Heathrow (Third Runway)

My hon. Friend makes an excellent point and one that was completely ignored by the hon. Lady. At any given time, there can be as many as four stacks of aircraft waiting to land. The average delay at Heathrow—caused by the capacity problems—is some 19 minutes, and some aircraft are delayed for far longer. Therefore it is necessary to address the question of capacity, in carbon terms as much as for any other reason. We have been criticised by the hon. Lady for failing to progress longer term options for transport infrastructure, which is why I set out clearly our ambition to ensure the development of a new high-speed line to the north, approaching London via a Heathrow international station on the Great Western line. That could provide a four-way interchange between the airport, the new north-south line, existing Great Western rail services and Crossrail, with a 15-minute service into the centre of London. But I reject the idea that that could somehow be an alternative to much needed runway capacity at Heathrow. The Conservative figures on which the hon. Lady relies assume that every single domestic passenger would transfer to high-speed rail. That would include all passengers flying from the remaining nine British airports served by Heathrow. Incidentally, that includes Belfast. The hon. Lady has failed to explain how a rail link would help our friends in Northern Ireland. A great many people simply do not believe the hon. Lady's argument. Richard Lambert of the CBI does not, and he said that"““a high speed rail link would have a lot going for it, but I don't think for a minute that it will solve the capacity problems at Heathrow.””" The Conservative Mayor of London does not believe it. He said:"““High speed rail should certainly be part of the mix, but it is not enough on its own.””" Even Conservative Back Benchers do not believe it. Only this week, the hon. Member for Spelthorne (Mr. Wilshire) said:"““Those who believe new rail links mean fewer flights are wrong.””" The beneficiaries of the Opposition's policy are clear—they would be the Dutch, the French and the Germans. Indeed, on Monday night the director of airport development at Schiphol said on the BBC London news:"““If I am honest, I must say Heathrow needs a third runway to stay as a major important hub in Europe and to connect London with all the other cities in the world. But for us it would be the best if they wouldn't get the third runway at all.””" Now, despite the reincarnation of the right hon. and learned Member for Rushcliffe, I do not believe for a moment that those on the Opposition Front Bench have suddenly seen the light and become overwhelmed by enthusiasm for all things European. What their policy would do, however, is give a real boost to continental employment and growth by exporting British jobs. The reality is that, by encouraging our European competitors to expand at our expense, the Opposition's policy would damage us economically without saving a single gram of carbon. The sorry truth is that, in their opportunist drive to secure short-term headlines, the Opposition are sacrificing the country's longer-term interests.