
The nation’s favourite political football just got another turn on the field as the Chancellor backs several airport expansions, but with fierce opposition from politicians and climate activists alike, how likely are these to come to fruition?
Cast your mind back to 2001 (three years before I was born), Tony Blair’s New Labour is in office, and a number of European Airports are expanding. In response, several Labour ministers are “seriously considering” building a third runway at Heathrow. Two years later, in December 2003, the government releases a White Paper titled “The Future of Air Transport.” The 300-page report recommends expansions at Heathrow and Stanstead, with “an urgent need for additional runway capacity in the South East” and “two new runways in the South East by 2030.”
“The further development of Heathrow is supported, including a further new runway and additional terminal capacity to be delivered as soon as possible (within the 2015-2020 period) after the new runway at Stansted, but only if stringent environmental limits can be met. An urgent programme of work and consultation will be started to examine this issue further and to consider how best use can be made of the existing airport”
-The Future of Air Transport report
Come November 2007, Heathrow’s expansion becomes government policy, with Transport Secretary Ruth Kelly setting out proposals for a third runway and a sixth terminal at Heathrow. The plans include building a new 2200m runway north of the existing footprint, which would require bulldozing an entire village, and 50 communities and towns will suffer increased noise.
“If nothing changes, Heathrow's status as a world-class airport will be gradually eroded”
-Ruth Kell
In 2008, the Opposition Conservative Party, headed by David Cameron, vowed to scrap the scheme, instead opting for a high-speed rail link between Leeds, Manchester, Birmingham and London (now referred to as HS2). However, a year later Labour doubled down on the expansion, despite opposition from local residents, environmental groups, neighbouring councils and its own backbenchers. The plans got the go-ahead from PM Gordon Brown in 2009, saying he wanted to "protect the economic future of the country while, at the same time, meeting the very tough environmental conditions we have set ourselves".

Around the same time, London Mayor Boris Johnston and a team of engineers were working on plans to build a new airport in the Thames Estuary, the plans were dubbed ‘Boris Island.’ This wasn’t the first time plans like these had been developed. In fact, the aforementioned December 2003 White Paper dismissed plans to build an airport near Cliffe at the Isle of Grain in the Thames Estuary. The ‘Boris Island’ plans were reprised in 2013 as “London Britannia Airport” by Testrad (Thames Estuary Research and Development), initially an agency formed by Johnson but now also involving other partners. This proposal would’ve cost over £40bn and resulted in the closure of Heathrow Airport. In early 2014 the UK Airports Commission, in its interim report, did not recommend the London Britannia proposal for further analysis.
With Labours loss one year later at the 2010 General Election, the incoming Conservative and Liberal Democrat Coalition immediately scrapped the Heathrow expansion scheme, revoking the permission previously issued by brown in the previous year. However, just two years later Both Prime Minister David Cameron and Chancellor George Osborne acknowledge the need for airport expansion in and around London and say they’re willing to look again at the Heathrow plans. Two years later an independent Airports Commission on future airport policy is set up by the government, to be chaired by Sir Howard Davies. After a three-year investigation, the commission’s final report recommends building a third runway at Heathrow, over Gatwick expansion.
A year later, after a tight Brexit vote, Cameron resigned, leading the fate of Heathrow’s expansion up to the new Prime Minister, Theresa May. She supports the plans and opts to launch a public consultation in October 2016.
Commons’ Transport Select Committee report warns the Heathrow plans shouldn’t go ahead without tougher measures to protect communities and passengers. Factors like noise and air pollution, regional connectivity and airport charges need more scrutiny according to the cross-party group of MPs.
In June 2018, Transport Secretary Chris Grayling proposed an Airports National Policy Statement (NPS) supporting Heathrow expansion is approved by the Cabinet. It passes through parliament by a large majority later that month.

Following this, several legal challenges are launched by a group of councils, residents, London Mayor Sadiq Khan and environmental charities. They won a judgement from the Court of Appeal which found the decision unlawful, as it failed to account for climate commitments. Heathrow Airport would a Supreme Court challenge, overturning the Court of Appeal’s ruling in February 2020.
Covid-19 briefly threatened to derail plans as passenger numbers fell dramatically over 2020, but Heathrow chief executive John Holland-Kaye says the airport “desperately” needs a third runway to enhance the UK’s access to global markets.

And that brings us to the present day, with Rachel Reeves supporting the plans once again. The airport has already spent over £500m on its expansion plans, and with many more millions being spent on reports, White Papers, commissions, and legal challenges, how much more time and money can we expect to spend on this?
Ms Reeves said the Government wanted proposals for a third runway at Heathrow to be produced by the summer, which will then face a full assessment through the airport national policy statement to ensure it “is delivered in line with our legal, environmental and climate objectives”.
Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander said once these have been received, the Department for Transport will review its Airports National Policy Statement NPS).
She added that the NPS “provides the basis for decision making” on a Development Consent Order (DCO) application submitted by the airport. The DCO process is expected to last around 18 months and will involve a public consultation on the expansion plan.
If the scheme is approved, there is a strong possibility that campaigners will launch judicial reviews of the minister’s decision. If legal challenges are not brought or are unsuccessful, Heathrow can begin construction.
There is currently no timeline for when that will happen, but it is likely to be at least another decade before a new runway opens.

Labour has previously announced changes to the planning system, which means opponents of major infrastructure projects will have fewer chances to “frustrate growth” through repeated legal challenges. Sir Keir Starmer said he would end a “challenge culture” that saw major projects such as nuclear power plants, wind farms and roads delayed by unarguable bids for judicial review.
These changes could help the proposed expansion plans at airports get approval quicker, eliminating long and costly battles in court.
Comments