say it won’t do that.”

The report’s authors stressed that action is needed quickly, with other European airports such as Amsterdam, Paris and Frankfurt already increasing their links with emerging nations.

Specifically London has no direct air links to Chile, Colombia, Peru, Venezuela, Indonesia and the Philippines. Damesick said the UK cannot afford to wait for a hub airport in the Thames Estuary.

“There are many, many obstacles to overcome — and even if they are overcome it could be 20 or 30 years to build it,” said Vincent. “In that time London’s competitive position will be eroded.”

Finding the funds for an estuary scheme could also be problematic, said Vincent, with the government likely to be committed to High Speed 2 (HS2). “Crossrail is a huge spend and follows the Olympics [spend] and then there is HS2 to pay for,” he said.

“Could one contemplate another multi-billion pound spend at the same time as HS2? Can we afford to do two major schemes at the same time? It would be a brave man to say the economy would be sufficiently recovered by then.”

Key recommendations


The Highways Agency should accelerate its programme of hard shoulder running
The Agency should be supported by a clearer, longer term policy framework from government with five year funding cycles
The government should work with local authorities to develop and consult on a variable road user charging system for urban areas and the worst congested sections of strategic highway network


Incremental upgrades are needed to grow rail capacity in London and the south east


Heathrow airport must be granted permission to allow aircraft to take off and land concurrently on both runways in exchange for enforceable measures to mitigate and compensate for additional noise
Ministers must review national aviation policy and include option to expand Heathrow with a third runway
Government must consider how further capacity in London and the south east should be provided in the next 15 years
Ministers must review aviation policy to include option of a new hub airport

Readers' comments (3)

  • Lee Stentiford

    Given the time that it took to get Terminal 5 through the Planning/Public Inquiry process isn't there a need to start thinking strategically now on the markets/destinations that Heathrow and airline operators should be serving?

    Dropping less-lucrative destinations to concentrate on the emerging markets must surely be logical so that the existing infrastructure generates the greatest income/benefit. This would at least mitigate the risk of the UK losing out to other airports whilst we debate 3rd Runways and new hub airports

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Paul Hampshire

    The current situation at Heathrow is entirely due to the short-term, vested interest thinking over the last decade(s) that a Third runway would simply emulate. Each bolt-on new airport facility just adds to the difficulty. It should not take 20 to 30 years for a replacement airport to be constructed ( just look at Hong Kong, etc.) but under the current planning system and political process it might well take 20 years to get to the point of starting the enabling works. Shame on you all!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Any rational decision would have been a 4 track HS2 and replacement for Heathrow located along it. Ultimately Heathrow could be closed and the rediculous situation of aircraft land ing and taking off over London removed.

    It will be quicker to buld new with few of the restrictions and compromises and expensives engineering fixes that further development at Heathrow would entail.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Please note comments made online may also be published in the print edition of New Civil Engineer. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.