The head of Heathrow Airport has urged David Cameron to back the plan for a third runway, saying it is the only way the Prime Minister can "secure our country's future".
Heathrow chief executive John Holland-Kaye said expanding the international hub west of London was the only way the Government could deliver sustainable growth and cut the deficit.
At a speech in London, Mr Holland-Kaye also hit out at the rival plan for an expansion of Gatwick, saying it did nothing for the economy or job creation and lacked political support.
Speaking in Euston he said: "Last month, the Chancellor warned against complacency on the economy, saying: 'Now is the time to make the long term decisions to secure our country's future ... the prize for us all is that Britain could become the most prosperous of all the major nations in the world in the coming generation'.
"After the Mayoral election, after the EU referendum, the biggest issue for the Prime Minister is delivering the sustainable growth that will tackle the deficit and create that prosperity.
"Only saying 'yes' to Heathrow expansion will help him deliver that vision."
He added: "Britain is falling behind, when we should be taking the lead. Only by choosing Heathrow can the Prime Minister secure our country's future."
The Davies Commission recommended last July that a third runway should be built at Heathrow, at a cost of £18.6 billion.
Other shortlisted options are an extension of the existing northern runway at Heathrow - costing £13.5 billion - or building a second runway at Gatwick, which would cost £9.3 billion.
On Sunday, 13 of Britain's largest construction and development firms wrote to George Osborne urging him to live up to his declaration that "we are the builders" by supporting a third runway at Heathrow.
The letter to the Chancellor said the west London airport has provided a "steady base of work" during the economic downturn and expansion would bring "a £15.6 billion order book to the UK supply chain".
It also noted last year's report by respected international economic think tank the OECD which found that the UK has historically underspent on infrastructure, partially due to "long decision-making processes".
Mr Holland-Kaye added that "we don't want to be still talking about this" in 10 years time, saying: "We have changed our plan completely to meet the tests the Prime Minister himself set - fewer people impacted by aircraft noise, offering more predictable respite, meeting environmental limits, ending routine stacking over London, being fair to local people.
"We have u-turned so the Prime Minister doesn't have to. On doing the right thing - we can deliver."
A Gatwick Airport spokesman said: "What John Holland-Kaye fails to mention are the insurmountable barriers that have stopped Heathrow expansion time and time again. What remains obvious is that Heathrow's time has passed.
"The simple facts show that Gatwick's plan is not just the best, but the only legal and only deliverable solution. The choice is very clear - Britain finally getting on with it with growth at Gatwick or illegal expansion grounded yet again at Heathrow."
The 2M Group of local authorities who question the environmental impact of expanding Heathrow said that "simply stating that air quality around Heathrow is not a problem will not make the issue disappear".
Spokesman Ravi Govindia, the leader of Wandsworth Council in south west London, said: "Air quality at Heathrow is getting worse, not better. Only last month Heathrow registered its highest nitrogen dioxide reading for eight years. It's fanciful to think millions more car journeys from a third runway are going to make the situation any better."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel