Originally Posted by
UKtravelbear
I'm only in favour of the additional runway
(a) if they restrict the extra slots available so the whole airport runs at 75-80% capacity (similar to I believe AMS and FRA) so that weather or a runway issue etc don't cause a total meltdown in flights.
(b) the new slots are allocated to particular routes and not to an airline so an airline couldn't start with LHR-XXX say it was failing and use the slot for LHR-ZZZ. It should go back into a pool for bids. Oh and these slots should belong to HAL and not the airline so they can't sell them.
As to possible challenges it depends on what sort of approval vote is given to MPs. If it just in principle and then there is a planning application etc then there will be challenges. If it us a specific act of parliament then it is harder to challenge in the courts. IIRC Crossrail was approved via an Act with only relatively small elements done via individial planning applications. Same is happening with HS2.
For (a) I believe that to be wishful thinking. As with any investment HAL will be keen to sweat all their assets as hard as possible. The promise of 6.5-7 hours closure overnight will be discarded with very quickly also.
In terms of planning/Acts of Parliament HS2 and Crossrail don't cause the impact on air quality and emissions that a third runway will. The government has repeatedly lost legal battles regarding it's failure to deliver air quality improvements from current levels.