A decision on where Britain’s next runway should be built is expected this summer and, even after years of debate, Gatwick’s expansion plan remains the best and most deliverable solution to the need for extra capacity.
For the first time, Gatwick has been allowed to stake its claim for expansion. Heathrow’s plan would blight the lives of hundreds of thousands of people and reinforce a high-cost monopoly provider at the expense of passengers – but now, finally, there is an alternative.
Gatwick is the solution that can:
- deliver all the connectivity and economic benefits the UK needs, at a fraction of the environmental cost
- enhance competition and spreads the benefits throughout the regions and nations of the UK
- serve all airline models and will future-proof the UK’s aviation industry to changing trends in the market, and, most importantly,
- can actually deliver the new runway the industry so desperately needs.
Gatwick’s case has won many supporters because it can provide all the economic benefits of additional runway capacity at a fraction of the environmental costs and provides the Airports Commission and the Government with a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to solve the issue of airport capacity for the generations to come.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Violent Bonham Carter features on Fake or Fortune?
Have resignations led to a rethink?
High Fell leaflet watch (2)
Stefano Brunesci
Robert Doyle
Peter Martin
Simon
Ben Austin
3 Comments
As part of promoting the “Northern Power House”, we up here north of Watford really need the equivalent of a Manchester Airport EAST of the Pennines. (Leeds/Bradford is very limited in what it can offer and needs radical expansion (or somewhere else (Humberside) needs developing instead if environmental/social conditions rule this out). Like HS2 (extremely unpopular among many up here for all kinds of reasons) (and which led to the ludicrous situation of Wakefield Council voting against HS2 while the local MP , Mary Creagh, was Labour transport spokesperson (and had to sing the praises of the scheme!) (Probably the main reason she was shifted to International Development?), I would much prefer to see major steps being taken to promote balanced economic development in England rather than see yet more resources being pumped into London and the South East bubble!
I agree –
“…. Heathrow’s plan would blight the lives of hundreds of thousands of people …” which is just one of the reasons why Liberal Democrats in London have opposed expansion of Heathrow for 40 years.
It is doubtful that expanding Gatwick , between London and the Sussex coast, is the best answer for Britain.
Survival chances for those on an aircraft that crashes are also worse at Gatwick Airport after Tory fire service cuts. If we are unlucky enough to be in a crash, the least we expect is that the emergency services will arrive quickly to rescue survivors. The response to Gatwick is now slower and smaller than ever, despite aircraft now carrying more people. 3 of the 5 nearest fire engines to the Airport have been cut. The response to aircraft in serious trouble has been cut from 10 fire engines to just 6. Other essential specialist vehicles, including a special rescue vehicle, have also been removed from the automatic response. Poor crewing also means that many of the nearest fire engines and support vehicles are often unavailable. As many as 16 of the nearest 22 fire engines have been without crews on occasions, so response times have increased dramatically. People who survive the crash may not survive the longer wait for rescue, thanks to the ill-considered council cuts.