Heathrow submits ‘shovel-ready' plans for third runway
The 2-mile (3.2km) runway expansion would cross a diverted M25 and allow more than 750 additional flights a day over London, helping bring the total annual number of passengers to 150 million.
Environmental campaigners called it a 'doomed scheme' that would release millions of tonnes of CO2 while benefiting only a small minority of rich flyers.
Heathrow said that with government support it could obtain planning permission by 2029 and have the runway in operation by 2035.
Its proposals remain essentially the same as those submitted in 2019 and approved in principle by the government and MPs. That scheme survived a brief block on climate grounds sparked by legal challenges from campaigners, overturned on appeal in 2020.
However, the plans were put on hold as passenger numbers dropped during the pandemic. The shareholders in the airport, which include the French private equity firm Ardian and Saudi Arabia and Qatar's sovereign wealth funds, are seeking legislative change, as well as long-term political support, before filing a full planning application.
Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, has strongly endorsed expansion, but Heathrow is seeking firm policy guarantees after previous runway plans were overturned.
These include airspace modernisation to ensure extra flight paths and the passing of the planning and infrastructure bill. The airport is also seeking guarantees that the aviation regulator, the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), would allow Heathrow to levy charges to airlines at a level high enough to recoup its investment.
Heathrow said the price of the runway itself would now be £21bn, up from £14bn six years ago, due to inflation in construction costs. An additional extension of Terminal 5 to support the extra passengers would cost £12bn, while another £15bn spend is planned to upgrade the wider airport regardless of the runway development.
The chief executive of the airport, Thomas Woldbye, said it had 'never been more important or urgent to expand Heathrow'.
He said: 'We are effectively operating at capacity to the detriment of trade and connectivity. With a green light from government and the correct policy support underpinned by a fit-for-purpose regulatory model, we are ready to mobilise and start investing this year in our supply chain across the country. We are uniquely placed to do this for the country. It is time to clear the way for takeoff.'
A government spokesperson said: 'Expanding Heathrow could drive growth, trade and tourism, whilst unlocking over 100,000 jobs.'
The government has promised to review the plans over the summer, with Heathrow pressing for a green light in September. It will also examine a rival proposal from a developer, the Arora Group, which has drawn up plans for a shorter runway further to the east.
Sign up to Business Today
Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning
after newsletter promotion
A Heathrow spokesperson said the airport was open to discussing with airlines the potential for a shorter runway, but it did not believe alternative schemes could reduce the cost or deliver the same benefits as the existing plans.
The hub's expansion is backed by business groups and unions, as well as the government, despite arguments that unchecked aviation growth is incompatible with Britain's net zero ambitions and tackling the climate emergency.
The CBI, British Chambers of Commerce, MakeUK and the Federation of Small Businesses said in a joint statement that the third runway 'opens up vital access to major and emerging markets [and] unlocks billions in private investment, strengthening supply chains, creating jobs, and driving skills across the country'.
Heathrow claims expansion would also create more competition. British Airways currently operates half of all flights from Heathrow and airlines jealously guard rights to valuable slots. EasyJet said the runway represented 'a unique opportunity for easyJet to operate from the airport at scale for the first time and bring with it lower fares for consumers'.
However, opponents questioned whether the scheme would progress, having failed to move ahead so far despite approval from two previous governments.
Paul McGuinness, the chair of the No 3rd Runway coalition, said: 'There's a real danger that we'll end up with a hole in the ground and a debt pile for taxpayers to underwrite, because the government had foolishly encouraged Heathrow's profligate self-interest, as if blind to the lessons of HS2.'
The mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, said a new runway would have 'a hugely detrimental impact on our environment'.
Dr Douglas Parr, the policy director for Greenpeace UK, said the announcements meant residents around Heathrow would have 'their lives put on hold for a few more years while more money and time is wasted on a doomed scheme … the economic case for the whole debacle just will not fly'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
2 minutes ago
- The Independent
Nigel Farage should do his bit to keep the peace
There is no situation where an intervention by Nigel Farage won't make things worse. He has, after all, made a career out of detecting, exploiting and exacerbating people's grievances and fears, a grim cycle that has delivered electoral success. The man is gifted in his insidious trade, if nothing else. Nowhere is this strategy more dangerously deployed than in issues of migration, race and crime, so often shamelessly conflated by the Reform UK leader with a studied and long-experienced hand. It is done almost instinctively. Once, he even blamed being late for a 'meet-the-Ukip leader' event in Wales on traffic jams on the M4 caused by immigration, rather than, say, the infamous bottleneck at Newport. Rather more grievously, his actions in the aftermath of the horrific Southport murders a year ago did nothing to calm tempers and stop the wild social media speculation that the person responsible was a Muslim asylum seeker who'd more or less just arrived in Britain, via a small boat. He plainly has no regrets and is approaching the disclosure of details concerning the rape of a 12-year-old girl in Nuneaton in the same reckless manner. He and his Reform UK colleagues on Warwickshire County Council are demanding, as Mr Farage did last year, that the immigration status of those involved be released by the police. The justification, once again, is that there is a 'cover-up' – a serious allegation made without foundation – and people are being denied the truth, presumably through some sense of misguided political correctness. Mr Farage implies, as he did last year, that this 'cover-up' – which he presumably sees as a deliberate attempt to deceive the public – only serves to create confusion and inflame feelings. In fact, of course, it is he who is creating additional tension, adding to a sense of injustice and the fear that the police are more interested in defending perpetrators than defending victims, despite the obvious truth that those accused have been caught and taken into custody by those same police, doing their duty. It is difficult to see why the migration status of everyone arrested on a serious offence should be automatically released, as Mr Farage suggests, even when it is immediately known for sure. If the person involved is a refugee, for example, accepted for indefinite leave to remain, then that does not make them 'more guilty' or their offence 'more serious' simply by the fact that they may have escaped from torture or some war zone. There is a strong probability that migration status will be equated to race, which is even less relevant. The only possible valid use of immigration status in the criminal justice system is if the person is convicted. At that point, the question of deportation does arise. The fact is that someone's immigration status can affect the feelings of many perfectly law-abiding and worried people demonstrating outside 'migrant hotels' (real or imagined) up and down the country on legitimate grounds. They are not all fascists or racists, still less pathologically violent. They are angry and fearful at what they learn from the news and the speculation on social media, and they deserve to be told the facts. But there is just the suspicion that immigration status can, in some grotesque, emotionally-charged way, lead to violence and mob rule. It is, quite simply, wrong and criminally so, to attempt arson on a hotel with human beings inside, whatever the circumstances. It doesn't help anyone or solve anything. If a rapist comes from a family that can trace its English origins to Anglo-Saxon times, that should make people no more or less angry than if the criminal has only lived here for a matter of weeks and is from some country in Africa or the Middle East. Race should play no part in justice, even mob justice. It would be refreshing, statesmanlike and a genuinely great public service if Mr Farage and those like him used their public platform to call for calm and peaceful protest, and not display so much apparent tacit support for angry, violent reactions in tense demonstrations. His warnings sound too much like self-fulfilling prophecies, as when he declared a few weeks ago: 'I don't think anybody in London understands just how close we are to civil disobedience on a vast scale in this country.' Given what happened last July and early August, the opposite is surely true: ministers and police chiefs are all too well aware of such a possibility. The difference is that, unlike Mr Farage, they don't seem to be talking it up. It would make a useful change if Mr Farage didn't make everything into a 'cover-up' and accept that, in many cases, details are withheld for sound legal reasons concerning a fair trial and the provisions of the Contempt of Court Act 1981. The police should not have to break the law and risk upsetting a trial and letting the guilty go free simply because of the threat of a riot if they don't, or accusations of 'two-tier policing'. What's more, Mr Farage shouldn't call for the resignation of chief constables, or any other officers, who are trying to keep the oaths they took to uphold the laws set down by parliament and the King's peace. Standing up for the police, defending the independent judiciary, condemning violence and respecting human rights are, in fact, the patriotic British things to do at times such as these. If he cares about the cohesion of communities and the rule of law as deeply as he claims, Mr Farage should do his bit to keep the peace as well.
Daily Mail
3 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Trump claims Jaguar Land Rover is in 'turmoil' after rebrand
Donald Trump has claimed Jaguar Land Rover is in 'absolute turmoil' after the company's 'totally disastrous woke ' rebrand. The US President labelled the British car maker's recent advert, which featured brightly dressed models, as a 'total disaster' and 'stupid'. Trump was scathing of Jaguar as he compared the firm's fortunes to those of clothing brand American Eagle in a rant on his social media platform Truth Social. ' Sydney Sweeney , a registered Republican, has the "HOTTEST" ad out there. It's for American Eagle, and the jeans are "flying off the shelves",' he wrote. 'Go get 'em Sydney! On the other side of the ledger, Jaguar did a stupid, and seriously WOKE advertisement, THAT IS A TOTAL DISASTER! The CEO just resigned, and the company is in absolute turmoil. 'Who wants to buy a Jaguar after looking at that disgraceful ad. Shouldn't they have learned a lesson from Bud Lite, which went Woke.' Trump ended the post by saying that 'being woke is losers'. It was announced last week that Jaguar Land Rover CEO Adrian Mardell is to retire at the end of this year. Mardell, 64, has been at the company for more than three decades including the last two years as chief executive during one of the most transformative periods in the firm's recent history. Arguably his biggest involvement has been his role in Jaguar's controversial 'woke' rebrand and shift to an electric-only premium car brand from 2026. Last month JLR said it was axing 500 management roles , which are going as part of a voluntary redundancy programme for managers in the UK. A spokesman said: 'As part of normal business practice, we regularly offer eligible employees the opportunity to leave JLR through limited voluntary redundancy programmes.' Sales of the luxury car manufacturer appear to have nose-dived following its controversial move to scrap its iconic 'growler' big cat logo in November. The firm's rebrand saw it replace the well-known badge in favour of a geometric 'J' design - which lovers of the brand raged looked like the logo on a handbag clasp. And as the firestorm surrounding the famed car maker's change continues to engulf it , sales at Jaguar Europe have plunged a staggering 97.5 per cent. But the British car marque has insisted the reason for the freefall in sales is not because of a lack of support or an image overhaul - but because it has stopped making older models as it focuses on its relaunch with an all-electric offering. Defending the news, the firm said it was 'pointless' to compare figures for 2024 and 2025, as 'Jaguar is not currently on sale in the UK' while it goes through its 'sunset period' of radical change. A spokeswoman for Jaguar Land Rover (JLR) said: 'Jaguar's transformation towards a new portfolio of pure-electric vehicles was announced as part of the Reimagine strategy in 2021. JLR always envisaged a period when the current range would "no longer be on sale" before the introduction of the new Jaguar collection. 'Production of XE, XF, F-TYPE, I-PACE and E-PACE all came to an end in 2024 as part of that transition. This strategic "sunset" of the product range is going to plan and will allow Jaguar to transform and reposition the brand for the future. 'Comparing Jaguar sales to 2024 is pointless as we are no longer producing vehicles in 2025 with low levels of retail inventory available. Jaguar's rebranding is not related to a sales decline.' Jaguar has not announced an official date for when its new fleet of high-end electric motors will hit the forecourt. It stopped sales of current Jaguars on November 11 as it prepared for its next generation of luxury vehicles to arrive. Defending the campaign late last year, JLR's Managing Director Rawdon Glover told the Financial Times: 'If we play in the same way that everybody else does, we'll just get drowned out.'
Times
3 minutes ago
- Times
Police chief ‘pressured over statement linking riots to migration'
A police chief says she was pressured by a government minister to retract a statement she made suggesting that 'mass uncontrolled immigration' was one of the reasons behind rioting last summer. Donna Jones, the police and crime commissioner for Hampshire and the Isle of Wight, said the minister phoned her after she made the controversial comments in the wake of the disorder following the Southport attacks. Jones said the newly appointed minister, whom she declined to name, told her 'you and I both know this has nothing to do with immigration', and asked her to take down the statement. Jones believes the episode shows that the government is 'out of touch' and fears that anti-migrant hotel protests will escalate and 'parts of the country risk falling into a state of lawlessness'.
