Heathrow Airport opposes changes to its ownership and operation model. Other parties have expressed interest in developing a third runway. The current regime has delivered high returns for shareholders. Competition at the airport would improve efficiency and capacity. Threats to halt development are unacceptable.
Speaking at the IATA 2026 congress in Rio de Janeiro, Willie Walsh said the airport does not compete and benefits from the existing system. Heathrow has gamed economic regulation for financial gain. Shareholders have received strong returns. Real competition would allow more efficient third runway development. The airport cannot hold the UK industry to ransom.
The debate on competition has opened following recent remarks. Technical and financial capability exists among interested parties. History shows the current model has worked for Heathrow but not for capacity needs. A third runway remains necessary for UK connectivity. Policy must prioritise efficient development over protection of existing operators.
Opposition to airport changes reflects preference for non-competitive structures. Third runway development requires open competition to deliver benefits. Shareholders have profited under the current regime.
Other operators can build the runway more efficiently. Threats to withdraw from development are not acceptable. The UK needs additional capacity at Heathrow.
Real competition at major airports would drive better outcomes for airlines and passengers. Economic regulation has been gamed for excessive returns. Policy should support expansion through competitive processes.
Willie Walsh shared: “They can’t hold Heathrow to ransom and they can’t hold the UK and the airline industry to ransom just because they’ve been hooked on the massive returns that they’ve been making over the years. So I think the time for real competition at Heathrow is well past actually, it would be great to see it and I think it could definitely work.”
I think Thomas Walby is reinforcing the strong message that we’ve heard from airports over time in that they don’t really compete. They like the fact that they don’t have to compete. In many cases, they’re comfortable with the economic regulation because they’ve put a lot of effort into gaming that regulation for their benefit. And history proves that Heathrow has done extremely well financially out of the way they’ve played the system. Their shareholders have been incredibly well rewarded.
I think it’s completely unacceptable that they say that if you try to change anything when it’s clear that the current regime doesn’t work, then they’re going to act like spoiled children and go home, it’s clear that there are others who are interested in the development of a third runway at Heathrow, have the technical ability to do so and have the financial support to actually build the third runway in a more efficient manner.
I’m pleased that there is now a debate around the impact of real competition at Heathrow and the point that he has made is yet again the threat from Heathrow that if you don’t let us play by our rules, well then we’re not going to play and that’s just unacceptable. They can’t hold Heathrow to ransom and they can’t hold the UK and the airline industry to ransom just because they’ve been hooked on the massive returns that they’ve been making over the years.
So I think the time for real competition at Heathrow is well past. It would be great to see it and I think it could definitely work, I don’t accept that he has a point.
