IN Brief:
- CILT(UK) has called for a UK-wide aviation framework rather than a Heathrow-first expansion strategy.
- The review argues that air cargo, e-commerce, integrators, customs performance, and regional freight capacity need fuller analysis.
- Surface access, airport capacity, funding, and net zero obligations are central to the proposed approach.
CILT(UK) has challenged the Government’s Heathrow-centred approach to airport expansion, calling for a national integrated aviation framework that gives greater weight to regional capacity, air cargo, surface access, and environmental impact.
The Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport in the UK has published a policy review as part of the debate around the Airports National Policy Statement and Making Best Use of Existing Runways. The review has been forwarded to the Department for Transport, and the Institute plans to submit a full consultation response by 1 September.
CILT(UK) welcomed the Government’s Heathrow expansion framework consultation, but criticised the continued focus on Heathrow rather than the UK airport system as a whole. Its review argues that existing and potential airport capacity across the UK could support growth over the next 20 years without an immediate need for a third runway at Heathrow.
The Institute does not argue that Heathrow expansion should be ruled out permanently. Its review says expansion should remain safeguarded and could proceed if a strong case demonstrates that the benefits outweigh environmental, infrastructure, and surface access costs, alongside an acceptable funding arrangement with airlines.
Freight sits at the centre of the Institute’s critique. CILT(UK) argues that the Government’s current treatment of air cargo is too narrow because it concentrates heavily on Heathrow while giving insufficient attention to the wider UK freight network. The review calls for fuller analysis of integrators, e-commerce growth, trucked air cargo, customs performance, and regional cargo capacity.
Airport capacity is not only a passenger issue. Air cargo supports pharmaceuticals, high-value manufacturing, automotive components, electronics, perishables, aerospace parts, urgent spares, and e-commerce parcels. Some of that cargo moves in dedicated freighters, some in bellyhold space, and some by truck between airports, warehouses, and consolidation points. Aviation policy that treats freight as secondary risks misreading how modern logistics networks operate.
CILT’s wider role across logistics, transport, and policy has been visible through its centenary partnerships activity, and the airport review brings that institutional focus into one of the UK’s most contested infrastructure debates. Regional growth, climate policy, cargo demand, airline economics, and surface access all sit inside the same decision.
The review also warns that landside access could become a major constraint unless clearer funding mechanisms are established for associated road and rail improvements. Airport expansion can increase runway or terminal capacity while transferring pressure onto local roads, rail services, freight routes, and surrounding communities. Poor surface access weakens the value of additional airport capacity, particularly where cargo depends on timely truck movement.
Regional airports form another part of the freight argument. A more balanced aviation strategy could use capacity outside London to support regional industry, e-commerce fulfilment, air cargo consolidation, and export connectivity. Heathrow remains a major hub, but national freight growth does not have to be planned as though every meaningful cargo decision begins and ends there.
Net zero obligations add further complexity. CILT(UK) says any revised Airports National Policy Statement must explain how aviation growth supports the UK’s legally binding 2050 net zero commitment. Operational improvements, sustainable aviation fuels, carbon markets, and emerging carbon reduction technologies all need to sit within that assessment, alongside the emissions produced by surface transport connected to airport use.
The policy debate now sits at the intersection of aviation capacity, trade competitiveness, and logistics resilience. The UK needs passenger connectivity, but it also needs cargo routes, customs efficiency, truck access, regional airport capability, and investment models that do not create unresolved costs outside the airport boundary.
A Heathrow-first approach may be administratively simpler, but freight does not move through a single-airport system. It moves through airports, roads, rail links, integrators, warehouses, customs processes, and regional economies. CILT(UK)’s review pushes the expansion debate toward that wider network, where aviation policy is judged by how well it supports the movement of goods across the country.
