The government has approved Gatwick Airport’s £2.2 billion plan for a second runway, with the prospect of an extra 100,000 flights a year.
The privately financed project was given the go-ahead by Labour Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander who backed the scheme as a “no-brainer” for economic growth, a government source said.
The airport will move its emergency runway 13 yards (12 metres) north, enabling narrow-bodied aircraft such as Airbus A320s and Boeing 737s to take off from the new runway.
The extra capacity is expected to bring more visitors to Sussex, 14,000 more jobs, including many for people living in Brighton and Hove, and £1 billion a year in economic benefits.
Airport bosses hope the first flights will take off from the new runway by 2029 after a series of changes to the original project plan were made to win the government’s approval.
The Transport Secretary is said to be satisfied with adjustments covering issues such as noise mitigation and the proportion of passengers who would travel to and from the airport by public transport.
The Planning Inspectorate initially rejected the airport’s application – and earlier this year it recommended that the project could be approved if the changes were made.
The commitments include Gatwick bosses setting their own targets for the proportion of passengers who travel to the airport by public transport, rather than having a legally binding target.
People who live near the airport and flight paths who are affected by more noise will be able to ask Gatwick to cover the cost of triple-glazed windows.
Homeowners living directly beneath the new flight routes who choose to sell could have their stamp duty and reasonable moving costs paid, as well as estate agent fees of up to 1 per cent of the purchase price.
A government source told the PA news agency: “The Transport Secretary has cleared Gatwick expansion for take-off.
“With capacity constraints holding back business, trade and tourism, this is a no-brainer for growth.
“This government has taken unprecedented steps to get this done, navigating a needlessly complex planning system which our reforms will simplify in future.
“It is possible that planes could be taking off from a new full runway at Gatwick before the next general election.
“Any airport expansion must be delivered in line with our legally binding climate change commitments and meet strict environmental requirements.”
Local campaigners opposed to expansion are concerned about the effects on surface transport, noise, housing and wastewater treatment. But the airport said that it had conducted “full and thorough assessments” of those issues.
CAGNE (Communities Against Gatwick Noise and Emissions), an umbrella community and environment group, said that it was ready to serve notice of a judicial review funded by residents and environmental bodies.
The group said: “We know this government cares little for the environmental impact aviation is having on our planet and Gatwick’s neighbours.
“But not to demand that Gatwick pays for the infrastructure, the onsite wastewater treatment plant and noise impact is unlawful in our book.”
The Labour government’s backing of a third runway at Heathrow airport as part of efforts to grow the economy has also drawn criticism from environmental groups and opposition politicians.
The new Green Party leader Zack Polanski described ministers’ support of a second Gatwick runway as a “disaster”.
He said: “It ignores basic climate science and risks undermining efforts to tackle the climate crisis.
“Labour keeps wheeling out the same nonsense about growth – but at what cost? What this really means is more pollution, more noise for local communities and no real economic benefit.”
The “14,000 new jobs” created will be low paid waiting and bar staff. These businesses will be needed to make the plan viable. However the wages on offer will not be enough for most to pay exorbitant rents in Brighton & Hove even with the subsidised rail fares.
So ‘waiting and bar staff’ will build and maintain the new runway, manage and admininster this massive peice of infrastructure and pilot and crew the additional 100,000 flights a year?
Lots of international crew and international companies whose profits won’t stay in the UK. Lots of environmental damage to the area, and more congestion on the roads.
Personally, I’d prefer investment in our railways, which would make much more difference to a lot of people in Brighton and the region than an additional runway at Gatwick will.
How remiss of me to omit “the majority of.” Apologies for the oversight. The “massive piece of infrastructure” is a slab of tarmac so you will end up crammed into existing buildings and the administration of flights is becoming automated. Crews will become smaller, a few extra pilots for a new fleet of aircraft? It’s the Air Traffic Controllers that I feel for. Under-appreciated, not great pay and burn-out by 40.
Gatwick has well developed plans to increase terminal capacity which are being dealt with by a separate planning process.
They have recently started an extension to add 8 new gates to the North Terminal for example.
As to the size of crews there is a minimum set both for pilots and cabin crew for each plane type and unless there is a wholesale change in the international regulations on this they aren’t going to change.
Plus given the limits of working hours for both sets of staff a new plane generates far more jobs than a “few extra pilots”
As to ATC more are being recruited and trained.
I suggest you review Gatwick’s expansion plans in full as you clearly don’t have a clue.
I hope it will be better connected via train to london rarther that just two ann hour Gatwick Express service!
Even bolder idea, I’d love to see the train service renationalised so it’s actually affordable to use!
Benny the skidmark knows no geographical bounds with his dullard opinions. Give it a rest Bud. Have a day off commenting and spend a day with yourself, however daunting that sounds.
So the multiple Thameslink and Southern trains an hour to Victoria and London Bridge don’t count?
Aah plans, those fanciful ideas promulgated to justify your cause that rarely come to fruition. Just like an election manifesto or other propaganda shouted loudly by public schoolboys with offshore trusts to hoodwink and rape the working classes.
“RAPE”? your rhetoric exposes the paucity of your argument