Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free
Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.
Ministers have backed Heathrow airport’s £49bn proposal to build a new runway across the M25 motorway, in spite of warnings from airlines that the project will make the airport significantly more expensive.
They rejected an alternative proposal from hotelier Surinder Arora for a shorter runway that would have cost less and avoided moving the M25, according to four people with knowledge of the process.
The UK government’s decision will be announced by transport secretary Heidi Alexander on Tuesday.
However, she is expected to leave the door open to other companies building and operating terminals at the airport, something that would allow the Arora group to pursue its own projects at the site and would drive competition within the airport, the people added.
Ministers have not explicitly picked Heathrow to build the new runway, leaving the door open to other companies bidding for the work, the people also said.
Airlines including British Airways and Virgin Atlantic have lobbied hard against Heathrow’s plan over concerns that spiralling costs would have to be recouped through higher landing charges.
This month, BA chief executive Sean Doyle called on ministers to “avoid moving the M25”. He added: “I think we should look at ways of potentially building a shorter runway.” But BA, which is Heathrow’s largest customer, has never publicly backed Arora’s proposal.
The Department for Transport said it did not comment on speculation. Arora and Heathrow declined to comment.
Heathrow’s proposal for a 3,500-metre third runway at the site requires the M25 to be moved — the company says a new stretch of motorway could be built alongside the existing one then linked up in overnight closures.
Earlier this month, Heathrow CEO Thomas Woldbye said moving the motorway would be “expensive but well controlled”, and promised the work “is not going to disrupt the M25 more than you have seen in the last year with junction work”.
Critics of the project have warned it would cause significant congestion and say Heathrow’s computer-generated video showing the plans does not include the crucial junction with the M4, one of the busiest interchanges in Britain.
Arora has proposed a 2,800-metre runway, crossing part of the M4 spur that runs into the airport. It has said the runway could accommodate 98 per cent of flights from the airport, though Heathrow had argued the shorter runway would limit the number of flights that could use it.
Arora’s plan would have required more homes to be bought and demolished than under Heathrow’s scheme.
Woldbye also said he could not “guarantee” the costs would not rise beyond the £21bn allocated for the runway project because of the nature of infrastructure projects. The rest of Heathrow’s £49bn spending plan relates to a new terminal building and other investments the airport expects to make.
A shorter runway would give the airport “much less capacity”, he told the Airlines UK conference.
Although ministers have backed the runway design, the plans have to go to a public consultation next summer.
Alexander is aiming to fast-track the Airports National Policy Statement (ANPS), the relevant planning policy document, with the aim of getting construction started before the next election, which must happen by 2029.
Once the ANPS is approved, formal planning approval for the project is not expected to be granted until later this decade.