The congested nature of London Heathrow operations is always going to tax the industry operators. UK domestic services into Heathrow have slowly been withdrawn in recent years as valuable Heathrow slots find more lucrative long haul uses.
London centric air transport policies have long been moulding the shape of the UK air transport infrastructure and result in the current top heavy solutions favouring the UK south east.
But is Boris Island International a solution? Delivery of this concept clearly has financing costs of mega proportions
What are the business drivers here? Are the needs of travelling public at the focus of this project? Is it state pride? Or are we massaging individual egos who wish to leave a legacy after they have departed, once again diverting hard earned public taxes into the further development ( and by inference wealth) to just one area of the UK at the cost to other UK regions. What invisible forces continue to influence air transport policy in what is already arguably the most capital centric country in the world?
The manufacturing engine house of the UK largely exists away from the capital and even the banking input to UK business success requires employment in the hundreds of thousands away from the 'square mile'.
With objectively good UK regional airport facilities already in place(and paid for) and a significant proportion of the UK public already forced to utilise London hub airports rather than these far more convenient regional airports, why are government looking to further exacerbate this issue?
The customers when asked, identify a preference for a direct point to point service if available and just require a convenient point to depart, arrive or alternatively transfer.
With BA all but abandoning non London operations with its own fleet and runway capacity limiting its further development, what has it got to loose by being confined by existing LondonAirport infrastructure limitations?- a great deal!.
Those in Government argue that adequate runway capacity is critical to maintaining London as one of the major focuses of global air transport- why ' London' ? why not 'the UK' ?
Low cost European carriers have shown they can successfully encourage travellers to move to other departure airports using price and departure location convenience as drivers.
Is it not time to throw the full force of policy behind regional expansion where runway capacity already exists? And incentivise use, if in fact one is needed by discounting regional APD ?
I'm not surprised that Scotland and Wales consider the merits of regulatory independence from the southern focus of the Westminster decision makers. Will the West Midlands and Greater Manchester be the next to declare independence as a gesture to avoid this ?
What do you think?
