MANCHESTER Airport should be sold to fund the Metrolink extension, according to a billionaire businessman.
This would enable the contoversial plans for congestion charging to be scrapped, says John Whittaker, head of Peel Holdings, owner of the Trafford Centre.
He says the move would raise £7bn, which could be invested in the region's trams, buses and trains.
This dwarfs the £3bn in government grants and loans transport chiefs hope to get in return for charging motorists a peak-hour congestion fee of up to £5 a day.
The airport is part of Manchester Airports Group (MAG), and is owned by all 10 councils in Greater Manchester.
Manchester holds a 55 per cent stake and the other nine councils have five per cent each.
MAG - which also includes airports in Bournemouth, East Midlands and Humberside - has assets of £1.5bn and an annual turnover of £373m.
In 2006 the councils drew dividends of £25m. Mr Whittaker, whose empire includes Liverpool's John Lennon and Doncaster airports, claimed selling MAG could raise £3bn, which could unlock a further £4bn in private-sector funding. The finance would be secured against future income from upgraded public transport.
He has put forward the idea in a letter to the leaders and chief executives of all 10 councils. It has been co-signed by Andrew Simpson, Peel's managing director.
Mr Simpson stressed the proposal had been made in the `best interests' of the local economy and was not related to Peel's airports business. The letter brands the congestion charge proposals `flawed' and claims Manchester could be put at a disadvantage if it acts `as a guinea pig' for similar schemes in the rest of the country.
Extolling the idea of an airport sell-off, the letter says: "It would make the region the most competitive in the UK rather than playing Russian Roulette within the local economy by making it high-cost and uncompetitive."
Peel, a vocal opponent of congestion charging, recently commissioned an independent poll of more than 1,000 businesses in which 80 per cent said they would vote No in a referendum.
Critics said the poll failed to make it clear that the charge would be introduced only in return for the £3bn for public transport.
Roger Jones, chairman of the Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Authority, described the poll as `skewed'. Other top business leaders said there was `no sensible alternative' to congestion charging.
What do you think of the suggestion to sell the airport to fund the tram expansion instead of introducing a congestion charge? Have your say.
Tweet

Showing comments 1 to 25 and replies | View All
PW, Manchester (03/07/2007 at 08:54)
Simon B, www.manchestertolltax.com (03/07/2007 at 09:20)
It shows that the coucils do not need the goverment money at all.
sell the airport and they will have more than double the money.
Pump the 7 billion from the sale of the airport into Greater Manchesters public transport and the roads and it could have the best public transport and road network in the world.
Georgina (03/07/2007 at 09:53)
David Dickinson (03/07/2007 at 10:06)
They are paying lip service to Green issues, given that the fat cats of the council are making millions from one of the most un environmentally business's in the North West - a gas guzzling airport.
If the council want to see the environmetal gains they should share the financial pain, as they expect the working people of Manchester to do via another stealth tax. My view, sell sell sell and improve our Public transport.
dessie, manchester (03/07/2007 at 10:09)
metro madness (03/07/2007 at 10:12)
Fred White, Manchester (03/07/2007 at 10:23)
Lee Cooper (03/07/2007 at 10:26)
Maybe we could also sell the central library to a hotel chain to make a few quid?!
Whittaker's only concerned that congestion charging will harm his businesses. He doesn't give a damn about you or me, just so long as he gets 30,000,000+ visitors a year at the Trafford Centre.
It always makes me laugh when 'billionaire busnessmen' show faux concern for the 'ordinary man in the street'.
I tell you what, John, why don't you cover the cost of the CC for all the TC visitors? You can afford it.
Oh, by the way, Peel also manage airports. Wouldn't it be nice (for them) if MCR airport suddenly came up for sale. Peel would falling over themselves to get involved.
John, your comments on this subject are driven by greed and anyone who thinks that he's a man of the people is a fool.
Simon B, www.manchestertolltax.com (03/07/2007 at 10:31)
get 3 billion from the goverment, 2 billion of it is a loan.
but you will ONLY get it if you introduce a highly unpopular Congestion Charge.
This will have a bad effect on the local economy
Option 2
Sell the large international aiport and get get upto 7 billion pounds, no goverment loan, no debt, no Congestion charge, and you can really go to town and build a world class public transport and Road network.
The economy will sky rocket.
I have to say this next line.
Its a no brainer.
Option 2 is the clear winner by a massive margin.
But I guarantee that AGMA/GMPTE/GMPTA will find some very flimsy way of discounting this fantastic idea by Peel Holdings.
Please do not let them.
Please keep signing the MART petition.
http://www.gopetition.com/online/12888.html
Please keep an eye on the MART website
www.manchestertolltax.com
It is in the proccess of an update.
You will see at the bottom the business that have joined as supporters.
Supporters
http://www.manchestertolltax.com/supporters.htm
moodyblu, Heald Green (03/07/2007 at 10:50)
ace, manchester (03/07/2007 at 10:56)
PW, Manchester (03/07/2007 at 11:02)
Andy., Bury (03/07/2007 at 11:15)
Incidentally I was interviewed by NOP on congestion charging - research conducted on behalf of the councils. Talk about loaded questions. Ignore when they publish - and this from someone who finds the fanatically pro-car lobby a real irritant, although I'm not convinced by congestion charging either.
CT, Manchester, Manchester (03/07/2007 at 11:23)
In response to metro madness: are you seriously comparing (a) the conditions in the Gaza Strip and (b) paying a congestion charge to get into town during the morning rush hour and out off town in the early evening? Then why not swap place with somebody in Gaza? I'm sure you'd find a volunteer.
Jennifer, Manchester (03/07/2007 at 11:26)
Technobabble, Manchester (03/07/2007 at 11:47)
So if they want to raise some cash to better fund public transport, which could be argued is one of their main reasons for existing, then why should they not be asked to consider selling off some of their private assets to do so.
Dave, Hyde (03/07/2007 at 11:51)
Of course, most visitors to the Trafford Centre go by car, so he would be against road charging wouldn't he.
Georgina, manchester (03/07/2007 at 11:53)
Pete Mac (03/07/2007 at 12:05)
A Callicott (03/07/2007 at 12:16)
ace, manchester (03/07/2007 at 12:28)
Your a dreamer mate do you think for one moment that this airport is run for the benefit of manchester ratepayers?? well if you do you need to go back and see where the profits go and the large tax bills this company generates......
metro madness (03/07/2007 at 12:31)
Simon B, www.manchestertolltax.com (03/07/2007 at 12:32)
they see the congestion charge as an eternal cash cow to be increased at will.
So when we are all driving around in our totally zero emission cars, they will still be charging you.
The Right to Reply (03/07/2007 at 12:35)
Forward with Frank (03/07/2007 at 12:41)
How can councils that despise cars and motorbikes and the vile filth that they belch from their exhausts be associated with this large airport that allows these filthy planes to fly in and out of it? Not to mention the car parking spaces for thousands in and around the airport that encourage people to travel by car.
If the council was so keen to be green they would disassociate themselves from this polluting monstrosity. Why did these councils allow a second runway to be built that served to increase the pollution.
If the council were serious about this they would sell the airport to pay for the new transport infrastructure. Will they ban the Mardi Gras parade or the St Patrick's parade? All those dirty poisonous lorries crawling through the city centre in the name of fun.
REMEMBER, THE £3.1bn THAT THE COUNCIL IS GETTING OR BORROWING FROM THE GOVERNMENT IS MONEY THAT WE HAVE ALREADY PAID IN TAXES. THE PUBLIC DON'T NEED TO PAY FOR THE NEW INFRASTRUCTURE THROUGH CONGESTION TAX BEACUSE WE HAVE PAID THE £3.1bn ALREADY!!