Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
RYANAIR CHIEF EXECUTIVE Michael O’Leary managed to raise some smiles in a committee meeting of members of the House of Commons yesterday, barely holding back in his views on a new airport for London.
The Ryanair chief executive was giving evidence to the Commons’ Transport Select Committee on the regulation of British airports and was asked if he had any opinions on plans to build a new airport for London – what would be the sixth airport to serve the British capital.
The idea of a ‘Thames Estuary’ airport to the east of the city has been floated for decades – and most recently has gathered steam after city mayor Boris Johnson proposed a transport hub with rail, freight and air infrastructure including a four-runway airport.
The Mullingar native did little to hold back on his opinions – and his typically blunt tone raised giggles from some onlookers who weren’t quite used to such direct language.
Q. Does London need more runways?A. Yes – at least three. One at Heathrow, one at Gatwick, one at Stansted. As fast as possible.
Q. Do you have any opinions on plans to create a new airport for London?
A. Yes.
Q. [after a pause] Would you like to share them with us?
A. Well, in parliamentary language they would be unprintable, but: insane, stupid, harebrained. The idea of building…
London is currently served by five airports. Some airports serve London better than others, but at least you have the infrastructure – you have the ground infrastructure, you have people who live there.
To try and come up with a new Greenfield runway, regardless of where you’re going to develop it, which has no infrastructure – no motorway, no rail infrastructure – which will probably take the rest of my lifetime before it sees the day – is insanely and asininely stupid.
It’s a worthwhile proposal [only] because it generates a lot of PR inches here [O'Leary raises his hand around the room], [which is] what you need.
You already have that transport infrastructure in place. You have the land at each of those airports for an additional runway. You don’t need to knock down houses to do it.
O’Leary continued by arguing that the forthcoming sale of Stansted Airport – for which Ryanair was once expected to bid – would create an immediate opportunity for the expansion of London’s airports without the need for a new one.
After Stansted is sold by the British Airport Authority, he said, London’s three biggest airports – Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted – would all be separately owned.
The first thing they will do is all start campaigning to build an additional runway at their airports, and government should support that.And let’s promote three additional runways – and we’d end a lot of this nonsensical debate for the next 20 years.
The vocal Ryanair chief executive has previously spoken out against the construction of the second terminal at Dublin Airport, regularly labelling the project as a “white elephant” which was built just as Dublin’s overall passenger numbers were falling.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
I cannot understand why the Gov do not invest that money into the Air Corp and let them carry out all SAR missions, as it is the AirCorp carry out many missions already.
At least this way the Gov would own the helis etc instead send money out of the state.
@Brian Guilfoyle: Depreciation, maybe? I’d imagine those helis are rugged, because they get a lot of use.
@Brian Guilfoyle: Absolutely 100% agree, the Coast Guard should be more closely integrated into Defence Forces , we have spent the guts of € Billion with CHC. We need to invest in Aer Corps and Navy to deliver a world class Coast Guard and Naval Patrol. Irish Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) in terms of Maritime territory is 11 times the size of Ireland. The Government should at this a strategic long term Investment if they are serious about Ireland’s Neutrally or Militarily non -aligned. Our capabilities are really poor when when compared with other “Neutral“ countries.
We need to be position to be able to conduct active 24×7 surveillance & protection of EEZ which contains some the most stratgeic Fibre optic comms between Europe and North America and some of fishing waters on the Globe.
@Brian Guilfoyle: We can’t even operate a basic Defence Force as it is, the thing is falling apart at the seams – plus we need help from the UK to protect our own airspace. Don’t forget the Air Corps ‘weren’t available’ the night of the R116 tragedy either….just another in a long history of unavailability. Can you imagine the current AC doing SAR in all fairness. Sorry to hear your ship is sinking, but the AC “is not available”… The Government is obviously at fault and needs to invest the same if not more into the Defence Forces before it can even ‘consider’ doing SAR. This is a 24-7 role with 98%+ availability, not a ’9 to 5′ jobbie.
@Frank Flanagan: were the Air Corps supposed to be waiting on an emergency that night 116 went down??? Crews are paid to be on duty… CHC had had Crews paid to be in Dublin, Waterford, Shannon and Sligo 24 x 7… that was their contract.. the Air Corps carried out SAR for 42 years prior to politicians awarding th contract to CHC… The Air Corps has been slowly draining since..
I just hope it’s not going to be another taxpayer sponsored service outsourced abroad
@Daniel Dudek:
Or brown envelope job
Service must be working so now it’s going to get broken. Why can’t they just renew the contract with the same people. Has someone got a vested interest here I wonder.
@Dave Barrett: or maybe there’s better aircraft or deal to be had. There’s plenty to moan about with our government but the amount of just baseless conjecture is astonishing. Moaning journal.
It seemed that we in Ireland are hell-bent on outsourcing to private companies making people believe we are getting a better deal… but the reality is we’re not at €670 million… has an average helicopter for this purpose is about €20 million which Air Corps equipped with 4 would only be required…Air Corps is also getting two new C295 SaR aircraft is designed for this purpose…so there is €500 million been wasted by this government.
@PMac: They can buy all the aircraft in the world, but when you haven’t got the qualified staff to operate them, whats the point.
Does anyone know are the crews and helicopters employed by CHC and therefore they will either lose their jobs or have to be rehired, and the machines potentially sent off to some other contract, or is it that this Bristow crew will just step in and crews and helicopters will just keep going pretty much as is with other people managing logistics that kinda thing? Seems mad to dismantle a service that’s already there and get in and train new crews etc potentially. In that case the government should have just bought out CHC Ireland and folded it into the army services. It’s not like we couldn’t afford it, it’s just that we’d probably feck up running it.
@bazhealy: Bristow will have to use their own machines, likely crews also though I imagine the current crews could/will apply for to fill their own positions.
Should be the Aircorps, end of!
@Chutes: thanks Chutes. Yes it should. Without a shadow of a doubt.
Air corps had it before CHC and the crash at Tramore scuppered their chance of getting it..
Probably over the outcome of the accident
Which was pilot error but the insurer
Would not pay out the claims for the 3 deaths of the rest of the crew and the aircraft.
A very messy case indeed .
Bristow operate alot oil rig work etc
Can I ask a question, how
Somebody must have done the maths
have your say