If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to our or .
| Sourced From |
As chief executive of BAA for the last 10 months, Colin Matthews has watched as Heathrow airport turned into an iconic battleground for environmental campaigners furious at the prospect of a third runway.
Now expansion has been approved by the Government, well organised residents’ groups and eco-activists have pledged to do all they can to prevent the project ever going ahead.
“Lots of people oppose Heathrow development and do so on lots of different grounds, and the grounds, I think, are complicated and not black and white.”
Colin Matthews, BAA chief executive
“I know we will face opposition,” Mr Matthews told me across a conference table when I met him at BAA’s headquarters next to the airport.
“I continue to be hopeful and optimistic the vast majority of people are going to respect the law.”
However, many of those angry at the adverse impact Heathrow expansion will have on them believe the Government´s decision was undemocratic, their views were ignored, and direct action is now their last resort.
Campaigners cite the consultation process - in which only 11 per cent of 70,000 responses were in favour of expansion - and the seemingly huge lobbying power of BAA, the formerly state-owned air operator.
Mr Matthews said: “I think the decision has been entirely democratic, which isn’t to say it’s an easy decision and isn’t to say there are not people who continue to be committed opponents.
“I think it is important people get a chance to express their views.
“There has been a good level of debate and I think the voices against development have been loud and clear in the Government, in the Commons, and more broadly, and I think that’s good.
“A new runway is such an important and controversial decision, it’s only the Government that can make that decision. It’s certainly not up to BAA to say we are or we are not going to build a runway, only the Government can make that decision on a democratic basis.”
Impact of expansion
The Heathrow boss is fully aware of the life-changing effect expansion will have on some communities in west London.
He spoke sympathetically in an email to employees of the “heavy responsibility” the airport will have towards its neighbouring residents to minimise the impact.
He also understands there are credible arguments on both sides of the debate and, although he says a third runway is essential for Heathrow to survive as an international hub airport, environmental concerns must be tackled.
The issues are not straight-forward, he says, and nowhere is this more the case than in Hounslow where many residents work at the airport and are simultaneously set to benefit from increased employment security and be blighted by more low-flying planes overhead.
Mr Matthews said: “Having the right capacity at Heathrow is important economically for the community and for the country as a whole, but we do understand the really significant impact the development will have on local communities and realise it’s our job to do everything we possibly can to minimise the possible impacts.
“Although there are compensation schemes for noise and property, the fact is there are some impacts you can not measure economically, and for some people no amount of compensation is going to in their mind make up for it, and I understand that.
“Lots of people oppose Heathrow development and do so on lots of different grounds, and the grounds, I think, are complicated and not black and white.”
Strict environmental limits
He echoed the words of Transport Secretary Geoff Hoon in committing the airport to strict environmental limits, which will have to be met before it is allowed to make the most of the extra capacity.
Campaigners, MPs and residents groups have questioned how Heathrow will be able to minimise its nitrogen dioxide emissions and keep noise pollution below 2002 levels while increasing flight numbers.
Mr Matthews is optimistic, but conceded “I do not have a crystal ball” to predict how soon the promised concessions such as the cleaner, quieter A380 aircraft, will come into widespread operation.
He said: “With the question of noise, which is a topic right at the top of people’s agenda, I think the story is a positive one.
“It’s based on the fact that new aircraft - available today, not future technology yet to be invented – are quieter than the aircraft they are to replace.
“Air quality, that’s frankly more complicated because the majority of pollution comes from ground vehicles, not aircraft, therefore a solution to this is not just about aircraft.
“It is also about better surface access to Heathrow. The more convenient the access means more people will choose to come to the airport by train rather than by car.”
He added: “Our projections are yes we can meet the targets as laid down by 2015 in the case of the air quality demands.
“People have expressed scepticism, but we can not add new flights until it is proved we are operating in the limits. Our modelling says we can achieve that.”
Protests
As well as these worries, Mr Matthews addressed the bigger picture in terms of Heathrow´s place in the climate change debate.
Protests against the third runway have progressively attracted more and more eco-campaigners from up and down the country, joining forces with residents living under the flight-path.
Mr Matthews believes the answer lies with international energy trading schemes, whereby airlines that want to fly more will have to cut their own emissions or pay for someone else to do so.
He argued that restricting capacity at Heathrow would do nothing to reduce world-wide greenhouse gas emissions.
“It is a topic which needs to be tackled on a global basis,” he said.
“The reduction of runway capacity is not a good way to limit carbon…what you get is congestion which means long periods of time with aircraft taxiing on the ground with their engines running and staying in the sky burning fuel, which is an outrage environmentally.”
So, if the plans for a third runway were to flop, what would be the fate of the world´s busiest international airport?
“It would be a continuation of a trend that has been happening over the last decade or so,” Mr Matthews said.
“In the absence of more capacity, more traffic flows through competing hubs in Paris and Amsterdam.
“If you look back over the last 10 years the number of destinations from Heathrow has dropped from 220 to 180. Destinations from Paris moved from 180 to 220. We are progressively losing our leadership in Europe.
“Right now Paris operates at I think 75 per cent capacity, unlike Heathrow which is 99 per cent. Paris has got plenty of scope to absorb any business we are generous enough to send their way.”
And, at the other end of the scale, if expansion goes ahead so Heathrow can keep up with the continued growth of the aviation industry (Paris, Frankfurt and Amsterdam are all investing heavily in new capacity), will a fourth runway be necessary in the future?
“The fact is it’s not my job to promise to build a runway or not build a runway.
“I really don’t have any basis for looking 40 or 50 years into the future and making confident predictions as to what is going to be required.”
{ 0 comments… add one now }
Leave a Comment