Who will win the runway battle?

Already serving over 38 million passengers a year, Gatwick bosses claim it is the natural choice over Heathrow to “future-proof the UK” from the rapid expansion of new aviation hubs in the Middle East and Far East.

But with the independent Airports Commission’s public consultation closing just next week on February 3, the fiery dispute over where to increase aviation infrastructure is as important as ever to business leaders and environmentalists.

Campaigners continue to contest the effects a second runway in Sussex would have on hospitals, the capacity of the M23 and rail links to London, as well as business growth.

The only point on which crusaders from both sides agree is the importance of mobilising residents and politicians to take part in a debate which has irrevocable consequences for growth and sustainability. Such is the impact of winning these people over that only last month Heathrow bought up advertising space on billboards as far afield as Manchester and Newcastle. For Gatwick’s part, they were revealed to have had distributed 200,000 leaflets saying, “with your help we can go the distance”; the importance of winning over the public is clearly paramount.

Also keen to win over the public are MPs, who face re-election in just under 100 days time. But opinion among parliamentarians in Sussex is far from unified.

Henry Smith MP, whose Conservative Crawley seat covers Gatwick, said he “hadn’t been won over yet”.

He said: “What I want to see articulated stronger in the coming weeks is that pressures on infrastructure, highways, healthcare and school places would be properly mitigated.”

Opinion is polarised in the constituency, the MP claims – there being a large number of people who are attracted by the alleged advantages of boosts to local economies and a similar-sized group concerned with a new runway’s environmental impact.

Despite these comments, and in a major development for the anti-expansion campaign, Crawley Borough councillors this week voted to oppose a second runway, 25 votes to 11. At 10,000ft in length by 500ft wide, the primary concerns they raised were over the size and scope of Gatwick’s proposals on noise, traffic burdens and housing needs.

Tory MP Sir Nicholas Soames, whose Mid Sussex constituency is less than 10 miles from Gatwick, rubbished the proposed expansion, citing a serious lack of infrastructure. And while neighbouring MP and government minister Francis Maude said he is not now speaking publically in favour of or against a second runway, he has previously been on the record opposing one.

Likewise, MEP for the South East and the Greens’ spokesperson for energy and climate change in Europe, Keith Taylor, has stated that he is categorically against the expansion of any new runways in the region. “The public isn’t interested in airport expansion,” he said.

“Communities across the South East are already heavily impacted by noise and air pollution from the aviation industry – adding new runways will only make matters worse.”

But Conservative Brighton MPs Simon Kirby and Mike Weatherley, have added their names to the pro-Gatwick expansion programme.

They cite job creation and the increase in regional airport use, respectively, as primary reasons for backing the scheme.

Foreign tourists and business travellers spent more than £2billion in 2013 in the South East alone, and those from the pro-expansion camp argue a second runway is desperately needed to help this figure to grow.

Jeremy Taylor, chief executive of business partnership Gatwick Diamond, said growth at Gatwick would be “a gamechanger – not just for the region, but for the whole of the South East”.

He said: “The consideration for the government is that if we don’t win for Gatwick then the bid will go to Heathrow.

“But the question still remains: how on Earth will it help serve the South East region?”

Gatwick claims expanded airport capacity will contribute £1.73bn a year to the local economy, with the growth resulting in the construction of up to 9,000 new homes.

It will cost £7.8bn to deliver their proposal, the airport estimates, funded wholly by its private owners – rather than propped up by the public purse, as it alleges Heathrow would have to be. The Airports Commission, an independent body reporting to the Department for Transport, is charged with adjudicating on and recommending a solution to airport expansion to the government in the next parliament.

The commission, chaired by economist Sir Howard Davies, has already estimated that transport infrastructure improvements would cost £5.7bn; much of this, Gatwick claims, could be borne by the taxpayer.

With the injection of private funding to produce economic benefits for the wider regions, expansion at Gatwick could do for South London and the wider region what the Olympics did for East London, said Sir Terry Farrell – one of the UK’s leading architecture planners.

His remark echoes that of Councillor Bill Acraman, who said at West Sussex County Council’s debate on Gatwick back in 2013, that a “mega-city” the size of Brighton would emerge in the North of the county if a second runway were constructed.

However the airport’s claim that it will create 120,000 jobs faces strong criticism from anti-expansion lobbyists Campaign Against Gatwick Noise and Emissions (CAGNE), whose chairwoman said that 280 businesses would look to relocate away from the area if the government backed a second runway in Sussex. Nestlé declined to comment on Gatwick expansion.

Sally Pavey, chairwoman of CAGNE and a businesswoman herself, also raised concerns about two new schools – one being built, Forge Wood, and one proposed, Manor Royal – as well as 2,500 proposed homes, which could find themselves situated directly next to one of the busiest runways in the world.

A Gatwick spokesman said: “At an early stage, when both schools were being planned, Gatwick raised concerns about the possible impact of aircraft noise. Other bodies however decided to proceed and establish schools in both locations.

“The impact on schools is one of the factors the Airports Commission will consider when it decides where a new runway should be built. Ten times more schools would be affected by noise if Heathrow were to expand.” While Gatwick estimates the creation of 22,000 airport-related jobs by 2050, unemployment in Crawley currently stands at just 1.2%. Anti-expansion body Gatwick Area Conservation Campaign (GACC) has suggested there will need to be a large scale of inward labour migration, possible from workers elsewhere in the UK from the European Union to make up the shortfall, leading to strains on already congested motorway and rail connections.

But the airport stated a second runway would affect less than 5% of the households affected at Heathrow today, and adds that only 166 homes would need to be demolished in order to accommodate expansion – compared to 950 if their competitors in West London were backed by the government.

With air traffic noise a primary concern amongst many in the region, Gatwick has said any extra air traffic would be directed over a much less populated area than Heathrow and insists it has carried out thorough consultation, pledging to address issues of concern in the locality.

But Gatwick’s claim that they have a good working relationship with community leaders was thrown into doubt just last week, when West Sussex County Council followed the lead of their Kent councillor counterparts, and repealed its support for aviation expansion in the region, saying residents who lived under flight paths would suffer the most.

Surrey and Mid Sussex County Councils, as well as Tunbridge Wells, Mole Valley and Horsham District Councils have all voted to oppose a second runway.

The Gatwick Coordination Group (GCG), a body of 6 Sussex and Surrey MPs, also yesterday submitted its response to the Davies Commission, slamming airport expansion in Sussex as “a catastrophe for local communities and a disaster for the national interest”.

Comprised of parliamentarians whose constituencies would all be severely affected by a second runway, the Group said it wanted to expose “the weakness of, but also the danger in Gatwick’s proposals”.

It criticised the airport’s lack of accountability and failure to consult with affected communities, saying Gatwick had not properly explain how the required workforce – some 22,000 by 2050– would be found, and infrastructure properly invested in to meet the huge surge in demand.

Only in East Sussex did county councillors this week choose to back airport expansion, electing, by 27 to 19 votes, to support a second runway in their neighbouring county.

Gatwick has attracted the backing from Birmingham and Edinburgh airport’s CEOs but has not yet won over GACC’s chairman Brendon Sewill.

He said: “It’s easy to think expansion would be just another strip of concrete and some nice flights down to the Mediterranean.

“But turning Gatwick into a two-runway airport would alter the character of Sussex, Surrey and West Kent forever.”

The question of aviation expansion has plagued the county – and indeed the country – for many years. But in just a few months time, when the Davies Commission gives its verdict on who it will back and the government has its final say, Sussex will finally have a definitive answer.

Public consultation on a new runway at Gatwick will close on Tuesday, February 3.

To join the debate and tell the Airports Commission your feelings visit: www. smartsurvey.co.uk/s/134578HXHDU.

Facts and figures:

• February 3: Public consultation closes
• £1.73bn a year for the local economy if expansion goes ahead, Gatwick claims
• £7.8bn to deliver Gatwick expansion
• 40,000 new homes would need to be built, the same amount as in Crawley
• Up to 95,000,000 passengers a year, GACC claims

EasyJet backs Heathrow’s bid

Gatwick was dealt a substantial blow yesterday when EasyJet, the biggest airline operating out of the airport, announced it was backing the bid for expansion at rival Heathrow.
Carolyn Mccall, the commerical airline’s chief executive, said Heathrow’s expansion is in the best interests of passengers as it has the greatest demand.
In a submission to the Davies Commission, the low-cost carrier said it believed enlarging the West London airport would provide the greatest passenger and economic benefits to the UK.