Airport expansion

The London airport report recommends an extra runway and inclines towards building it at Heathrow, though it leaves open the possibility of Gatwick. I will study the report over the week-end and will send in formal representations to Ministers in due course. I would appreciate constituents’ views before I do so. In an interview today on the report I stressed the need to do better at controlling noise from Heathrow over our area. I am making new representations about the current level of noise and possible ways of abating it later this month.


  1. Pete
    July 1, 2015

    I went to Windsor for a day trip and was appalled at the constant aircraft noise. People pay an arm and a leg to live in the Thames Valley/ Heathrow corridor and have to put up with that awful racket. Add that to the appallingly traffic, ludicrous parking fees, sky high taxes and I really wonder how anyone can actually want to live there. The wages are higher but is anyone better off after the costs?

    1. alan jutson
      July 2, 2015


      Agreed traffic and parking charges in Windsor means we do not go there for anything else other than the theatre.

  2. Narrow Shoulders
    July 2, 2015

    Gatwick can be delivered sooner and without affecting Heathrow output. These perceived fiscal benefits could be reaped earlier by looking at the Gatwick option.

    If we truly need an extra runway a high speed shuttle between Gatwick and Heathrow with an extra runway at Gatwick.

    Heathrow is yesterday’s legacy, Gatwick is the future

  3. CdBrux
    July 2, 2015

    Firstly I must say I am not a constituent.

    My view is although the LHR option is said to be more beneficial for the country, LGW option should take less time (before any consideration that the ‘wrangling’ about LHR is quite probably going to take much longer) as I understand, so delivering benefits earlier.

    Additionally there has to be a balance between pure financial gain and quality of life which is far harder to measure, and sticking to legal limits is a cold way of measuring that.

    Not any easy decision, from what I know I would lean to LGW.

  4. alan jutson
    July 2, 2015

    No to Heathrow expansion

    Yes to another runway at Gatwick, cheaper and quicker to operate.

    Then look again at Boris Island for the extra capacity addition that will be required for the next 50 years.

    At the moment we are only on catch up for present demand. !!!

  5. Matt
    July 2, 2015

    this is another example of our bureaucratic systems slowing down development. In the decade plus we have taken to not reach a decision other countries have planned and built whole new airports bigger than Heathrow. The government seem quite happy to now sit on their hands for another 6 months. How to balance everyone having a fair say and the country actually moving on is the real issue.

    Can’t stand the noise? Don’t fly.

    Reply The government has to consider the report properly, otherwise any decision it takes can be subject to judicial review. For your noise suggestion to work all have to decide not to fly!

  6. David Price
    July 8, 2015

    I would not support any option that involved closing LHR as this would have a significantly detrimental effect on the Thames Valley economy, not just the businesses directly involved in LHR but also those that are here because of the convenient international transport links.

    Regardless of which of LHR or LGW are upgraded and extended I think a key development would be to establish a fast rail connection between the two and maybe other sites such as Stanstead. This would have the benefit of distributing the traffic and noise, avoiding the need to transit central London and simplify transfers.

Comments are closed.