Financial Times

Also known as the gutter press, the papers present the viewpoints of various segments of society, and give MPs an opportunity to write directly to them.
Post Reply
User avatar
Blakesley
A-team
A-team
Posts: 292
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2020 5:19 am
XP: 14
Trait(s): None
Discord username: Blakesley

Financial Times

Post by Blakesley »

Image
User avatar
Blakesley
A-team
A-team
Posts: 292
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2020 5:19 am
XP: 14
Trait(s): None
Discord username: Blakesley

Re: Financial Times

Post by Blakesley »

"Heathwick" a barrier to global Britain, say airlines and industry

The government's "Heathwick" proposals will be a barrier to building a "global Britain" in the wake of Brexit, say industry sources and the Confederation of British Industry. Insiders point to technical challenges, less long haul connectivity, and broader economic impacts to make this assessment.

The airline industry points out the "Heathwick" cannot feasibly bring about a true "hub" for air travel. A British Airways executive added: "Even with optimistic expectations for a 15 minute transfer between Heathrow and Gatwick, the reality of wait times for the train to arrive, deplaning, and moving between terminals means that it would be next to impossible for passengers to achieve a 45 minute gate-to-gate travel time." 45 minutes is seen as the international standard that allows for connections between flights to be made at large hub airports. "If the stars were to align, it could be possible, maybe 5-10% of the time," said the BA team. "That's not good enough to be competitive as a hub."

The government's proposed expansion at Gatwick would have a better carbon balance for the country. However, that is at the cost of connectivity. "The lower carbon numbers from Gatwick expansion are a result of fewer long-haul flights and less global connectivity," added an analyst. The reduced long haul capability is likely the combined result of transfer difficulties and legacy carriers being unlikely to transfer services from Heathrow to Gatwick. "BA won't say it out loud, but they have no intention of leaving Heathrow once this comes online - and they are not obligated to."

There are, of course, additional impacts that industry expects from this decision. "Despite the rail link, 'Heathwick' may not serve as the transfer hub that the government anticipates," said airline officials. A Gatwick official added that, "We anticipate Gatwick retaining large point-to-point capability." The impact of this would likely see a rise and short- and medium-haul flights including to other cities. There is a chance that increased short-haul air traffic capability could alter the business case for national high speed rail networks in the United Kingdom.

CBI chief Carolyn Fairbairn added: "I don't see why we're revisiting this. Heathrow expansion was agreed to. It was a plan that was good for the economy. Good for travelers. Good for British competitiveness and connectedness. We're creating uncertainty for business and diminishing Britain's ability to operate in global markets. That is the key takeaway from this plan. I hope the government reconsiders it. If carbon is the main concern, there are a million other ways to offset carbon emissions that don't involve creating chaos in South East air capacity."

Despite criticisms, the plan has been praised in certain areas of west London, which were set to be subject to increased noise pollution as a result of Heathrow expansion. "I think this is a very good deal for London," said one voter. While voters in the East End say that it may not change their lives dramatically, they can't be bothered to see this as a bad thing. "It's investment in our city - who can complain really?"
Post Reply

Return to “The Papers”