Mr Cameron: don’t worry, a longer runway, not a third runway is the sensible way forward for airport expansion

Sometime in the next few weeks, the Government is expected to respond to the Airports Commission, which recommended expanding Heathrow via a third runway. The Commission got the right airport, but chose the wrong scheme. Our Extended Northern Runway is cheaper, simpler and unlike the 3rd runway, has been designed from its inception to be politically and socially acceptable.

Our scheme is independent of Heathrow Airport Ltd. It provides the required additional capacity with the minimum disruption and is £6bn cheaper. It is a long runway (extending the existing northern runway to 6,800 metres and dividing it into two with a 650m safety zone), not a third runway. It avoids bringing new areas into aircraft noise contours. In fact, it is estimated that 240,000 people would be removed from the current 54 decibel noise envelope.  It also eliminates the need to destroy local villages and important facilities such as the Lakeside Energy from Waste Plant, the Home Office’s immigration removal centres, and BA’s headquarters.

Since the Airport Commission’s recommendation in the summer, the debate has highlighted the very factors that differentiate the Extended Runway from other plans. Crucially, the construction can be in distinct phases. The first phase costs only £5bn and the Government need only release additional slots when noise and emissions targets are met.

Unlike Heathrow Airport Ltd, we continue to advocate the elimination of night quota flights before 6am.

Meanwhile the inadequacies of the case for Gatwick expansion have been exposed. There has been no convincing economic argument made to overturn the Commission’s principal judgement that the greatest benefits to the entire UK would be delivered by expanding Heathrow as opposed to Gatwick.  Surface transport improvements to Gatwick would be prohibitively expensive and in any case the two airports are in completely different leagues. Heathrow has substantially higher passenger numbers and assets, with more than six times the passenger revenue of Gatwick.

While Heathrow and Gatwick have been vocal attacking each other in the press, our objective has always been more focused: to deliver a proposal which is politically realistic for the Government of the day and I believe we are making good progress. We have therefore written to the Prime Minister and other members of the Cabinet to ask that our Heathrow Hub extended runway scheme, and not the third runway, is taken to the next stage of consultation as the common sense solution. We can help Mr Cameron keep his word. No ifs, no buts, no third runway.