Party leaders will stay grounded even as their anti-Heathrow wings take flight

Parliamentary Business

Passenger numbers at Heathrow fell 0.4 per cent last month despite a record year (AFP/Getty)

Conservative MPs are frustrated by another delay over airport expansion. They argue that Government exists to make tough decisions yet, on this issue, continues to abdicate responsibility.

The likeliest option remains a £17.6m third runway at Heathrow that would, it is claimed, boost the economy by £147bn over 60 years. Businesses and trade unions that have backed Heathrow for years might even have an unlikely saviour: Jeremy Corbyn.

It must be acknowledged that, following the dreadful dithering over approval of Heathrow, which should have happened before Christmas, a second airstrip at Gatwick for around half the cost remains very much in the running.

There’s sufficient unease among Sussex residents that anti-Gatwick campaigners continue to lobby MPs and are attempting to meet ministers to point out the dangers of expanding an airport that is built on an impermeable clay flood plain. They also argue poor rail and road connections would not be able to cope with a sudden, sharp increase in passenger numbers.

I don’t think they need worry for now, at least. I suspect one additional runway in the South-east will prove insufficient – the real fight to expand Gatwick will come around 2030, once Heathrow has its new airstrip.

Heathrow expansion will surely be given the ministerial OK this summer. The delay is partly down to ongoing environmental concerns which should, by happy coincidence, be calmed after May’s London mayoral election, conveniently not putting the government at loggerheads with its candidate, the anti-Heathrow expansion MP Zac Goldsmith.

Let’s suppose this scenario is correct. Heathrow is an argument that has divided the Conservatives, much to the delight of a parliamentary Labour Party that has largely backed Heathrow.

As with Trident, though, this is an issue that has been turned on its head by Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership victory and, more significantly, the promotion of his closest ally, John McDonnell, to shadow Chancellor.

Heathrow expansion would directly hit Mr McDonnell’s constituency, Hayes and Harlington in West London, so he opposes a new runway. Mr McDonnell has complained that people are “literally dying” because of air “poisoned by the aviation industry”.

Given that David Cameron could well need opposition votes to approve a third runway bill, there is a political danger that the Labour leadership could whip MPs to vote against it. This puts Mr Corbyn, who is also anti-Heathrow, in a quandary, because it is likely he would suffer a rebellion at least as large as the 66 Labour MPs who voted for air strikes in Syria.

Northern MPs in particular are pro-Heathrow because they believe it will mean there will be more domestic flights to their local airports, boosting regional economies.

This rebellion would not be as high-profile as Syria, but, in many ways, a more damaging test of his authority given that, ostensibly at least, Syria was a free vote even though Mr Corbyn and Mr McDonnell are ideologically opposed to bombing.

Labour’s official policy is that Heathrow expansion would have to pass four tests, including convincing evidence that it will increase aviation capacity and effective management of noise and air pollution.

These tests have a whiff of malleability, which should suit Mr Corbyn if he is intent on opposing a third runway. Of all the fights the Labour leader has picked, is picking, and will and could pick with his parliamentary party, though, it seems unlikely that he will conclude it is worth getting a bloody nose over airport capacity.

Having spent more than three decades in Parliament pushing his socialist agenda without hint of success, this is not the issue to waste political capital on at a time when Mr Corbyn finally has the chance – not to mention overwhelming mandate – to remould Labour into something more akin to a movement.

A senior Labour MP says that Mr Corbyn will almost certainly allow another free vote, though a member of the party’s transport team is adamant this has yet to be discussed. Either way, it is clear an accommodation will be found.

It is understood that Mr McDonnell could be given permission to vote against Heathrow, even if the rest of Labour votes for it, on the basis that he is a special case because it is essentially a constituency matter.

This is a bit of an awkward get-out, but there is little that is particularly comfortable about the accommodations that the leadership has been forced to make with the more centrist parliamentary party – and vice versa.

Moreover, the Prime Minister could copy this little wheeze, meaning he could allow the likes of International Development Secretary Justine Greening to rebel, or at least abstain. Both major parties could, in effect, eschew collective responsibility for the sake of party unity.

There are constitutionalists, historians and true believers of both red and blue hue who would deplore such a compromise, but it is one where everyone saves face. More importantly, this deal could finally see the UK given the additional airport capacity it so desperately needs after years of inquiries, debate and delays.

Whether that capacity is in the right place is another argument and one that will be repeated when a third runway proves to be less than was required.

Twitter.com/@mleftly