Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Michael Meacher (Labour) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 11 November 2008. It occurred during Debate on Heathrow.


Heathrow

The debate has made it clear that there are essentially three issues before us: first, the national economic role of aviation; secondly, the impact of the third runway on the long-suffering people of west London; and, thirdly, the compatibility or otherwise of that runway with an 80 per cent. cut in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, to which the Government are now firmly committed. I believe that on all three counts, the balance of evidence is clearly now against proceeding with the expansion. On the first point, the airline industry has of course staked its demand for continued expansion on the claim that it is central to the UK economy. However, it is not. No one will deny that the aviation industry has an important role, but it ranks as only the 26th largest industry in the country. It is half the size of the computer industry and, until a few months ago, just a 10th the size of banking and finance—[Laughter.] That figure will now be slightly different, but I hope that the point is still made. Far from being key to the balance of payments, as the industry often argues, it helps to create a tourism deficit of some £17 billion a year—that is what British tourists spend abroad over what visitors to Britain spend in this country. In addition, the UK airline industry gets a subsidy of some £10 billion a year from VAT-free tickets and planes, and tax-free fuel. That is taxpayers’ money that could be far better spent on promoting sustainable transport systems, not least as a substitute for domestic, short-haul flights. In the past decade, the subsidies have been so large that they have allowed a 40 per cent. reduction in air fares at the same time as rail fares have rocketed by 70 per cent. The economic case for the third runway is a lot more questionable than has been made out. Indeed, that view was recently expressed in a report released in February this year by the respected consultant C.E. Delft, which argued that the official figures greatly overestimate both the number of jobs that the runway would generate and the value brought to Britain by extra business travellers.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
482 c706-7 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Aviation Construction Airports Air routes Heathrow Airport Pollution Noise
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk