Cliff Notes
-
The UK government has approved Gatwick Airport’s £2.2bn expansion project, allowing the northern runway to operate concurrently with the main runway, facilitating an additional 100,000 flights annually.
-
The expansion aims to enhance the airport’s capacity to handle 75 million passengers by the late 2030s, while generating £1bn yearly for the Economy and creating 14,000 jobs.
-
Despite the approval, environmental groups express concerns regarding climate impact and noise, with plans for legal challenges pending from campaigners voicing opposition to the expansion.
Gatwick second runway given green light by government | UK News
.
Gatwick’s second runway has been given the go-ahead by the government.
The northern runway already exists parallel to Gatwick‘s main one, but cannot be used at the same time, as it is too close.
It is currently limited to being a taxiway and is only used for take-offs and landings if the main one has to shut.
The £2.2bn expansion project will see it move 12 metres north so both can operate simultaneously, facilitating 100,000 extra flights a year, 14,000 jobs, and £1bn a year for the economy.
It would also mean the airport could process 75 million passengers a year by the late 2030s.
Gatwick is already the second busiest airport in the UK, and the busiest single runway airport in Europe.
No public money is being used for the expansion plan, which airport bosses say could see the new runway operational by 2029.
The expansion was initially rejected by the Planning Inspectorate over concerns about its provisions for noise prevention and public transport connections.
Campaigners also argued the additional air traffic will be catastrophic for the environment and the local community.
A revised plan was published by the planning authority earlier this year, which it said could be approved by the government if all conditions were met.
The government says it is now satisfied this is the case, with additions made including Gatwick being able to set its own target for passengers who travel to the airport by public transport – instead of a statutory one.
Nearby residents affected by noise will also be able to charge the airport for the cost of triple-glazed windows.
And people who live directly under the flight path who choose to sell their homes could have their stamp duty and estate agent fees paid for up to 1% of the purchase price.
CAGNE, an aviation and environmental group in Sussex, Surrey, and Kent, says it still has concerns about noise, housing provision, and wastewaster treatment.
The group says it will lodge a judicial review, which will be funded by local residents and environmental organisations.
‘Disaster for the climate crisis’
Green Party leader Zack Polanski criticised the second runway decision, posting on X: “Aviation expansion is a disaster for the climate crisis.
“Anyone who’s been paying any attention to this shambles of a Labour Govenrment (sic) knows they don’t care about people in poverty, don’t care about nature nor for the planet. Just big business & their own interests.”
Friends of the Earth claimed the economic case for the airport expansion has been “massively overstated”.
Head of campaigns Rosie Downes warned: “If we’re to meet our legally-binding climate targets, today’s decision also makes it much harder for the government to approve expansion at Heathrow.”
Shadow transport secretary Richard Holden welcomed the decision but said it “should have been made months ago”, claiming Labour have “dithered and delayed at every turn”.
“Now that Gatwick’s second runway has been approved, it’s crucial Labour ensures this infrastructure helps drive the economic growth our country needs,” he said.
A government source told Sky News the second runway is a “no-brainer for growth”.
“The transport secretary has cleared Gatwick expansion for take-off,” they said. “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.”