Heathrow expected to win green light for £49bn third runway 

A cheaper alternative plan for a shorter Heathrow third runway has reportedly been rejected in favour of a £49 billion in-house scheme involving moving parts of the M25.

 

A proposal from hotelier Surinder Arora’s Arora Group for a 2,800-metre runway that would have cost less at £23 billion and avoided alterations to one of the busiest parts of the motorway appear to have failed to sway the government.

 

However, the possibility of other companies building and operating terminals at the airport remains, potentially enabling Arora Group to create its own projects at the site and drive competition.

 

Airlines such as British Airways and Virgin Atlantic will seek assurances that they will not be burdened with higher costs and landing fees which would need to be passed on in the price of fares.

 

Campaigners against expansion of the London hub condemned any approval of Heathrow’s third runway plan as an act of “national self-harm”.

 

Heathrow has long insisted that its full-length privately financed 3,500-metre runway is “shovel-ready” and would be capable of being operational within a decade, opening the capacity constrained London hub up to at least 30 new daily routes.

 

The airport’s capacity would increase to handle up to 756,000 flights and 150 million passengers.

 

Heathrow has pledged to consult with airlines, the local community, local authorities, businesses and others from next year, with a planning application expected to be submitted in 2028.

 

Kenton Jarvis, chief executive of easyJet, which announced annual results today, confirmed in August that expansion at Heathrow “represents a unique opportunity” for the budget carrier to operate from the airport “at scale for the first time and bring with it lower fares for consumers”.

 

Heathrow outlined plans in September to create a new tunnel and bridges for the M25 “minimising the impact” on motorists with a new sector built “offline” on land 130 metres to the west of the motorway.

 

The airport said at the time: “Any design that avoids the M25, some airlines have indicated, would result in a runway too short to accommodate all long-haul flights. 

 

“Building a new runway over a motorway is far from new and has been successfully delivered at other airports including Frankfurt and Charles de Gaulle, Paris.”

 

No 3rd Runway Coalition chair Paul McGuinness said: "The government was always going to support Heathrow’s own bid to expand the airport. 

 

“The exercise of inviting rival proposals was never more than low politics. A ruse to create the impression that there might be some particular quality in Heathrow’s absurdly expensive £49 billion plan – to build what will equate to the UK’s second largest airport next to the current largest, which is already hemmed in by suburbia. 

 

“On behalf of the UK and its taxpayers, the government is not only being irresponsible in giving the go-ahead to this misguided project. It is committing an act of national self-harm.”

 

British Airline Pilots’ Association (Balpa) general secretary Amy Leversidge said: “The government has recently cleared the way for millions of pounds of private investment in airport expansion at Heathrow and Gatwick. This investment will bring hundreds of thousands more flights in and out of the UK, with huge economic benefits as a result.

 

“Now the government needs to make sure that we have enough UK-trained pilots by the time the promised new runways and terminals are built and flights are taking off.

 

“To truly see the benefit of an expanded aviation industry we also need the development of UK-based SAF [sustainable aviation fuel] production facilities. 

 

“This would not only help UK aviation meet the government’s targets for SAF use, reducing aviation’s environmental impact, but also create a domestic SAF supply that enhances our security and resilience.”