Heathrow (Third Runway)

I am going to make some progress, in the light of Mr. Speaker's observation. One suggestion set out in the motion tabled by the hon. Member for Chipping Barnet is that we should"““give full consideration to alternative solutions””." I have no idea—and I am none the wiser from her speech—what that would mean in relation to her previously stated opposition to expansion at Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted. She has opposed expansion at each one of those airports without saying why she is against it. Perhaps she is now considering the option of a new four-runway airport in the Thames estuary, which I know that the Mayor of London and some Members of this House favour. At the weekend, I read about the Mayor's plans for runways and train tunnels in the sea, which were described by others as something out of ““Thunderbirds””—Boris island rather than Tracy island. Some 400 alternative sites were considered before the 2003 White Paper, many of which were in and around the estuary. I have said repeatedly why we do not believe that they are feasible or practical. The recent incident in New York, in which a plane was forced to land in the Hudson river, should demonstrate the consequences of a bird strike and make hon. Members think about the implications. Anyone who believes that such a proposal is non-controversial should note the words of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, which said:"““'Boris Island'…has been conclusively proven to be a complete non-starter ecologically, environmentally and economically. To revisit the issue is a complete waste of everyone's time and energy.””"