A phony war between London Mayor Boris Johnson’s proposed
Thames Estuary island airport and the Heathrow third runway has been made the
focus of debate over airport expansion.
In other words, the discussion has been diverted to be about
where it will be rather than whether it is wanted at all.
We know in advance the answer that will come from the
commission on airport capacity chaired by former Financial Services Authority
chair Sir Howard Davis. They will vote for Heathrow – that is what they are
there for.
The commission has been warned not to report until 2015 so
the government can claim to be sticking to the Coalition deal ruling out
airport expansion. It will also avoid a by-election in Zac Goldsmith’s Richmond seat. The Tory
MP had said he’ll resign and stand as an independent if the government commits
to the third runway.
Chancellor George Osborne is Heathrow’s big supporter
because it’s an apparently simple way of trying to get growth back in the
economy and the banks, airport industry and construction companies want it.
Osborne made clear at the weekend that he thinks Heathrow is
the only option and showed his contempt for the hundreds of thousands of
Londoners whose lives are already blighted by noise and pollution: "I
understand all about the local pressures but you have got, as a nation, to be
able to overcome those and make a sensible decision about where that extra
runway capacity in the south-east should be."
A "sensible decision" is, in Toryspeak, one that favours
business.
The argument that there is an urgent need for new airport
capacity simply does not hold water when the figures are examined.
The total number of commercial flights (cargo and passenger
combined) in the UK
in the first quarter of this year was down 1.8% compared to the same quarter in
2011. London
airports saw a smaller decrease (1.4%) than regional airports (2.2%). This is a
steady trend, though there will of course be a blip in passenger numbers for
the Olympic quarter.
In the first quarter of this year there was a small increase
in the number of passengers handled at all UK airports and a small decline in
all commercial flights and cargo tonnage. Cargo tonnage on international
flights to and from the UK
has remained broadly the same since 2000, in contrast with the 1990s when it
was rising at 7% per annum.
A smaller number of cargo flights from Europe is being offset
by a larger number from the so-called BRIC countries, Brazil, Russia India and,
in particular, China.
The truth is that the system is desperately trying to
generate growth by increasing airport capacity, rather than meeting an existing
need.
The main result of airport expansion would be to facilitate
imports of goods from China
whilst sending a few British suits to sell financial services on the return
flight. Trying to slow China ’s
slide into slump is crucial for profits everywhere.
Over half of China 's
exports are a result of foreign (including British) business locating part of
their global manufacturing chain in China . This rises to 90% in
high-tech sectors. So when Osborne talks about the economy he doesn’t mean the
British economy, he means the world capitalist economy.
To try and get the system back on track they will go for
growth – any kind of growth, at any price and anywhere in the world. The
environmental impact of new airport capacity, and whether the mass of the
people agree to it or not, simply does not feature in their thinking.
So will Ed Miliband and Labour refuse to take part in this
fraudulent commission? Not likely! New Labour supported Heathrow expansion when
in government for the same business reasons as Osborne and Cameron support it
now. As on all major issues, there is a cigarette paper between the major parties.
Penny Cole
Environment editor
