Disruption at Heathrow Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Department for Transport

Disruption at Heathrow

Lord Harris of Haringey Excerpts
Tuesday 25th March 2025

(1 week ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Harris of Haringey Portrait Lord Harris of Haringey (Lab)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

My Lords, I refer to my interest as chair of the National Preparedness Commission.

I understand that the Daily Telegraph knows what happened. The headline today said:

“Blame Heathrow’s faceless foreign owners for airport’s meltdown”.


That may be a rather simplistic analysis, but it does strike me that there is an issue—this is a point the noble Earl raised—with the extent to which the contingency plans within the airport had been thought through and stress-tested. You cannot create it overnight, but had Heathrow considered, for example, as part of its risk analysis and appetite, whether it was possible to run part of the airport and keep some of the functions going? Had it considered its ability to switch from one source of power to another without having to switch off all the systems?

When it is known the extent to which Heathrow had contingency plans and stress-tested them, could my noble friend the Minister say whether his department has any powers to say to those who own airports that their risk appetite should be different? The economic consequences of disruption at Heathrow will always be enormous and the reputational impact for the country as a whole is enormous. Does the Minister have the power, if necessary, to tell the owners to take a different risk appetite?

Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill Portrait Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill (Lab)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank my noble friend for that contribution. I also respect the National Preparedness Commission and know how useful it is because I was, fairly briefly, a not particularly active member of it. It is interesting that somebody in the media already thinks they know who is responsible. One should wait for the in-depth and comprehensive review from Heathrow Airport itself and the National Energy System Operator to find that out. In particular, they must between them look at whether complete closure was the only option, or whether some partial closure could have been achieved with less disruption.

The direct answer to whether the department has powers to change the risk appetite of an airport operator rests with the Civil Aviation Authority, which is the economic and safety regulator for airports. The Secretary of State has, of course, been in touch with the CAA, which will look closely at the work to be done by Heathrow Airport in the Kelly review. When the CAA receives that report it will then be able to take a view on the appropriate level of risk appetite and the amount of money that needs to be spent to assuage that risk. The CAA is the authority that should, in due course, take a view, and I am sure that it will.