Debates between Bernard Jenkin and Louise Ellman during the 2010-2015 Parliament

Aviation Strategy

Debate between Bernard Jenkin and Louise Ellman
Thursday 24th October 2013

(11 years, 1 month ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Louise Ellman Portrait Mrs Ellman
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Gentleman is wrong. The Committee looked at the future and the possibility of high-speed rail links between London and Birmingham, and it says that that would produce a different situation.

Bernard Jenkin Portrait Mr Jenkin
- Hansard - -

I perfectly accept that, but we are committed to a hub. We need a hub, and we need a decision to build a four-runway hub now. Once we have reached that conclusion, all the logic drives us towards having a Thames estuary airport.

Not a single objection has been raised to a Thames estuary airport—not cost, not bird strikes, not sea level rise—that is a showstopper; and then there are the advantages of a Thames estuary airport: it is achievable, and achievable within a predictable time frame; and its connectivity is better than that of any other possible site for a four-runway hub, and that almost includes Heathrow. Because it is already almost on the HS1 route, it has better rail connections to European onward destinations than any other possible site. It is also closer to the City of London by rail time than Heathrow. As the right hon. Member for Greenwich and Woolwich said, its connectivity by non-road is better than any other possible site, so that puts it firmly on the agenda, as does the fact that east of London is where we need regeneration and investment.

This is the visionary approach that should be adopted by the Davies commission. The estuary airport is the best environmental option because a bird habitat that would be affected can be replicated and replaced—or even doubled—elsewhere, and the Ramsar sites can be moved. It is the best safety option, because there would be no more flying over populated areas, and it is the best noise option, too. Some 750,000 people live under the 50 dB-plus noise footprint of Heathrow, which is why a decision there is impossible. Almost no people will be living under such a noise level around the Thames estuary airport, which is why this is a no-brainer.

Select Committee Inquiry (Aviation Strategy)

Debate between Bernard Jenkin and Louise Ellman
Thursday 13th September 2012

(12 years, 2 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Louise Ellman Portrait Mrs Ellman
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I hope the hon. Lady will note that the terms of reference of our inquiry make it very clear that the Committee will be interested in looking at all possibilities, so we look forward to hearing her thoughts on the issue.

Bernard Jenkin Portrait Mr Bernard Jenkin (Harwich and North Essex) (Con)
- Hansard - -

The hon. Lady mentioned the commission that is being established by the Government. It will inevitably consider the Heathrow proposal, which is shovel ready, and other proposals such as for the Thames estuary airport, which is much less developed. Is she concerned that this inquiry must not only be objective but be seen to be objective, and that, therefore, it is up to the Government to spend some money on bringing forward the alternative proposals that they want considered during the inquiry—otherwise, it will not be an objective inquiry, but a fix for Heathrow?

Louise Ellman Portrait Mrs Ellman
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Gentleman makes an important point, and the Government should consider that in setting up their inquiry, as should the Chair and members of the inquiry when conducting their business.