Heathrow third runway, Environment, Business, London, Travel and transport, Rachel Reeves, Keir Starmer, Politics, Economic policy Business | The Guardian
On top of the added levels of noise and air pollution, there’s the non-trivial matter of demolishing hundreds of homes, diverting several waterways and rerouting a long stretch of the M25Ladies and gentlemen, the captain has illuminated the “fasten seat belts” sign. Not only have Sir Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves run into severe turbulence over Heathrow, the flight deck deliberately steered the Labour plane into storm clouds. That’s an interesting choice for a government that was already buffeted by serious unpopularity and it’s a choice that a lot of their own party are struggling to explain to themselves. Anger about the chancellor’s new commitment to back the expansion of the London airport and others is mingled with bewilderment. A lot of Labour people are scratching their heads trying to work out why she wants to burn political capital on a hugely contentious project that couldn’t possibly be complete until long after she’s done at the Treasury and Sir Keir is gone from Number 10.It was her choice and his. She didn’t have to make airport expansion the centrepiece of her keynote speech about growth. The prime minister, if his title means anything, could have stopped his chancellor had he wanted to. One consequence of the fury about the subject is that it diverts attention from her more welcome thoughts about how to boost Britain’s growth-starved economy. Continue reading…
On top of the added levels of noise and air pollution, there’s the non-trivial matter of demolishing hundreds of homes, diverting several waterways and rerouting a long stretch of the M25
Ladies and gentlemen, the captain has illuminated the “fasten seat belts” sign. Not only have Sir Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves run into severe turbulence over Heathrow, the flight deck deliberately steered the Labour plane into storm clouds. That’s an interesting choice for a government that was already buffeted by serious unpopularity and it’s a choice that a lot of their own party are struggling to explain to themselves. Anger about the chancellor’s new commitment to back the expansion of the London airport and others is mingled with bewilderment. A lot of Labour people are scratching their heads trying to work out why she wants to burn political capital on a hugely contentious project that couldn’t possibly be complete until long after she’s done at the Treasury and Sir Keir is gone from Number 10.
It was her choice and his. She didn’t have to make airport expansion the centrepiece of her keynote speech about growth. The prime minister, if his title means anything, could have stopped his chancellor had he wanted to. One consequence of the fury about the subject is that it diverts attention from her more welcome thoughts about how to boost Britain’s growth-starved economy.
