Politics may stand in the way of economics when it comes to airport expansion
It is no surprise to see a government that claims to be committed to making economic growth a priority giving the green light to expansion of Gatwick Airport and Luton Airport.
Nor, for that matter, would it be a surprise for a third runway at Heathrow Airport to be given the go-ahead by Sir Keir Starmer‘s government – particularly as Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, told the London Evening Standard in July last year that she had “nothing against expanding airport capacity… I want Heathrow to be that European hub for travel”.
Put in purely economic terms, airport expansion is a no-brainer.
Money blog: Trump’s cryptocurrency crashes as critics call it worthless
The economic case
The independent commission led by Sir Howard Davies, the former chairman of NatWest, and published as long ago as July 2015, concluded that “expanded airport capacity is crucial for the UK’s long-term prosperity”.
Gatwick, according to a report prepared for the airport by the independent economic consultancy Oxera, generated £5.5bn for the economy in 2023 and supported more than 76,000 jobs.
The airport’s owner estimates that expanding it to take annual capacity to 75 million by the mid-2030s, up from the £46.5m it hit in 2019, would create around 14,000 jobs and generate an extra £1bn a year in economic benefits.
Those numbers are difficult to verify – but it can be stated with confidence that anything which provides access to new markets for both consumers and businesses will be positive for growth.
Expanding the smaller Luton Airport would, similarly, be positive for growth.
A plane flies past a ‘Stop Heathrow Expansion’ sign in west London. Pic: PA
Read more:
Water boss blames 15 years of keeping bills low for industry woes
Wage growth and jobless rate rising, official figures show
The airport in 2019 – these pre-pandemic numbers are probably the most reliable given the upheaval of the last few years – is estimated to have supported 16,500 jobs in the local area and contributed £1.1bn to GDP. Expansion on the airport’s estimates creates up to 6,100 jobs and contributes an extra £900m to GDP.
Trumping them both, of course, is Heathrow.
The Davies Commission said that building a third runway to the northwest of the airport would provide for around 40 new destinations from Heathrow and would create more than 70,000 new jobs by 2050, adding some £147bn to GDP.
It stated: “Heathrow is best-placed to provide the type of capacity which is most urgently required: long-haul destinations to new markets. It provides the greatest benefits for business passengers, freight operators and the broader economy.”
It is worth noting that among the members of the commission was Sir John Armitt, the respected former chairman of the Olympic Delivery Authority, who is now chair of the National Infrastructure Commission.
His term of office was extended by Ms Reeves in October last year in order for him to oversee the 10-year strategy ordered by the chancellor and the establishment of the National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority.
He will be an influential voice in this debate.
However, while the economic case for airport expansion is unimpeachable, the bigger question, perhaps, is whether it is achievable.
Political considerations
Getting approval for the expansion of both Luton and Gatwick will be a major test of the new government’s commitment to overhauling planning regulations where they are an impediment to growth.
And here there are – for supporters of expansion – ominous signs.
A decision on whether or not to expand Luton was postponed for the third time just before Christmas so that Heidi Alexander, who had just succeeded the disgraced Louise Haigh as transport secretary, could be given time to assess the application.
Climate concerns
Tied into the planning hurdles are the inevitable environmental objections.
The Climate Change Committee, the government’s independent advisory body, has already said emissions savings would have to be made elsewhere in the economy were there to be a big expansion in airport passenger numbers.
The aviation industry will doubtless argue that it has already committed to becoming net zero by the middle of the century – but the environmental lobby has a long track record of successfully campaigning against airport expansion.
On top of that are the political obstacles.
Ms Reeves – and Ms Alexander, should she back expansion of Gatwick and Luton – will face implacable opposition from within their own cabinet, not least from Ed Miliband, the energy and climate change secretary.
Backing Heathrow expansion would be more controversial still.
Sadiq Khan, the London mayor, is strongly opposed to this and so are other senior Labour figures, among them Andy Burnham, the mayor of Greater Manchester.
He argues that a third runway at Heathrow would run counter to levelling-up proposals – although it is worth noting here that some of the UK’s biggest regional airports, such as Newcastle, support a third runway on the basis that it would boost international connectivity to their region.
That means leadership will ultimately have to come from Sir Keir Starmer who, it is worth noting, voted against a third runway at Heathrow in 2018.
Government unlikely to ever get credit
Supporting airport expansion is often difficult for governments – quite apart from the environmental objections and the inevitable planning hurdles – because it takes so long to add capacity and ministers are therefore unlikely to receive credit for it during their political lifetime.
For example, the two main airport expansion projects currently under way in Europe, the new Luis de Camoes airport in Lisbon and the new Solidarity superhub in Warsaw, are unlikely to be completed until the mid-2030s.
But the latter, in particular, highlights how other European governments have no hesitation in seeing airport expansion as a major generator of growth.
It is not alone. Amsterdam’s Schiphol Airport, an increasingly important competitor to Heathrow, is currently investing some €6bn in upgrades with the aim of expanding both passenger and flight numbers. Budapest, an airport once owned by BAA, the former parent of Heathrow and Gatwick, is looking to build a third terminal that would generate an extra three million passengers by the end of the decade.
These examples highlight how other European governments are less squeamish about putting airport expansion over environmental considerations in the name of pursuing economic growth.
You can be sure that the international investors who own Heathrow, Gatwick and Luton will be looking to the UK to do likewise.
Business
Donald Trump’s tariffs will have consequences for globalisation, the US economy and geopolitics
For decades, trade and trade policy has been an economic and political backwater – decidedly boring, seemingly uncontroversial.
Trade was mostly free and getting freer, tariffs were getting lower and lower, and the world was becoming more, not less, globalised.
But alongside those long-term trends, there were some serious consequences.
Trump latest: US president announces sweeping global trade tariffs
Mature, developed economies like the UK and US became ever more reliant on cheap imports from China and, in the process, saw their manufacturing sectors shrink.
Large swathes of the rust belt in the US – and much of the Midlands and North of England – were hollowed out.
And to some extent that’s where the story of Donald Trump’s “Liberation Day” really began – with the notion that free trade and globalisation had a darker side, a side he wants to remedy via tariffs.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Trump’s tariffs: Ed Conway analysis
He imposed a set of tariffs in his first term, some on China, some on specific materials like steel and aluminium. But the height and the breadth of those tariffs were as nothing compared with the ones we have just heard about.
Not since the 1930s has the US so radically increased the level of tariffs on all nations across the world. Back then, those tariffs exacerbated the Great Depression.
It’s anyone’s guess as to what the consequences of these ones will be. But there will be consequences.
Consequences for the nature of globalisation, consequences for the US economy (tariffs are exceptionally inflationary), consequences for geopolitics.
Imports from the UK will face a 10% tariff, while EU goods will see 20% rates. Pic: Reuters
And to some extent, merely knowing that little bit more about the White House’s plans will deliver a bit of relief to financial markets, which have fretted for months about the imposition of tariffs. That uncertainty recently reached unprecedented levels.
But don’t for a moment assume that this saga is over. Nothing of the sort. In the coming days, we will learn more – more about the nuts and bolts of these policies, more about the retaliatory measures coming from other countries.
We will, possibly, get more of a sense about whether some countries – including the UK – will enjoy reprieves from the tariffs.
To paraphrase Churchill, this isn’t the end of the trade war, or even the beginning of the end – perhaps just the end of the beginning.
Donald Trump has announced a 10% trade tariff on all imports from the UK – as he unleashed sweeping tariffs across the globe.
Speaking at a White House event entitled “Make America Wealthy Again”, the president held up a chart detailing the worst offenders – which also showed the new tariffs the US would be imposing.
“This is Liberation Day,” he told a cheering audience of supporters, while hitting out at foreign “cheaters”.
Follow live: Trump tariffs latest
He claimed “trillions” of dollars from the “reciprocal” levies he was imposing on others’ trade barriers would provide relief for the US taxpayer and restore US jobs and factories.
Mr Trump said the US has been “looted, pillaged, raped, plundered” by other nations.
Pic: AP
His first tariff announcement was a 25% duty on all car imports from midnight – 5am on Thursday, UK time.
Mr Trump confirmed the European Union would face a 20% reciprocal tariff on all other imports. China’s rate was set at 34%.
The UK’s rate of 10% was perhaps a shot across the bows over the country’s 20% VAT rate, though the president’s board suggested a 10% tariff imbalance between the two nations.
It was also confirmed that further US tariffs were planned on some individual sectors including semiconductors, pharmaceuticals and critical mineral imports.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Trump’s tariffs explained
The ramping up of duties promises to be painful for the global economy. Tariffs on steel and aluminium are already in effect.
The UK government signalled there would be no immediate retaliation.
Business and Trade Secretary Jonathan Reynolds said: “We will always act in the best interests of UK businesses and consumers. That’s why, throughout the last few weeks, the government has been fully focused on negotiating an economic deal with the United States that strengthens our existing fair and balanced trading relationship.
“The US is our closest ally, so our approach is to remain calm and committed to doing this deal, which we hope will mitigate the impact of what has been announced today.
“We have a range of tools at our disposal and we will not hesitate to act. We will continue to engage with UK businesses including on their assessment of the impact of any further steps we take.
“Nobody wants a trade war and our intention remains to secure a deal. But nothing is off the table and the government will do everything necessary to defend the UK’s national interest.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Who showed up for Trump’s tariff address?
The EU has pledged to retaliate, which is a problem for Northern Ireland.
Should that scenario play out, the region faces the prospect of rising prices because all its imports are tied to EU rules under post-Brexit trading arrangements.
It means US goods shipped to Northern Ireland would be subject to the EU’s reprisals.
The impact of a trade war would be expected to be widely negative, with tit-for-tat tariffs risking job losses, a ramping up of prices and cooling of global trade.
Research for the Institute for Public Policy Research has suggested more than 25,000 direct jobs in the UK car manufacturing industry alone could be at risk from the tariffs on car exports to the US.
The Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) had said the tariff costs could not be absorbed by manufacturers and may lead to a review of output.
The tariffs now on UK exports pose a big risk to growth and the so-called headroom Chancellor Rachel Reeves was forced to restore to the public finances at the spring statement, risking further spending cuts or tax rises ahead to meet her fiscal rules.
Read more:
What do Trump’s tariffs mean for the UK?
The rewards and risks for US as trade war intensifies
A member of the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), David Miles, told MPs on Tuesday that US tariffs at 20% or 25% maintained on the UK for five years would “knock out all the headroom the government currently has”.
But he added that a “very limited tariff war” that the UK stays out of could be “mildly positive”.
He said: “There’s a bit of trade that will get diverted to the UK, and some of the exports from China, for example, that would have gone to the US, they’ll be looking for a home for them in the rest of the world.
“And stuff would be available in the UK a bit cheaper than otherwise would have been. So there is one, not central scenario at all, which is very, very mildly potentially positive to the UK. All the other ones which involve the UK facing tariffs are negative, and they’re negative to very different extents.”
Business
Donald Trump’s tariffs will have consequences for globalisation, the US economy and geopolitics
For decades, trade and trade policy has been an economic and political backwater – decidedly boring, seemingly uncontroversial.
Trade was mostly free and getting freer, tariffs were getting lower and lower, and the world was becoming more, not less, globalised.
But alongside those long-term trends, there were some serious consequences.
Trump latest: US president announces sweeping global trade tariffs
Mature, developed economies like the UK and US became ever more reliant on cheap imports from China and, in the process, saw their manufacturing sectors shrink.
Large swathes of the rust belt in the US – and much of the Midlands and North of England – were hollowed out.
And to some extent that’s where the story of Donald Trump’s “Liberation Day” really began – with the notion that free trade and globalisation had a darker side, a side he wants to remedy via tariffs.
He imposed a set of tariffs in his first term, some on China, some on specific materials like steel and aluminium. But the height and the breadth of those tariffs were as nothing compared with the ones we have just heard about.
Not since the 1930s has the US so radically increased the level of tariffs on all nations across the world. Back then, those tariffs exacerbated the Great Depression.
It’s anyone’s guess as to what the consequences of these ones will be. But there will be consequences.
Consequences for the nature of globalisation, consequences for the US economy (tariffs are exceptionally inflationary), consequences for geopolitics.
Imports from the UK will face a 10% tariff, while EU goods will see 20% rates. Pic: Reuters
And to some extent, merely knowing that little bit more about the White House’s plans will deliver a bit of relief to financial markets, which have fretted for months about the imposition of tariffs. That uncertainty recently reached unprecedented levels.
But don’t for a moment assume that this saga is over. Nothing of the sort. In the coming days, we will learn more – more about the nuts and bolts of these policies, more about the retaliatory measures coming from other countries.
We will, possibly, get more of a sense about whether some countries – including the UK – will enjoy reprieves from the tariffs.
To paraphrase Churchill, this isn’t the end of the trade war, or even the beginning of the end – perhaps just the end of the beginning.
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports12 months agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business3 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway