Nick Biskinis is a volunteer advocate for public transport users in South London.
Flying into London Heathrow Airport is, depending on the direction and runway used, one of the great sightseeing treats in the world. As the plane stacks and circles over the metropolis, you can marvel both at the dramatic urban splurge of London with its tapestry of buildings, railways and parks with the classic horizon of Central London once your aircraft is cleared for its final approach. It is not uncommon to hear the silent awe in the cabin as passengers on the right side of the plane gaze unflinchingly at the window kaleidoscope.
Yet that spectacle is also indicative of delays and congestion; gazing over London is indeed a pleasant interlude but the stacking itself is really just a traffic jam in the sky, costing passengers time and airlines money as planes await clearance to finally land. This holding pattern is an apt metaphor for British aviation (and wider transport policy) over the past 40 years. If the UK economy is to flourish and reach more overseas markets both within and beyond the EU, the UK’s principal international gateway must expand beyond the two runway straitjacket that is stifling opportunity.
London Heathrow isn’t simply about passengers or tourists, important though that undoubtedly is. The airport is the UK’s busiest port, handling a quarter of UK trade value in 2025 – representing around £300 billion in fact and 1.5 billion tons of cargo. Passenger wide body jets as well as dedicated freighters ship most of these goods, which in turn have spurred the development of adjacent areas such as Reading and Slough into the logistics hubs they have become alongside the wider West London economy. Proximity to a well-connected airport drives investment decisions.
However, Heathrow is at real risk of being left behind, stuck with an anachronism of two runways, meaning only one is ever available for take-off or landing. This puts Britain behind its key European and global competitors.
Paris Charles de Gaulle Airport has four runways, Frankfurt Airport four and Amsterdam Schiphol Airport five. Where London Heathrow once carried the most international traffic, that status has since passed to Dubai, whilst Istanbul’s new six runway airport is now Europe’s busiest. That means investment going elsewhere.
Heathrow matters to the UK, not just London and the South East, which is why local authorities across England and Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland support expansion. Domestic connections feed into Heathrow flights bound across the world, making certain air links between the UK and other countries commercially viable. Lack of slots and a lack of resilience means the airport cannot maximize its commercial potential.
This doesn’t preclude expansion of other London airports such as Gatwick or London City, but these are not substitutes for expanding capacity at the prime hub airport. Nor for that matter is the possibility of new international rail services from London St Pancras and Stratford: whilst these could reduce some air demand to Amsterdam and Geneva, there isn’t a train that can get people conveniently to business meetings in Frankfurt or Milan or further afield. Paris CdG and Amsterdam Schiphol airports are all international rail hubs. They all still have more than 2 runways each.
UK governments have ducked decisions over a third runway for decades, mirroring a constant theme of under-estimated future demands on aviation. The internet was meant to have permanently reduced the need for international business travel, then Covid meant we would all be holding meetings on-line: tourism would be domesticated and rail-borne. All proved illusionary.
The Conservatives infamously sought easy votes with David Cameron’s promise of “no ifs or buts – no to a third runway,” until reality dawned and the Davies Commission argued that a third runway was necessary. Boris Johnson’s Thames Estuary Airport was one of his many flights of fantasy, predicated on closing down Heathrow with the laughable assurance that this would not lead to net job losses as ex-Heathrow employees would apparently commute to the new airport: it is a wonder how airline executives in meetings listening to Boris and his aviation advisor managed to keep a straight face.
Kemi Badenoch, sensibly as part of her detaching the Conservative Party from the eco-woke dead weight of Theresa May and Boris Johnson’s policies, has thrown her support behind Heathrow expansion. But has James Cleverly, who is reportedly sceptical and has previously warned against ‘quick fix solutions’?
James Cleverly cannot seriously position himself as the champion of London business whilst looking for a mental holding pattern concerning whether to support a third runway. A third runway would double Heathrow’s capacity with aircraft that are steadily quieter and cleaner. That means more connections to new markets but also doubling potentially inbound and outbound cargo with huge new export opportunities driving more job creation and growth – for a cost of £49 billion that will be met privately. That is a much better return than HS2’s Phase One, which will have cost upwards of £150 billion, whose business case decomposes with each cost estimate and cuts to the scheme.
It also can be part of a wider vision of accessible and sustainable surface access to a bigger and more efficient Heathrow whereby rail links to South London and Surrey are built alongside a spur link for the Great Western Railway – thereby putting Heathrow on the national rail network. In turn that will reduce car dependency, freeing up road space for buses/coaches and freight vehicles. It is a fallacy that the UK has to choose between high speed rail or aviation: ‘Heathrail’ can be part of an expanded Heathrow.
This needs James Cleverly to come off the fence and unashamedly champion Heathrow expansion. There is a wider reason that he must show some mettle over this issue: hesitancy will underline a sense that he is not a leader, but someone who carries a tape measure to assess every potential policy question before finding a precise middle-of-the-road position in a bid to be ‘a centrist.
Boris Johnson’s opposition to Heathrow was (arguably) purely political – one suspects that when Heathrow does finally build its third runway he will conveniently find an overseas speaking engagement to prevent him otherwise fulfilling his promise to “lie down in front of the bulldozers” – ironically probably flying out from Heathrow.
Hence, James Cleverly’s reportedly apparent prevarication about Heathrow would indicate a perception that he does not seem to know why he is standing as London Mayor and for what. This is not a case of ‘Heathrow scepticism’ but aversion to taking a bold stand.
He cannot be a perpetual crowd-pleaser – that ship sailed with Boris Johnson (and sank once Boris hit the political iceberg of Partygate) – or coast on ambiguity, whether on aviation, transport or policing. He must challenge Sadiq Khan on policy as well as on competence. That means taking a different stance and showing a long term strategic ambition for London – supporting a third runway is one way of doing so.
London’s premier aviation gateway cannot afford to be stuck in gridlock any more than London’s commuters. If he wants his Mayoral campaign to take flight, James cannot just circle around. Procrastination isn’t a destination.
Nick Biskinis is a volunteer advocate for public transport users in South London.
Flying into London Heathrow Airport is, depending on the direction and runway used, one of the great sightseeing treats in the world. As the plane stacks and circles over the metropolis, you can marvel both at the dramatic urban splurge of London with its tapestry of buildings, railways and parks with the classic horizon of Central London once your aircraft is cleared for its final approach. It is not uncommon to hear the silent awe in the cabin as passengers on the right side of the plane gaze unflinchingly at the window kaleidoscope.
Yet that spectacle is also indicative of delays and congestion; gazing over London is indeed a pleasant interlude but the stacking itself is really just a traffic jam in the sky, costing passengers time and airlines money as planes await clearance to finally land. This holding pattern is an apt metaphor for British aviation (and wider transport policy) over the past 40 years. If the UK economy is to flourish and reach more overseas markets both within and beyond the EU, the UK’s principal international gateway must expand beyond the two runway straitjacket that is stifling opportunity.
London Heathrow isn’t simply about passengers or tourists, important though that undoubtedly is. The airport is the UK’s busiest port, handling a quarter of UK trade value in 2025 – representing around £300 billion in fact and 1.5 billion tons of cargo. Passenger wide body jets as well as dedicated freighters ship most of these goods, which in turn have spurred the development of adjacent areas such as Reading and Slough into the logistics hubs they have become alongside the wider West London economy. Proximity to a well-connected airport drives investment decisions.
However, Heathrow is at real risk of being left behind, stuck with an anachronism of two runways, meaning only one is ever available for take-off or landing. This puts Britain behind its key European and global competitors.
Paris Charles de Gaulle Airport has four runways, Frankfurt Airport four and Amsterdam Schiphol Airport five. Where London Heathrow once carried the most international traffic, that status has since passed to Dubai, whilst Istanbul’s new six runway airport is now Europe’s busiest. That means investment going elsewhere.
Heathrow matters to the UK, not just London and the South East, which is why local authorities across England and Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland support expansion. Domestic connections feed into Heathrow flights bound across the world, making certain air links between the UK and other countries commercially viable. Lack of slots and a lack of resilience means the airport cannot maximize its commercial potential.
This doesn’t preclude expansion of other London airports such as Gatwick or London City, but these are not substitutes for expanding capacity at the prime hub airport. Nor for that matter is the possibility of new international rail services from London St Pancras and Stratford: whilst these could reduce some air demand to Amsterdam and Geneva, there isn’t a train that can get people conveniently to business meetings in Frankfurt or Milan or further afield. Paris CdG and Amsterdam Schiphol airports are all international rail hubs. They all still have more than 2 runways each.
UK governments have ducked decisions over a third runway for decades, mirroring a constant theme of under-estimated future demands on aviation. The internet was meant to have permanently reduced the need for international business travel, then Covid meant we would all be holding meetings on-line: tourism would be domesticated and rail-borne. All proved illusionary.
The Conservatives infamously sought easy votes with David Cameron’s promise of “no ifs or buts – no to a third runway,” until reality dawned and the Davies Commission argued that a third runway was necessary. Boris Johnson’s Thames Estuary Airport was one of his many flights of fantasy, predicated on closing down Heathrow with the laughable assurance that this would not lead to net job losses as ex-Heathrow employees would apparently commute to the new airport: it is a wonder how airline executives in meetings listening to Boris and his aviation advisor managed to keep a straight face.
Kemi Badenoch, sensibly as part of her detaching the Conservative Party from the eco-woke dead weight of Theresa May and Boris Johnson’s policies, has thrown her support behind Heathrow expansion. But has James Cleverly, who is reportedly sceptical and has previously warned against ‘quick fix solutions’?
James Cleverly cannot seriously position himself as the champion of London business whilst looking for a mental holding pattern concerning whether to support a third runway. A third runway would double Heathrow’s capacity with aircraft that are steadily quieter and cleaner. That means more connections to new markets but also doubling potentially inbound and outbound cargo with huge new export opportunities driving more job creation and growth – for a cost of £49 billion that will be met privately. That is a much better return than HS2’s Phase One, which will have cost upwards of £150 billion, whose business case decomposes with each cost estimate and cuts to the scheme.
It also can be part of a wider vision of accessible and sustainable surface access to a bigger and more efficient Heathrow whereby rail links to South London and Surrey are built alongside a spur link for the Great Western Railway – thereby putting Heathrow on the national rail network. In turn that will reduce car dependency, freeing up road space for buses/coaches and freight vehicles. It is a fallacy that the UK has to choose between high speed rail or aviation: ‘Heathrail’ can be part of an expanded Heathrow.
This needs James Cleverly to come off the fence and unashamedly champion Heathrow expansion. There is a wider reason that he must show some mettle over this issue: hesitancy will underline a sense that he is not a leader, but someone who carries a tape measure to assess every potential policy question before finding a precise middle-of-the-road position in a bid to be ‘a centrist.
Boris Johnson’s opposition to Heathrow was (arguably) purely political – one suspects that when Heathrow does finally build its third runway he will conveniently find an overseas speaking engagement to prevent him otherwise fulfilling his promise to “lie down in front of the bulldozers” – ironically probably flying out from Heathrow.
Hence, James Cleverly’s reportedly apparent prevarication about Heathrow would indicate a perception that he does not seem to know why he is standing as London Mayor and for what. This is not a case of ‘Heathrow scepticism’ but aversion to taking a bold stand.
He cannot be a perpetual crowd-pleaser – that ship sailed with Boris Johnson (and sank once Boris hit the political iceberg of Partygate) – or coast on ambiguity, whether on aviation, transport or policing. He must challenge Sadiq Khan on policy as well as on competence. That means taking a different stance and showing a long term strategic ambition for London – supporting a third runway is one way of doing so.
London’s premier aviation gateway cannot afford to be stuck in gridlock any more than London’s commuters. If he wants his Mayoral campaign to take flight, James cannot just circle around. Procrastination isn’t a destination.