Thames Estuary Airport: The Fight Continues…

020320134118Article originally featured in Kent on Sunday – Click Here To Download

The Mayor of London and Foster & Partners are not the first to suggest building an airport in the Thames Estuary. The last government did that with Cliffe airport. That was ruled out, not least on grounds of cost, and these latest reheated proposals lack feasibility just as their predecessors did.

Despite Boris’ gung-ho attitude, support for a Thames Estuary airport remains extremely limited. The substantive report by the Transport Select Committee, published on Friday, which drives a coach and horses through the proposals, follows hot on the heels of the London Assembly’s findings that a Thames Estuary airport is not a viable option.

By advocating the Thames Estuary airport, Boris wanted to take the focus off Heathrow expansion, but by backing such an ill-advised, economically and environmentally unfeasible scheme he only succeeded in putting the focus back on Heathrow, although other options may make more sense.

I welcome the decision by the Transport Select Committee to reject a new hub airport in or around the Thames Estuary. It is a huge boost for the thousands of residents across Medway, particularly those living on the Hoo Peninsula, who are opposed to such proposals. However, it is important that we stay focused on our ultimate goal of seeing off these pie in the sky plans once and for all.

With cost estimates ranging widely from £70-100 billion, this scheme would not only have added at least £50 to each plane ticket but would also require huge swathes of public subsidy, money which we simply do not have. Not only would the estuary airport impose a massive financial cost to the nation as a whole, it would devastate Medway and subject many across Kent to constant aircraft noise.

Moreover, Heathrow could not continue to operate alongside a Thames Estuary airport, or airlines would not relocate from Heathrow to a much more expensive and less commercially attractive new airport. Airlines themselves have indicated that they are not prepared to move to an estuary airport from Heathrow – and are even less willing to pay for such a scheme.

Therefore, for an estuary hub to work, Heathrow would have to be forcibly closed. How this would happen in practice is a question which remains unanswered and it has been suggested taxpayers would have to pay £20bn to compensate Heathrow and associated businesses. The closure of Heathrow would necessitate a shift of at least 75,000 directly employed staff to a Thames Estuary airport. No council in peacetime has ever been asked to re-home so many people and the implications of such a task would be almost unimaginable for our area.

RSPB map showing extent of Foster proposal

RSPB map showing full extent of Foster+Partners’ proposal

The site of the proposed airport is home to many internationally protected wildlife and environmental sites as well RSPB bird and nature sanctuaries. The likelihood of bird strikes on planes would be far higher than at other airports. The location chosen for the estuary airport would not only be environmentally devastating, but on the wrong side of London for access from most of the UK, as well as being technically unfeasible in key respects.

Richard Deakin, chief executive of air traffic management association, NATS, pointed out that four runways in the estuary would mean some approaches and departures being over London, compounding noise problems and conflicting with the flight paths of other airports, including Schipol.

There are other far more realistic solutions for increasing airport capacity. If £5 billion were spent on a Crossrail spur from Stansted to Stratford this would link Stansted to the City in 25 minutes and to the West End or Ebbsfleet in 35 minutes, with Heathrow less than an hour away. Stansted is currently operating at only half its potential capacity and therefore could greatly increase its number of flights without even needing a new runway in the short-term. Gatwick is now pushing for a second runway once its planning agreement which prevents this expires in 2019. Expansion at Gatwick and/or Stansted with one becoming a hub which competes with Heathrow would benefit Kent with better connections.

Advertisements

3 Comments

Filed under boris johnson, conservatives, estuary airport, Heathrow, hoo peninsula, isle of grain, Lord Foster, mark reckless, medway, MP, No Estuary Airport, rochester and strood, rspb, Thames Hub, transport

3 responses to “Thames Estuary Airport: The Fight Continues…

  1. barry luxton

    heathrow is not an hour away for folks in the medway towns. It takes me daily 2.5 hours in total each way to get to west London and back. The south east is desperately in need of new infrastructure that the likes of the purpose built airport would support. All I see in the above ‘news’ is nimbyisem of the highest kind. Vote conservative, no hope no plans for growth. Without new road and rail links across the thames it’s more of the same. Build the damm thing.

  2. Whatever the argument for this airport, the government keep on saying they are broke. I mean they even continue the discrimination of a minority of ex-pat pensioners living in the Commonwealth countries because they say they cannot afford it , forgetting that the pensions come from the National Insurance fund and is ring fenced and in a surplus situation of about 28 billion. Ok , they borrow from this for other projects but have to pay back interest on the loan and the interest alone would pay the pensioners twice over. Just 4% of all pensioners worldwide get no annual increases to their pensions ever. Plain straightforward discrimination which is in the hands of the Pensions Minister.

  3. Peter Black

    The real issue is that continuos governments have failed due to interference by the likes of BAA plc British Airways and the like to agree on a proper policy.Heathrow is a lame duck excuse for an airport and expansion will over heat the south east economy to the point of collapse, bang goes tourism.
    Off shore airport proposals are the reality and can be built without tax payers money parliament knows this as do the government.
    Green lighting an off shore proposal will stabilise the london economy and will not mean the closure of heathrow as numerous reports have outlined.JUst stop messing about and trying to score points and just give the go ahead and build the thing.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s