The decision to back a third runway at Heathrow is a grotesque folly | John Sauven

The decision to back a third runway at Heathrow is a grotesque folly | John Sauven
Business flights are declining, CO2 levels are climbing, and the cost of expansion is staggering. Only shameless cynicism can explain this outcome

The government’s decision to back a third runway at Heathrow has been informed by a mishmash of misinformation and missing information. To take just one example, business flights are in decline. They’ve been in decline for years. And yet the debate is conducted as though they were not only increasing, but increasing at a rate that our current infrastructure is unable to cater for, and our economy is suffering as a result. But they’re not, they’re declining.

Here’s another. Heathrow can’t afford to expand with its own money. Surface access costs for Heathrow are only affordable with a huge subsidy from the taxpayer. Heathrow will only pay £1bn for the additional road and rail links required to get the extra passengers to and from Heathrow. Transport for London say it will cost £18bn. Anyone see a small discrepancy?

Related: Heathrow expansion: Zac Goldsmith to resign over third runway decision – live

Related: Local residents on Heathrow’s third runway: ‘I would lose my house, community and friends’

Continue reading…

Source: Guardian Transport

<a href="The decision to back a third runway at Heathrow is a grotesque folly | John Sauven” target=”_blank”>The decision to back a third runway at Heathrow is a grotesque folly | John Sauven