Chancellor Rachel Reeves is under fire over her plans to create another runway at London Heathrow airport, which was unveiled in her Autumn Budget last year.
A coalition of leading economists and transport specialists has challenged the Government's aviation expansion strategy in correspondence sent to Chancellor Rachel Reeves and Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander.
The group, which includes sixteen university economics professors, argues that projected economic gains from expanding airports remain "at best uncertain".
Their intervention follows government endorsement of substantial growth plans at multiple UK airports, including Heathrow's £49billion third runway scheme and Luton's approved capacity increase from 18 million to 32 million passengers yearly.
Heathrow expansion plans are under fire
|GETTY
The experts' letter expresses particular concern about environmental consequences, stating there are "no indications that the environmental and health impacts of airport expansion can be adequately mitigated".
This correspondence arrives as ministers consider business proposals for constructing Heathrow's third runway, with the government committed to examining the Airports National Policy Statement that establishes approval criteria for the project.
Dr Alex Chapman, a senior economist at the New Economics Foundation who coordinated the letter, questioned why ministers seemed eager to encourage British holidaymakers to spend abroad whilst Reform Party support grows in coastal communities.
He explained: "The economic case for airport expansion is questionable from so many angles, but chief among them is the decline of business reliance on air travel."
Do you have a money story you’d like to share? Get in touch by emailing money@gbnews.uk.
Rachel Reeves has sought to bolster economic growth
| GETTYChapman suggested ministerial backing appeared "grounded in assumptions and industry vibes more so than evidence and research".
The economist highlighted that government-appointed inspectors examining the Gatwick and Luton schemes had advised rejection after determining the advantages failed to outweigh the drawbacks.
"As a bare minimum the upcoming review of the Airports National Policy Statement must involve a thorough and independent impact assessment of Heathrow's expansion and should consider other, lower-impact, alternatives," he stated.
The economists' concerns emerge against a backdrop of extensive aviation growth plans, with Heathrow seeking to expand annual passenger numbers from 84 million to 150 million through its proposed third runway development.
Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander previously overruled planning inspectors' recommendations against Luton's expansion, citing economic growth priorities.
The Government's aviation expansion agenda extends beyond Heathrow, with ministers supporting growth across multiple airports despite warnings from the Climate Change Committee against increased flying before 2030.
LATEST DEVELOPMENTS:
Heathrow is the busiest airport in the UK | HEATHROW EXPRESSThe committee recommends only a minimal two per cent rise in passenger numbers by 2035, allowing time for sustainable aviation technologies to mature.
Current sustainable aviation fuels represent merely two per cent of supply, far below the 17 per cent projected for 2040, while electric aircraft and carbon capture remain largely theoretical solutions.
Environmental campaigners warn that expanding capacity now threatens legally binding carbon budgets essential for achieving net zero emissions by 2050.
Earlier this year, Reeves said: "I have always been clear that a third runway at Heathrow would unlock further growth, boost investment, increase exports, and make the UK more open and more connected as part of our Plan for Change."