Tories

We’re through the looking glass people. I woke up yesterday morning to discover that the Conservatives have opposed the third runway, and are actively warning contractors that if they sign a deal with Labour it won’t be honoured under the Tories. What the bloody hell is going on?

A little background: as a child of the early eighties I grew up under a blue Government, and came of age under a red one. I still associate Conservatism with milk theft (not so bad: I was allergic to it) and very spotty six formers. At age 11, that’s about as evil as life gets. Only axing Cities of Gold could have increased my hatred.

But Cameron and Villiers have been tiptoeing around the third runway for some time now: last year’s Quality of Life Commission report opposed expansion, and there have been constant noises from Tory HQ on ‘economic arguments’ not yet being proven. But the industry is hopping mad and pushing harder than it's ever pushed before, so until the plans are six feet under, forgive me for not raising a glass just yet.

In an earlier article, I talked about 'predict and provide', a pro-growth transport policy model which has lead to self-fulfilling and exponential growth in surface transport. In this article I'll be looking at the Government's argument that Heathrow must be expanded to meet the growing demand for air travel, and consider if this is a predict and provide approach.

Let's quickly recap on predict and provide. Officials make a prediction based on current growth rates, and extrapolate future data. It is presumed that this demand cannot be checked (because demand is caused by forces over which the Government has no control) and therefore the space for the demand to grow into is provided.

You can call the Heathrow consultation many things, but there's one phrase the Government doesn't want you to use: 'predict and provide'. But what does predict and provide mean - and is it a fair description of the industry's unprecendented expansion plans? In the first of two articles, I'll focus on how a phrase that was once transport policy gospel fell into ill repute.

For years, transport policy was based around a growth model, whereby the Department for Transport would "provide road capacity where and when it will be required". This primarily applied to traffic growth - road building - and it was widely (and erroneously) held by civil servants that the "main drivers of traffic growth [were] outside policy control"; they felt that income was the primary driver of growth - and who in the 80s was going to suggesting reducing that?

A report by pollsters Ipsos-Mori confirms what environmentalists have been saying all along: high levels of popular support for the green agenda.

The report, Public finds much to support in Conservative's new Green Agenda, explored a number of potential Tory policies, and found widespread support for green taxation: 62% of people support the 'polluter pays' principle, while only 10% oppose it.