How can anyone claim that construction has come to a standstill in this nation? Consider this: our parliament is literally collapsing, has been ignited 45 times in just the last decade, and will require an investment of billions – just to bring it close to being usable. This reality has been brushed aside for decades by politicians who refuse to confront it, despite living with it daily. So don’t even suggest we don’t have a construction culture. We create the most remarkable metaphors imaginable.
Another project we may be embarking on, albeit in our distinctive manner, is a third runway at Heathrow. Chancellor Rachel Reeves hinted at this during her Davos appearance this week, suggesting it could usher in a peculiar Labour era. Some members of the cabinet are strongly opposed, while others embrace the idea. Picture Tony Blair, but with asphalt.
Indeed, we are just days away from Rachel Reeves’s significant address on growth, set against a backdrop of an economy she is often blamed for shrinking. The backdrop won’t be the economic state; rather, it will feature crafted slogans like Getting Britain Growing, Growing From Strength to Strength, or perhaps my favorite – Let’s Just Grow a Pair! In this address, she is likely to endorse the third runway, as well as expansions at Gatwick and Luton airports. Those familiar with the history of infrastructure projects in the UK would recognize that she is unlikely to reveal any concrete plans for the runway yet, which could be described as:
1. It goes drastically over budget.
2. It goes drastically over budget and remains under construction in 2040.
3. It goes drastically over budget, and in a 2039 budget-cutting episode, is redefined as a runway that disconnects from Heathrow airport, serving as an advanced road to nowhere, randomly placed in the Harmondsworth area.
Anyway, now to Davos. As previously mentioned, Reeves attended the World Economic Forum, possibly to engage with some of the 10,800 millionaires said to have departed the UK over the past year. Certainly, the Chancellor, who fiercely declared back in September, “we will close the non-dom tax loopholes!” seems to have a new message for these non-doms: the government is eager to consider reopening some loopholes. Or, as Rachel expressed: “We have been receptive to the concerns raised by the non-dom community.” One cannot help but notice how non-doms have seamlessly joined the ranks of Labour’s “communities.” I wonder if they, like the others, have “community leaders” who are invited to share their perspectives in the media to either call for calm, condemn a small fraction, or demand immediate order at the Hermès store.
Back to the potential runway, which could trigger a tremendous backlash due to Labour’s environmental promises. Some are questioning how the two can coexist. Rachel clarifies that the growth objective “takes precedence over others.” It’s illuminating to learn that a trump mission exists – not a Trump mission, but a goal that supersedes any of the other numerous missions, pledges, or targets that Starmer has initiated since taking power. I now wish to see a ranking of Starmer administration buzzwords, or at least an exchange rate: one mission equates to two pledges, one foundation equals three milestones – that sort of framework.
Regarding the staunch opponents of the third runway, one might assume that environment secretary Ed Miliband would be among them. In 2009, Ed “almost” resigned from Gordon Brown’s administration over the runway proposals, and as Labour leader, he rescinded support for such efforts, later voting against them in 2018 (alongside Keir Starmer). “We owe it to future generations not just to advocate good environmental principles,” Ed remarked then, “but to act on them.” However, on Thursday, Miliband dismissed the idea of resigning as “absurd.” Oh Ed. It’s far too late for you to dismiss something as ridiculous.
Then there’s Boris Johnson, who once infamously pledged to “lay down in front of the bulldozers” to obstruct the runway’s progress. Come on, there’s still time! Don’t let any principled British citizen stand in your way (and, by that logic, the bulldozer’s as well). Yet, speaking of gateways to alternative realities, I increasingly worry that the door to a scenario where Boris Johnson returns to British politics hasn’t fully closed. Thus, despite his self-reported struggles with Ozempic, Johnson might not see either being steamrolled or becoming an eco-warrior as the most advantageous course of action for himself (his only measure).
For Sadiq Khan, the former aspiring Labour leader, this is a more complex juncture. In 2018, the London mayor took part in an initiative to legally challenge the government should parliament endorse a third runway at Heathrow. He secured a third mayoral term last year on a similar promise and reaffirmed his opposition just last week, soon after Reeves suggested her backing for the runway. When pressed for details on how a potential legal battle would be financed, Khan confessed: “there is no budget allocated for a legal dispute.” He further opted not to comment on the speculation, perhaps allowing him a few more days to formulate a different response explaining why he won’t pursue legal action.
Wordplay may very well be one of our last great manufacturing endeavors. Therefore, expect a flurry of it as we dive into discussions on whether the third runway represents a miraculous economic solution or simply the latest version of cakeism in 21st-century Britain.
Marina Hyde is a columnist for The Guardian.
