Oral evidence: Scrutiny of the draft Heathrow Expansion National Policy Statement, HC 482

Oral evidence, 2 September 2026.

Witnesses

Perry Phillips, John Dickie and Kate Shoesmith.

Chair

Welcome to our second panel. Could you please introduce yourselves?

John Dickie

My name is John Dickie and I am the chief executive of BusinessLDN. We are a business membership organisation representing a couple of hundred or so large businesses headquartered in or with substantial operations in London.

Perry Phillips

My name is Perry Phillips. I am the GMB union regional officer with membership responsibilities for our members at Heathrow airport. I am also the aviation officer for the GMB London region.

Kate Shoesmith

Hello and thank you for the invitation. I am Kate Shoesmith and I am the director of policy and insights at the British Chambers of Commerce.

Chair

Thank you very much. Before we go on, some of us need to note our interests. I am a member of the GMB.

Jacob Collier

I am a GMB member, and I should also declare a donation.

Alex Mayer

I am also a GMB member.

Daniel Francis

I am also a member, and received a donation that was not registrable because it was under the threshold.

Chair

Barry?

Barry Gardiner

I don’t think I have had a donation yet, so if there is anything—

Chair

Right. Thank you very much. A lot has changed since the last airports NPS was designated in 2018: we have had expansion approved at other airports, changes in business travel habits, growing geopolitical uncertainty, legal compliance with net zero and so on. Do you think any of these changes have affected the potential benefits of more hub airport capacity in London?

John Dickie

The changes that you listed, Chair, and some of the other geopolitical factors over the past few years, have of course moved demand up and down. If you look at Heathrow now, we see quite a strong rebound in long-haul business travel but not quite such a strong rebound in short-haul business travel, which is kind of what you would expect, given that it is easier to do what one might describe as casual meetings online and over Zoom—that is the experience of the pandemic. So the case, as it were, moves up and down, but we do know that Heathrow is operating at about 5% above its pre-pandemic peak. That level of operation puts all kinds of stresses on the way the airport works. The airport is a bit less resilient than one might like it to be because it has so many flights leaving across its two runways. We also know that there is still, as of today, huge unmet demand for capacity at Heathrow, due to the inability to get more aeroplanes in and out of the airport. That is why pairs of slots at Heathrow can be sold for very large sums of money—much more than at virtually any other international airport. That means two things. One is that we are continuing to lose out on the direct benefits of the economic activity at Heathrow. For the rest of the UK economy, outside of aviation, and certainly for the London economy, what really matters is the connectivity that we are losing out on to the rest of the world. I think Heathrow is still the world’s best-connected airport, although there are people snapping at its heels; it is, I think, no longer the busiest airport in Europe, having lost that crown to Istanbul over the summer. We are losing out on the connectivity that that brings. If you are, as London is, an international business centre on an island, connectivity really matters for the growth of your professional and services economy in particular. It also matters to the whole of the country, because we know from other airports and from other regions that people in those regions value the ability to transfer via Heathrow rather than having to transfer via Schiphol or middle east airports to go on their full journeys.

Chair

Have you done an analysis of the economic cost of the difference between somebody changing planes at Heathrow, Schiphol, Charles de Gaulle or Dubai?

John Dickie

I have not done such an analysis, although people on your previous panel may have done—I am sure there is a lot of analysis out there—but we do know it to be what people think, and we do know it to be what representative organisations in the rest of the country believe they want.

Perry Phillips

From a union perspective—from a GMB perspective—Heathrow at the moment is at its full capacity. Obviously, we are losing out on connectivity to Istanbul and other airports across Europe, such as Charles de Gaulle and Schiphol airports. Because of the full capacity, we are losing out on those connections, and business and flights are choosing other airports. We are getting left behind—Heathrow is getting left behind—while a decision is being made on the future of the third runway.

Kate Shoesmith

From a British Chambers of Commerce perspective, we have been looking at the case for Heathrow expansion for a number of years, and it is felt that there is a lack of capacity and that to expand Heathrow is the right way forward. It is the only UK option as a hub airport and, as my colleagues said, that is important—otherwise, we lose out to the international competition out there. When we look at what will create growth in the UK economy, we know that trade is one of the fastest routes to that. British Chambers of Commerce has a long, proud heritage of supporting businesses to trade more effectively, and when we looked at international trade opportunities and how we grow exports as a UK economy, if we had grown exports last year by just 2%, it would have added 0.6% to UK GDP, which is a significant amount in the current economic climate.

Chair

To what extent is connectivity an element of that growth, or of that lack of or constraint on growth?

Kate Shoesmith

Not from economic analysis, but from our case studies, we believe that is a point to—

Chair

Has anyone done economic analysis?

Kate Shoesmith

No—

Chair

Of the benefit or cost of connectivity, as opposed to the benefit of trade—we all know that.

Kate Shoesmith

No. From our perspective, we look across our member businesses—the 60,000 member businesses in the network of chambers—and talk to the chambers locally about what they get from being part of a supply chain, working with Heathrow, and what trade capacity does for their local economies.

Chair

Thank you. Let us now do a bit more on assessing the benefits and costs, with Olly.

Olly Glover

We explored with our previous panel the often very technical appraisal and economic modelling that underpins the draft policy statement, but there may well be things that conventional appraisals of economic benefits cannot consider. What potential economic and employment benefits are not captured by the usual tools that are used for appraisal and economic modelling? Who would like to start?

Kate Shoesmith

Shall I pick up where I left off, thinking about supply chains and the work of different chambers? A number of chambers of commerce submitted evidence to the Select Committee. They articulate why there is a benefit in them working with Heathrow. In the north-east, about 19 suppliers locally in that area work with Heathrow. That adds £3.5 million to their work. If they can increase their capacity, if they can trade more effectively and if they can enable that work through Heathrow expansion, they believe that there is a gain to be made there.

Chair

These are businesses that are using belly or hold freight at Heathrow.

Kate Shoesmith

Absolutely. Whether they are part of logistics or exporting a capacity, they are a whole part of the supply chain. They might also work in construction. A number of different organisations submitted evidence to say that they could benefit advantageously from Heathrow expansion. I mentioned the north-east, but there is also the north-west. Our chamber that covers north Wales and west Cheshire has 61 suppliers working with Heathrow right now, and they think that they could grow that number.

John Dickie

I listened to the earlier session and heard the great complexity of different approaches to economic modelling. It is worth remembering that the DFT’s methodology is fundamentally about how to get the best value from scarce public capital when investing in transport projects. At Heathrow, we are referring to a scheme that will attract something of the order of just under £50 billion of likely inward investment to the UK’s infrastructure. Quite how that benefit is captured by the modelling seems to me to be important, and so too—I think you talked a little about this at the end of the previous session—is the dynamic effect of improved access to international markets. Frontier Economics did some modelling that is now quite old—I think it was in 2011—about the benefits of direct as opposed to indirect connectivity to markets. Back then, they estimated that well over £1 billion of trade was being lost to the UK because of the lack of connectivity through viable air routes. The air routes were not viable because there was not the capacity at Heathrow. There are some broader issues that it would be useful to build into the appraisal on the benefits side, as well as some of the costs you have talked about.

Olly Glover

Is there anything you would like to add, Mr Phillips?

Perry Phillips

Yes. To reiterate what my colleagues have said, the modelling misses the export and import of cargo into Heathrow. That misses the important contribution that cargo freight coming in and out of London makes to the UK economy.

Chair

On cargo, we have had witnesses from the logistics industry saying that the growth of capacity in passenger airports is not enabling them to grow their business, because dedicated cargo is squeezed out and there are virtually no dedicated cargo flights at Heathrow. Is the issue whether cargo should be going through Heathrow in greater capacity if runway 3 goes ahead, or should there be more dedicated cargo capacity? Manston airport is lobbying for reopening as a dedicated cargo airport. To what extent is runway 3 logistics and cargo expansion a key factor, or are there other wider issues in air freight? Has that been included in the analysis to an adequate extent?

Kate Shoesmith

Let me take part of that. There is a definite proportion of the value of air freight that is going via Heathrow and air freight more generally that we think could be expanded. Obviously, the vast majority of freight does not go via airports for all sorts of reasons.

Chair

By volume, no, but the value does.

Kate Shoesmith

Yes, and the costs and so on. However, it is important that we continue to have that capacity and that we can grow it. That is the key thing that we hear all the time, to export—

Chair

Any capacity growth is a good thing in your view.

Kate Shoesmith

Exactly.

John Dickie

I very much agree. It is difficult to see a world where it is somehow bad for exporters across Britain that there is more capacity and, over time, cheaper capacity at Heathrow, given its interconnectivity. I can see there is a bit of complexity about where that might lead to a reduction in demand too. I would have thought it was, on the face of it, likely to be a good thing for those businesses trying to export. The Scottish Chambers of Commerce described the expansion of Heathrow as a “huge opportunity” for Scotland, in part because of the impact it would have on the ability of Scottish businesses to export goods through Heathrow. Notwithstanding the conversation I just heard about gold going through Heathrow, I am told that Scottish smoked salmon is its biggest export by weight. I am not sure how that stacks up with gold, but one way or another it is obviously a big export.

Chair

I want to pick up on something you just said, John, which was that the likely benefits to the UK were £50 billion, but the HEAR confirms that the upper bound of the range is £40 billion. Our other witness, Alex Chapman, said there is an element of cherry-picking figures. Could you clarify? Are we talking about apples and pears, or the same thing?

John Dickie

I think so. The numbers I gave earlier—£49 billion to be precise—are a combination of the investment that Heathrow will make in delivering the third runway, coupled with the modernisation programme associated with that at the airport. That is the amount of aggregate inward investment that investors in Heathrow will make in the airport and its environs.

Steff Aquarone

Is Heathrow expansion important for the principle of business confidence, and, in your view, is there a cost to business confidence from proceeding or not proceeding?

Kate Shoesmith

I started the evidence today by saying how long we have spoken about Heathrow expansion. I can find the British Chambers of Commerce talking about Heathrow expansion right back to the early 2000s. We have produced something called a quarterly economic survey for the last 40 years that gets 5,000 businesses—largely SMEs—to respond every quarter. We know from looking at our data that business confidence is critical to future productivity, investment and growth. That is what we find. We are now in a situation where many businesses say that the lack of a decision is causing them to take pause for thought and not know whether to invest. Only around 17% of businesses responding to our survey in the last quarter said that they are looking to invest and grow in terms of their plant machinery operational equipment. That is significantly low, and we have seen that lack of business confidence play through into investment and the private sector.

Steff Aquarone

But is your view that the main cause of holding back investment is a lack of decision, as opposed to their not investing because there is not the capacity at Heathrow and that is directly holding back their businesses?

Kate Shoesmith

They are definitely two sides to the same coin.

Steff Aquarone

Which is bigger?

Kate Shoesmith

The lack of a decision is the significant one. The reason for saying that is that it is not just on this critical infrastructure project; we see it across the board. Whenever we are out and about talking to members about what is happening, whether we talk about roads, rail or air freight—across the piece—they really hold back because of the lack of decisions.

Steff Aquarone

So, John, is this just a vibes-based thing that is to do with Government’s commitment to seeing things through, or is there a specific reason why business confidence is being affected by the decision?

John Dickie

As Kate said, 2003 was the first time a British Government said that we should expand and create a third runway at Heathrow, and here we are in 2026. Who knows? At some point in the next decade, all the paperwork may be done, and you can start digging for a third runway—or not. That undermines global confidence in Britain as a place to invest, because, not just in transport but in commercial development and a whole range of areas, if you start the process of investing, you do not really know how long it will take and what the deadweight costs of preparing for that are. Whereas, if you want to build a data centre in Iowa, you kind of know how long that will take. That debilitates the UK’s competitiveness globally in attracting capital. That is definitely a thing. There is then an issue with confidence about Government commitment to growth. Governments talk a good game on growth but do not always deliver behind that. I think that, not least because the previous Chancellor of the Exchequer in particular made such a strong commitment about Government support for expanding Heathrow because it would drive growth, not doing that will have an effect on confidence in investing in Britain. It would suggest that even that level of support cannot be relied on to deliver projects, if that were to happen. As you say, there is a third impact, which is that people are not flying directly to parts of Asia in particular and parts of America because there aren’t flights. There aren’t flights because there is not the capacity at the hub airport, and that is holding business growth back. It is impossible to quantify that. I fear that this may be one of those areas where, depending on what answer you would like to get, your assumptions will get you there, but it is a common-sense statement that it must be the case that it is holding back growth for Britain.

Steff Aquarone

Well, that was the subject of much of the deliberation with our first panel. Thank you. Lastly, Perry, I suppose you look at it from a slightly different perspective, but do you have a view on what the impacts of continued uncertainty about the third runway are on your workforce?

Perry Phillips

From my perspective, I have spent 16 or 17 years representing members down at Heathrow airport, and there is uncertainty as the years go on about what businesses need to do. From the perspective of airlines down at Heathrow, having spoken to a lot of people, companies and airlines, there is uncertainty because they need to have the green light for the expansion. There is a danger if we do not give the green light to the third runway. What will these airlines do? Already at Heathrow, they are looking at better connections, so what will they do if we do not get the expansion? They will be looking at other airports for new routes across Europe, into Asia and China. India and China are emerging markets that obviously need connectivity. Just to reiterate what I said before, we are getting left behind. The uncertainty is that we may lose what we have already.

Chair

Perry, could I just pick you up on that? Heathrow is obviously the UK’s major airport with 480,000 ATMs every year. Where is the evidence that business will move away from Heathrow if runway 3 does not go ahead? I have not seen any.

Perry Phillips

It is just the perception—

Chair

So it is a perception? There is no background to that statement?

Perry Phillips

It is just the worry about them expanding to—

Chair

How many of your members who currently work at Heathrow fear that their jobs are at risk? I guess you mean among all the employers at Heathrow, not just Heathrow Airport Holdings Ltd. How many of your members who are there now fear that their jobs are at risk if runway 3 does not go ahead?

Perry Phillips

To be quite honest, Chair, it has not been a big factor. It is just the uncertainty.

Chair

Could you give me an example? What sort of uncertainty do you mean? What risk is there for people or businesses operating at Heathrow now?

Perry Phillips

It is those businesses that are operating now and want to expand, but have the option of other hub airports that they can take advantage of with their capacity. Like I said, Chair, it is obviously not a statistical point of view; it is just that uncertainty and pessimism about what happens if we do not get the third runway. Will these airports—

Chair

I understand the emotional question. I am just wondering where the evidence that any airlines are considering moving away is.

Perry Phillips

To reiterate, Ruth, it is just about looking into the future. If we don’t get the Heathrow expansion, what will these businesses and airlines do when they suddenly realise that the extra capacity that the third runway will bring is not there? They see Dubai and emerging airports such as Istanbul building capacity. Will they be looking at that business, and will it have a big effect on Heathrow if it does not move with the times?

Chair

All those businesses will be making forecasts for their business and for investment, and it is steady state or expansion. I am happy to be corrected, but are any of them looking at a third option of retraction if runway 3 does not go ahead? I have not been made aware of anything like that.

John Dickie

There are two parts to this. One is that there are airlines—a Chinese regional airline, for example—looking to have a base in Europe to get adequate capacity to do what it hopes to do over time: grow its business. It is very difficult to do that at Heathrow, for all the reasons that we know about with capacity constraint. That is a loss of jobs at Heathrow—well, it is a loss of increase in jobs.

Chair

It is a loss of increase in jobs. Will there be any loss of existing jobs at Heathrow if runway 3 does not go ahead?

John Dickie

Heathrow will be able to give you better answers than I can.

Chair

We will ask them.

John Dickie

If you are a Chinese airline that has one slot at Heathrow and you want to expand, you might decide that it is cheaper and that you will have greater growth options if you sell that slot and invest in a base of your own at, say, Schiphol or Frankfurt, at which point you will leave Heathrow. And that does happen.

Chair

But because of the demand, others will fill it.

John Dickie

Someone else will fill it—indeed. In the short term other people will fill that demand, but not necessarily in the long term.

Chair

I have a question for you, Perry. Do you think the draft HENPS strikes the right balance between the interests of those who may benefit directly from new jobs and opportunities, which we have just been discussing, and people who may bear the negative impacts of expansion and who will not be able to access those benefits? In particular, I am thinking about many of your members and other people working at Heathrow who live in the areas that are going to be affected by the third runway being built.

Perry Phillips

The HENPS is a balanced proposal, and it is balanced in its assessment. Our caution is different, as the benefit it describes cannot simply be assumed; it must be built in. The draft weighs economic, community and environmental questions together in one framework, which is the honest way to do it, rather than treating them as rival cases.

Chair

Many of your members—many of our constituents—do not fly in and out of Heathrow, as they cannot afford it, and the levels of deprivation around Heathrow have also been increasing in recent years, which has been confirmed by all the local authorities around. Why do you think that is the case? Why do you think runway 3 will make a difference?

Perry Phillips

I come from a union perspective, and I have been working down there for practically 16 or 17 years and speaking to thousands and thousands of workers, our members and staff, who range from aircraft cleaners to ground handlers and terminal cleaners—it is a massive employment workplace. I have spoken to a lot of our members who are obviously raising concerns, and they say, “Perry, when is the third runway going to go ahead?” The opportunities for the local areas around Heathrow and beyond—

Chair

Why do you think the local areas have not benefited from the expansion of passengers at Heathrow to date? Why do you think deprivation is increasing around Heathrow, rather than decreasing?

Perry Phillips

There is a case to say that the third runway will offer massive opportunities through thousands of jobs and apprenticeships. To go back to the fundamental basics, you have school leavers who will have the opportunity to go into apprenticeships.

Chair

That goes without saying, but we were made those promises with terminal 5. However, they did not materialise, and we have not seen the benefits that we were promised then, so I am trying to understand from you and other panel members why that was the case.

Perry Phillips

The expansion will create thousands of jobs, and we expect them to be well-paid jobs.

Chair

Heathrow itself and its direct contracts did commit to the London living wage for a short while. I do not know whether we are back at that now, because that was dropped during covid. How many of the new staff will be at the national minimum wage and London living wage levels?

Perry Phillips

That is a very good point; part of our support for the Heathrow expansion is based on jobs with well-paid, liveable wages, pensions and proper contracts of employment, rather than casual hours or zero-hour contracts.

Chair

Are you saying the latter is the reality at the moment? Are casual hours, zero hours and the minimum wage what the bulk of your members are on?

Perry Phillips

No, not at the moment, because through the years—

Chair

You have negotiated.

Perry Phillips

Yes. As you know, Chair, through the years, we have worked with Heathrow on employment status and low wages, and we managed to achieve liveable wages, specifically in the direct supply chain. There is an ongoing commitment from Heathrow that the jobs and apprenticeships created by the expansion will be good, well-paid and unionised jobs with pensions, and that is our expectation with the third runway.

Chair

Thank you. I would like to ask the other two witnesses about the range of negative health and environmental impacts that are going to come about with runway 3. Obviously, the Government have to weigh those up against the benefits. How will those environmental and health impacts affect businesses and employees around Heathrow?

Kate Shoesmith

We think the framework is the right framework in terms of looking at the four tests and making sure that there is equitable treatment across them, and that is really important in terms of this scrutiny from the Committee and across the board. In terms of our membership, which includes Heathrow, one of the things that we are very aware of is that Heathrow, as well as the aviation industry more broadly, has established good working relationships and good collective agreements with unions. It recognises the unions. That has been part and parcel of its modelling over the past few years. It is really important that each and every one of these tests is taken into proper consideration, and we would expect that to happen going forward.

John Dickie

As Kate has said, the work Heathrow airport has done to try to make sure that its spend goes through small and medium-sized enterprises in London and across Britain has been formidable. It seems to me that the economic test of the four tests is overwhelmingly and clearly met. The other tests do require serious regulatory oversight, both by the London government and by the national Government, but we have already seen considerable progress. A lot of the issues are not really to do with the airport as a place with lots of planes coming in and taking off; it is to do with the ancillary activities. We have seen something like a fall of a third in NOx around Heathrow airport since 2019, partly because of ULEZ, as well as the work TfL has done, for example, on modal shift. There is a whole range of interventions that can be made, and we have already seen substantial fruit around Heathrow that could meet the local environmental impact aspect of the test. There is a great deal of regulatory and other interventions that can be made to make sure that the planes that fly into Heathrow are modern planes that emit less and that produce less noise. There is also work on carbon, which I think it is important that the Government do, and on creating a strong framework for sustainable aviation fuels. I think I am right in saying that there are some short-haul flights that, over time, might very well be made using batteries and electricity. We do not know quite where that will go, but it is plausible. It is difficult to see there being a world where batteries power long-haul flights, so I think getting the UK’s SAF capacity up is a really important part of the mix over the next decade of making sure those tests can be met.

Jacob Collier

Kate, in your written evidence you said that the British Chambers of Commerce would not support Heathrow expansion at any cost. What are your red lines, and what would you like to see reflected in the national policy statement?

Kate Shoesmith

Obviously, Heathrow is an ecosystem. We have spoken about its supply chain in terms of wider distribution across the whole of the UK and about how it works with SME businesses. It works with a number of businesses on site at the minute. It is really important that the views of those businesses, which are well-established, highly regarded and profitable UK businesses, are taken into consideration. We need to ensure that there is clear analysis of the costs and the expected return on investment. There are a number of organisations—I know you are taking evidence from some of the airlines in the coming weeks—that have a set of assessments of what they think should be a fair price on this and why they need that look across the long-term consequences for them.

Jacob Collier

Perry, in your evidence you said, “The benefits of expansion cannot simply be assumed, they must be built in.” We have just had a conversation about pay and conditions, and I suppose that will be something that you will also consider as you go further. Can you explain what you meant by that and is there anything else that you think should be reflected in the policy statement?

Perry Phillips

I think it was reflected to the Chair previously that we expect that to be built in. Over the years, the GMB have done a lot of work on liveable wage salaries. Many years ago, a lot of our members were working there on a wage that was not acceptable. We worked on a collaborative approach to reach the levels in the direct supply chain that are happening now, where a liveable wage and beyond are being paid. Going back to the statement, we expect the commitment to be built in when the Heathrow expansion gets the green light. We expect decent pensions, decent employment contracts and a liveable wage. Our expectation is that they are built in with a commitment to the Heathrow expansion.

Jacob Collier

John, are there any gaps in the national policy statement that need to be filled? That question is open to anybody if you think there is anything that needs to be included.

John Dickie

The national policy statement as it stands is pretty well balanced. There is more, as we heard earlier, around the economic benefits of Heathrow that could be built in. But the local environmental tests on noise and pollution, as they are currently set out, are sensible. The importance of making sure that the economic benefits are well distributed is sensible too. As I said previously, the only thing I would add would be about the carbon implications. It is always worth remembering that there may be more flights taking off from Heathrow but that may mean there are fewer flights taking off from Schiphol to go to Sydney or wherever. We need to think about how the Government can play their part in building the UK’s sustainable aviation fuel capacity at pace across the aviation sector.

Kate Shoesmith

To pick up on what John said, we were very clear in the submission that the nationwide benefits need to be secured moving forward. We have heard from different chambers in our membership and their organisations about why they work with Heathrow and why they think it is important to their future capacity. We need to ensure that there is a broad base across the UK. In particular, we would argue that the SME supply chain needs to be considered. We know from direct investment from the public sector that not enough SMEs get access to those opportunities. We need to secure it here.

Olly Glover

Under the economic tests set out in the policy statement, promoters will have to demonstrate how their scheme will deliver economic growth nationally, regionally and locally. What kind of evidence should they be required to provide?

Kate Shoesmith

We would like them to take evidence from across a broad base. The British Chambers of Commerce has 51 accredited chambers across the UK. Each and every one of them will have a perspective on how they can operate and work with a hub airport. It will be important to take account of their views.

John Dickie

I said at the beginning what I think the principle local benefits are. It is good to do economic modelling to test and assess those benefits, but as we have just seen, economic modelling is heavily contested. It takes you as far as it takes you. It seems to me that for London, the economic benefits of being a professional services global centre on an island of greater connectivity speaks for itself. We are talking about an investment that is being made by the private sector, not the public.

Olly Glover

A quick supplementary: if the expansion resulted in labour being reallocated to different places rather than additional jobs being created, would that affect your view of its impact?

Kate Shoesmith

Different places around the UK? Is that the question?

Olly Glover

Yes.

Kate Shoesmith

I think there is a wider benefit. Shall we go back to our Scottish salmon example? We know that 44% of it goes through Heathrow, and we know that premium food and drink is a growing market globally right now; we know that there are key areas of the world looking to benefit from the UK’s reputation in terms of that premium food and drink. We think that there are jobs to be created in other areas as well, which can come from this.

Daniel Francis

How important is the ultimate affordability of services through Heathrow airport to realising the benefits of expansion and how do you think that that should be approached? I will start with you, John.

John Dickie

Are you thinking of the cost of using the airport for airlines?

Daniel Francis

Absolutely, because clearly—depending on the analysis—that cost might change.

John Dickie

It is absolutely right that a regulated airport—the only regulated airport in the UK—is scrutinised carefully by the CAA, and that the CAA has the resources and capabilities to scrutinise carefully Heathrow’s expansion plans, the cost of those plans, the effectiveness of the delivery of those plans and the effect that all that will have on landing charges for airlines. However, I do not think that landing charges for airlines will constrain demand for Heathrow. I think it is important that expansion is done as efficiently and as effectively as possible, but I really think it is important that it’s done. It is the increase in capacity that London and Britain need at their hub airport. The lower the cost of doing that, the better. But it is not the cost that is the barrier to growth; it is the lack of capacity.

Daniel Francis

You represent London, so do you have a view on the impact that expansion might have on other London airports, because obviously changing costs at one airport might impact another?

John Dickie

It may well do so. If there are concerns about the impact on other airports, then of course costs at Heathrow going up make it more attractive to go to other airports, rather than less attractive. But in the round I am strongly in favour of competition and choice. You can have effective competition between different airports with different catchment areas, different assets and features, and different strengths and weaknesses, but you cannot have effective competition between those airports if capacity is constrained at one and there is no competition.

Daniel Francis

Perry, do you have views on the original question?

Perry Phillips

Apologies—I am not an economics expert. But obviously I see the point of view that my colleagues have just put to you.

Daniel Francis

Would your members or you as a union have views, given that, depending on those costs, it might mean that there are additional routes, but it might also mean that some routes no longer exist? Has the union considered those points?

Perry Phillips

We have not considered those points, so it would be difficult for me to give you a proper direct answer.

Daniel Francis

Okay. Kate, do you have any view on the original question?

Kate Shoesmith

I fully agree with John’s point of view, in that is really important that there is a regulated environment for this. That is why the CAA needs to have a strong voice in terms of looking at this. And the airlines need to be fully involved in the decisions that are made next.

Alex Mayer

How important is increased domestic connectivity to realising the benefits of Heathrow expansion for businesses around the country?

Chair

Is there anything you want to add that you have not already covered on that issue? Kate?

Kate Shoesmith

The thing that we have not necessarily spoken about is surface transport options. It is obviously essential that they are part and parcel of this, because if we are going to realise the benefits they need to be part of the scheme and understood from the outset. I think that it is super-important that that aspect is considered, too.

Alex Mayer

So you do not necessarily think that we need more domestic flights going into Heathrow from other parts of the country, and you would be just as happy with people coming to Heathrow by rail?

Kate Shoesmith

I do not know enough about it. What we do know is that a huge number of passengers go via Heathrow who are domestic travellers using it as that hub airport, and it is the only option we have for that right now. What we have heard from our membership is that they think that increasing capacity will allow them to do more of the travel that will enable them to grow their businesses.

Alex Mayer

Anyone else got anything to add?

John Dickie

A very substantial increase in the capacity at Heathrow will make it more viable for there to be more flights from UK airports to Heathrow than is the case now, and that will support wider hubbing through Heathrow. All the arguments we know. There are important modal shift issues about how you get to Heathrow. That is particularly true for people coming to Heathrow from relatively short distances. So things like the expansion of Southern rail—

Chair

We are going to come on to surface access.

John Dickie

Long-distance surface. I think Manchester is one of the busiest routes in the UK going into and out of Heathrow. One way to get modal shift there is to improve the rail service between London and Manchester, which would make a lot of people in both London and Manchester very happy. My view is that we should be thinking about modal shift by making trains more attractive to passengers, rather than saying you cannot fly, because all that does is hobble people’s ability to go on holiday or do business.

Alex Mayer

Do you think that the requirements of the NPS put enough duties on the promoter to safeguard and expand domestic routes?

John Dickie

I think it is complicated is the simple answer. We might get on to this on local surface access. What you really need is good institutional co-operation between Network Rail, the Highways Agency, Transport for London and the GLA and Heathrow. We need to make sure we have a framework that encourages and supports that co-operation. In the case of Heathrow, it links into the way in which they are regulated, because fundamentally the contributions they can make to local public transport or national public transport are a function of that regulatory model.

Chair

In terms of more domestic flights in and out of Heathrow, we had evidence that the growth at Heathrow could mainly end up going to wide-bodied long-haul flights, and regional flights might not be able to afford to take the additional capacity and get into Heathrow. They would be priced out or squeezed out. As I say, do you think the NPS should put a duty on the promoter to safeguard those routes? If so, how would that be done and paid for?

Kate Shoesmith

I do not know the answer in enough detail, so we can come back to you. In terms of the economic analysis, the consideration was across the piece in terms of that nationwide benefit, and domestic routes were part and parcel of that. That is definitely the strong pull that we have had from the membership in terms of thinking about it. Across the sector and across the economy, what they are particularly interested in is how this allows them to grow locally but also have access. They do not have the capacity right now.

Chair

Does that growth in capacity that you say they want have to be protected in some way because it might not happen?

Kate Shoesmith

That is a really fair question in working out the balance of this. From our perspective, we are looking at how it allows all boats to rise. I am thinking about a UK-wide perspective, so I think it is worth considering.

Alex Mayer

When your members get to Heathrow, they get on a big plane that goes far away. Is that the key thing? Or is it just as important that they can get from wherever they are in England to Heathrow? Which bit are they most worried about? They are going on a big plane far away, but there is not enough of that.

Kate Shoesmith

They are worried about three things. They are worried about the domesticity and being able to go on a short-haul flight. They are worried about the long-haul opportunities and what that allows them to do. And they are worried about cargo and freight and how that allows them to export goods.

Chair

Okay. Thank you. Is there anything still to be asked about freight stuff?

Steff Aquarone

I was going to ask about the benefit to businesses and jobs of what seems to be uncalculated increases in cargo capacity. Are there any views on that? Witnesses indicated dissent.

Chair

Right. Now we will move to surface access. Olly is next.

Olly Glover

As you will be aware, the ground transport links, particularly the prospective rail from Heathrow, are pretty dismal compared with European competitors. It is great in the London direction, but apart from that it is nothing compared to the Amsterdam Schiphol direct intercity train to basically everywhere in Netherlands. Frankfurt Flughafen is similar, as is Paris CDG.

Chair

Okay, you’ve been to all those places.

Olly Glover

I just want to emphasise the point, Chair, because we say we want Heathrow to be a globally leading airport, yet we have persistently neglected all that stuff. A lot of business organisations have emphasised to us in their evidence that improved surface access is really important for realising the airport’s benefits. That would also be important for people who work there and commute to it. Are you reassured by what the draft policy statement says on this front?

John Dickie

I am reassured, but I return to the point from right at the beginning that it is over 20 years since the Government first said we should have a third runway at Heathrow.

Chair

Can I correct you on that? In 2003 Heathrow airport changed their minds and said, “We do want a third runway.” The then Government proceeded with that. This time around, it was not Heathrow that started the conversation; it was the Chancellor who said we need a third runway, and the DFT and Heathrow are now working up the plans.

John Dickie

It depends when you believe that conversation started, but shall we agree that we have been talking about this very seriously for over 20 years?

Chair

I would definitely agree with you on that.

John Dickie

The question is really about delivery capability. As I said a minute ago, that requires a properly joined-up conversation approach, plan and funding model across Transport for London and Network Rail, in particular. We have been talking about the western rail link and Heathrow Southern Railway for a similar amount of time—possibly even longer than we have been talking about expanding Heathrow—and it would be great if we could just crack on and do it. There is a distributional question of whether that is paid for by the taxpayer or by people flying through Heathrow. Those are your options.

Chair

Where would your members be on that question?

John Dickie

We would be in favour of the model that maximised the efficiency of who was paying. That is an empirical question that will need to be studied as part of this process.

Kate Shoesmith

That is very fair. The other part of that is being extremely clear in terms of the respective roles—the Government, the actors that John spoke about, and the promoter of the scheme and their ownership. Which parties are involved in this, and are they very clear on their respective roles? Local transport is a frustration. It is absolutely important that it is factored into all these considerations and addressed properly. We put this in our evidence—just on a national level, over 60% of businesses are unsatisfied with local transport options because they are not good enough.

Chair

Are you are talking about now?

Kate Shoesmith

Yes—right now. It is not enabling people to get to their place of work properly. We hear this over and over again. There is a series of examples of how it stops people being able to do the work they need to do.

Chair

Perry, to what extent does the transport infrastructure at the moment impact your members? What are you calling for in terms of surface access changes?

Perry Phillips

A lot of our members had travelling problems getting to work and with the cost of parking at Heathrow. We have quite a few members who do unsociable shifts. We have a lot of members with caring responsibilities, like a husband and wife sharing caring responsibilities in terms of dropping children off at school, at nannies and things like that, so they work around each other. A lot of the time, they cannot rely on public transport to get to work. From the perspective of an employee getting to work, the cost of parking at Heathrow is still a concern. A lot of companies subsidise staff car parking. A lot of employers do not. It is a concern that the cost of our members going to work is considerable. That is a main concern from our point of view.

Chair

Do delays and congestion impact on staff arriving at work on time?

Perry Phillips

Do you mean currently, Chair?

Chair

Yes.

Perry Phillips

That is not a big problem. We have a lot of members that live in Hampshire and Berkshire—not just in the surrounding areas of Hounslow, Southall, Ealing and Heston. We have a considerable number of members that live quite far from the airport. With their connectivity, using the M25 and the M4 for those connections, there has not been much of a concern coming to us as a trade union at this current time.

Chair

But Kate, your members have raised issues of congestion around Heathrow.

Kate Shoesmith

It is the availability of the transport options, rather than the congestion. I do not know about congestion specifically, but we can ask. It is the availability and the unreliability of those transport options that is particularly problematic. It is coming into London and leaving London that is the particular issue.

Chair

I only found out later, but apparently, the M25 was closed completely in one direction near Heathrow yesterday, which must have caused some problems. John, do you have issues from your members? Is there a cost of congestion at the moment?

John Dickie

In general, we are favour of London-wide congestion charging so that journeys become more predictable and all the externalities of lots of idling vehicles are reduced. It would be a good thing if we could improve the surface transit reliability from central London to Heathrow, but of course, it is also a good thing that we continue, as the Mayor’s transport strategy is doing, to drive up modal shift, getting more people to Heathrow using public transport. Again, we are in favour of an expansion in those options, particularly for commuters coming in from outside London, where there is now quite robust connectivity.

Chair

Would you like to see the HENPS strengthened in the area of surface access?

Kate Shoesmith

I would particularly like to see the roles of each of the participants in the scheme outlined so that there is a clear articulation of what each party is doing and what Government’s involvement is in the funding going forward.

Chair

Great. I will ask the final question. Is there anything else that we have not covered today that you would like to see amended in the final version of the HENPS?

John Dickie

Some of the economic benefits of expansion, which we have talked about.

Perry Phillips

I would reiterate our position as a union. I have been with the workers for so many years, and I would just like to give an example. From my position, it is jobs, jobs, jobs—good jobs. With the Heathrow expansion, there is an opportunity to grow the UK. I was across at Heathrow a couple of weeks ago, and that hit home to me. I am passionate about the airport. I have been working for so many years down there. I was talking to a couple of ground handlers about the Heathrow expansion. They were giving me a history of how they came into the airport—guaranteed jobs. A lot of people have been there 30, 40 or 50 years. They have spent their whole working lives there. They are like me—I came out of school when I was 15 or 16. I went straight into an apprenticeship, when manufacturing was massive back in the late ‘70s and early ‘80s—it has obviously declined a lot now. As an engineering apprentice, I had that opportunity, just like thousands of people. Young people leaving school will have the opportunity to gain experience in aviation. Talking to these guys, they were saying, “We would like our children, our grandchildren and our great-grandchildren to benefit from the economic value and job opportunities that we knew would come our way and would give better prospects for a lot of people.”

Chair

I absolutely agree with you, but I think there is a much wider debate, which this Government are picking up, about the need to do far more for young people to get them into the kind of work that you have described—a proper apprenticeship.

Perry Phillips

It is a massive opportunity for these young people leaving school. A lot of the boroughs have high employment rates. It is a massive opportunity, whether they take apprenticeships or trade skills, or whether they go into a job position that is vacant for them. When you look at aviation, you look at so many job positions. We can say to young people leaving school, “There is a massive opportunity for you.”

Chair

Obviously, I am aware that the airport provides many of those opportunities. The colleges are tied in and so on.

Perry Phillips

I was just singing from my heart, Ruth—that’s all.

Chair

I know many people who, similarly, have worked all their working life at Heathrow. Is there anything else that we have not covered?

Kate Shoesmith

The role of the Committee is essential in making sure we get to a clear articulation of what the next steps are. The prolonged uncertainty has created a situation that we would like to see move on now.

Chair

Many people have made that point. Thank you very much for your evidence and for the time you have spent writing your evidence and preparing for today. If there is anything that you feel you did not get to cover, please feel free to write to us. That concludes today’s meeting.