Vanity projects exploit governments' insecurities

Heathrow Airport (Image: NTM)

It is widely recognised that a growing number of people want to 'look good' - whether it is buying the new and trendy handbag, or hiring a personal trainer with the hope of achieving that desired physique. More of us are even visiting private clinics, spending thousands to making our skin look younger through Botox and fillers. What do these activities have in common? Vanity.

I represented a Harley Street cosmetic surgeon more than a year ago and he told an audience once that one of the key reasons why people went to him was 'vanity'. He is right. After all, the Dictionary's definition of 'vanity' is when an individual has "excessive pride in one's appearance, qualities, abilities and achievements" and had taken actions accordingly. We are all guilty of this and honestly, within your limits, there's nothing to be ashamed of. I say 'within your limits' because sadly, we can be impulsive spenders - money is no object, and our decisions can divide opinion.

But what about vanity projects? It's defined slightly different to 'vanity' though it has a similar sentiment. Our politicians are classic examples of vanity project-seekers and by doing so, add to their vanity factor. If you think about it, their job is to serve their constituents and/or British public (depending on their individual roles in parliament). By doing so, they pledge certain policies and projects, not because it'd make a genuinely positive difference to the communities they represent, but because it makes them look good, therefore gifting them a greater chance of further election success.

For some reason, in recent years, such vanity projects appear to be in the areas of housing and transport. The former of which I won't go in detail because building more homes is justified in certain parts of the country. However, our past and present governments have this obsession with our capital's trains and planes, and are willing to spend billions on such projects just so Britain looks good to foreign investors.

Gatwick Airport (Image: Daily Telegraph)

Yes, I am talking about the expansion of Heathrow Airport. A few months ago, I was given a call from an official polling firm and they asked whether I support the third runway at Europe's busiest airport. I said 'no'. And when asked whether I'd support a new runway at Gatwick Airport, I again, said 'no'. The reason for my refusal at extending either globally recognised airports were clear - and it is something I've been nagging about on here for too long. I am sick of all the focus, time and investment put into London.

Seriously, why don't we see the government turning their attention to expanding Manchester Airport, Liverpool's John Lennon Airport, or even our smaller yet efficient airports in Newcastle, Doncaster or Bristol? Unfortunately, the indication we have from our governments (past and present) is clear - our international investors are only invited to splash their cash in our capital and therefore, detracting interest in communities that need the finances.

Under a Labour government, this wouldn't have been approved. In 2009, when they were in power and proposed the idea, there was so much opposition from influential Conservative ministers and certain local (to Heathrow) Labour MPs. If politicians were given a vote at that time, there'd be no third runway. High profile politicians like then Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, and 2016 Tory Mayoral candidate Zac Goldsmith, who recently resigned as Richmond Park MP, have protested against Heathrow's intended expansion

But a lot has happened since 2009. In the Conservatives' manifestos in 2010 and 2015 elections, they pledged a 'no ifs, no buts' stance against Heathrow's third runway - a promise made by David Cameron who up until last summer was our Prime Minister. Current occupant of 10 Downing Street, Theresa May, who previously joined the anti-Heathrow brigade, being the MP for Maidenhead - a town just 15 miles away from the airport - has suddenly changed tune. With an MP vote to confirm such action taking place by 2018, Goldsmith was so disgusted, he's running as an Independent in the Richmond Park constituency, dissociating himself from Tory policy.

Chris Grayling and Theresa May (Image: Spectator)

My sense here is that May and Transport Secretary, Chris Grayling (MP for Epsom & Ewell - 15.5 miles from Heathrow), have both panicked. Having seen forecasts of significant job losses as a result of UK's imminent exit of European Union membership and the prospect of gaining less (or no) access to the Single Market, both had to chew over their true and constituents' beliefs and chose Heathrow over Gatwick for expansion. It is true to say however that Grayling has privately backed Heathrow expansion from the start - or at least has suggested seven years ago that his party shouldn't go against the idea.

But this decision is rightly linked with the recent EU referendum result. The prospect of 77,000 new yet short-term jobs, bulldoze nearly a thousand homes, cause major disruption to drivers commuting on nearby M25 and M4 motorways, and increased noise and pollution levels - is it really worth considering economic benefits? Heathrow is big enough to suit current and future long-term demands - and with other London airports; Luton, Stansted and City airports - all of which efficient enough to welcome anyone worldwide - airlines and investor passengers have great options in ways to landing in our precious capital.

Our politicians' obsession with the airport vanity project has resulted in the shortening of the Conservatives' already small majority in the House of Commons with Goldsmith's resignation. With further backlash to follow, including expensive legal proceedings, the Tories are stabbing themselves on the foot by emotionally reacting to Britain's decision to leave the EU. They may not show it from the outside and go out of their way to reassure the public by announcing headline grabbing negotiations with car giants Nissan to keep their plant in Sunderland. But that's highly insignificant and irrelevant to what is bound to crop up in the near future.

P.S. Don't get me started on HS2 and Crossrail. Again, these are two vanity projects that may sound fluffy and fantastic for the West and North of England, but completely pointless. When would our governments realise that it's not the time efficiency that's the core issue, but pricing of tickets? This is another emotional reaction by our governments to reports on commute delays and strikes imposed by unions.