Or £50billion to start with – and that’s before we begin properly.
The idea of Boris island – or an airport in the Thames Estuary has been floated again, and this time the government is paying attention. Well a bit to the point where it will form part of the formal consultation plan on UK aviation.
The study is due to commence in March, in a vain attempt to hold onto the UK aviation hub status that has been eaten away by larger hubs such as Paris CDG, Amsterdam Schiphol and Frankfurt-Main
By 2050, London is estimated to be handling more than 400 million passengers through its Five Airports, and there is a need to add capacity.
In political terms, The Prime Minister has ruled out expanding Heathrow, whilst the Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg is opposed to the Estuary idea.
The idea is to build a new airport – with a new infrastructure to go with it – roads, high speed, warehouses and create chaos.
BAA is happy that more capacity is recognised, but fears a new airport would force a Heathrow downsize.
The site on the Kent side on the Thames Estuary is a known home of birds during the winter months, as well as being a breeding ground for some breeds.
Meanwhile opposition comes from Ken Livingston (Labour Party) in regards to noise, congestion and pollution for people living in Bromley, Bexley, Havering and Barking, with the jobs threatened. Brian Paddick (Liberal Democrats) said Heathrow would be “closed down” if the estuary airport was built, causing “devastation” in the area. The RSPB, Medway Council and Kent County Council also oppose the Thames Estuary idea, saying it is “undeliverable, unaffordable and unnecessary”.
Even Ryanair calls the idea nuts. British Airways notes if Thames Estuary opens, Heathrow would have to be downsized.
Meanwhile, Plans for Runway 3 at Heathrow was thrown out when Conservative/Lib Dem coalition came to power, with Stansted upgrades thrown out too – including a second runway. Gatwick cannot upgrade before 2019 due to local agreements.
So what does this leave us? That’s right, a collective mess, with political parties trying to make the best of a situation they created. And the so called Aviation Consultation Plan will probably be another bunch of political whitewash when no one has the guts to do anything about it – in case they offend their voters.
In fact we’ve been here before with the proposed Maplin Sands airport – which got canned due to Ecological and access reasons.
My views? Runway 3 should had been built at LHR, and the 2nd Runway at STN too to provide some of the extra capacity needed. But its interesting to note that the areas where these would had had been constructed… are Conservative Party held seats/heartlands. Funny that…
