1. The Runway Extension is not an alternative to the Second Runway but in fact makes the Second Runway more likely to go ahead in future. 

Local politicians attempting to position themselves as both 'pro-environment' and 'pro-airport' by on the one hand opposing a second runway but on the other hand backing the extension of the existing runway risk giving the misleading impression that we are dealing here with two alternative proposals for the future development of Birmingham International Airport.  

In fact, the Runway Extension is only the first major instalment of the much larger, long-term programme of expansion - culminating in a Second Runway - originally recommended for Birmingham by the Government in its 2003 White Paper 'The Future of Air Transport'. All that has changed with the current BIA Master Plan is the development timeframe: the Second Runway is not now expected to be needed before 2030, and neither the government nor the Airport Company have begun to plan for beyond 2030 - yet.  

The Master Plan states that since the publication of the previous draft of the document, 

'more recent work, by the Airport Company, has included a detailed review of the traffic forecasts and runway capacity. This work now indicates that a second runway should not be needed before 2030. Consequently, a new second runway has not been included in this Master Plan, but, as the forecasts are reviewed, over future periods, runway capacity and the need for a second runway could be reconsidered.' (emphasis added) [1]  

In other words, the Airport Company will 'never say never' to a Second Runway and the Master Plan leaves the option wide open to resurrect the proposal in future. And as long as the Second Runway is supported by Department for Transport in the White Paper, BIA Ltd will have national government policy to appeal to as justification for its further expansion. 

The current Master Plan is unlikely to be reviewed again until after 2012, the year the extended runway is expected to begin operating. But once a longer runway is in place, and work has begun on increasing the capacity of the runway and constructing a third terminal, it will be much easier for the Airport Company to make a case for the Second Runway. Conversely, there is no question of the Second Runway being built ahead of the extension of the existing runway.  

For these reasons we believe extending the existing runway will make the Second Runway more, not less, likely to go ahead in future, and we caution those who support the Runway Extension as the 'lesser of two evils' to think again. 

References 

[1] Birmingham International Airport Limited, 'Towards 2030: Planning a sustainable future for air  transport in the Midlands', November 2007, para.7.2.24, p43. www.bhx.co.uk/Planning/351.pdf 

[2] Ibid. para.5.18-19, p23.