The local conflict I have studied was the expansion of Heathrow airport, although the conflict itself ended in 2010 when it was legally resolved. However there are still effects that were created from the plans to expand Heathrow that have upset many different groups. In this essay I will discuss how the groups involved were either satisfied or dissatisfied with the outcome.
There was a debate to whether or not the expansion at Heathrow was necessary. Here BAA (the airports directing company) pointed out that Heathrow was currently operating at 99.2% capacity utilisation meaning that even small incidents would create major delays, such as the ability of Heathrow to cope in extreme winter conditions such as snow. But the Greater London Authority and Hillingdon council argued saying there were alternatives such as expanding Gatwick airport. Labour parliament also intervened stating the huge increase in passengers should be met by London’s most efficient and largest airport should be developed into the UK’s air hub. However the conservative party suggested more alternatives such as improving rail infrastructure to allow extra capacity to spread to other airports such as Manchester. This would benefit the north of England especially with the struggling economy.
Arguments then arose over the impacts that would come from the expansion of Heathrow and there were many mixed attitudes towards this. A positive outcome economically would be that 140,000 new jobs would be created meaning that more people would be earning a decent wage paying taxes that would contribute to the government in funding public services such as hospitals. And if the expansion didn’t go ahead then it was estimated the UK would lose potentially £4.5 billion GDP growth and £1.6 billion of its existing GDP to