The Conservative party in the United Kingdom has attracted widespread criticism for saying that, if elected to power, the party would scrap the proposed third runway at Heathrow Airport and instead build a high-speed train link.

Theresa Villiers, the Shadow transport secretary, had announced during a speech at the Tory party’s conference in Birmingham that the party would dump the government’s plans to expand Heathrow Airport and instead go for a rail network that would connect Leeds, Manchester, Birmingham and London.

She had told the delegates that the best way to tackle transport congestion was to introduce high-speed rail networks and not expanding Heathrow Airport.

Theresa Villiers had outlined the Tory plan for Heathrow, if the party was voted to power, thus: “Work on the new rail link would begin in 2015, but would take until 2027 to complete. The Tories would commit £1.3 billion a year in funding, using existing government rail budgets, to help meet the cost of track and land.”

“Evidence from around Europe,” she had added, “showed that high-speed rail provided a viable and attractive alternative to short-haul flights. For example, a high-speed rail link from (London) St Pancras to Heathrow, connecting to the north, could replace up to 66,500 flights a year. That would free up almost a third of the capacity that would be provided if a third runway were built.”

The Shadow transport secretary also asserted that “there are also considerable environmental penalties involved in building another runway at Heathrow, including health problems, noise and catastrophic climate change.”

Disagreeing with Theresa Villiers’ plan were business leaders as well as aviation experts, who argued that a new rail link would not solve the current transport problems of London and insisted that a third runway at Heathrow is “crucial in maintaining London’s global status.”

The website timesonline.co.uk quoted Richard Lambert, director-general of the business lobby group CBI, as reacting to the Conservatives’ proposal thus: “A high-speed rail link would have a lot going for it, but don’t think for a minute that it will solve the capacity problems at Heathrow. We need to have a third runway at Heathrow, as long as all the environmental conditions are met.”

The British Airports Authority Limited (BAA), the owner and operator of seven airports in the United Kingdom and the operator of several other airports worldwide, insists that a third runway at London’s Heathrow Airport is “essential for Britain’s future competitiveness.”

Reacting to the Conservatives’ stand, a spokesperson for the BAA said: “It is not clear how this proposal will resolve the lack of airport capacity, a problem which must urgently be addressed. The total number of flights to Manchester and Leeds/Bradford is only 13,356, or less than 3% of Heathrow’s total flights. Even if every flight from Manchester and Leeds/Bradford were replaced by a new high-speed rail line, then Heathrow would still be operating at 97% of capacity.”

The BAA is of the opinion that Britain needs both a third runway at Heathrow and a high-speed rail network and “prioritising one over the other will put Britain’s future competitiveness at risk.”

Theresa Villiers drew criticism even from some members of her own party who fear that her stance against a third runway at Heathrow had “needlessly upset business.”

The British media quoted one member of the shadow cabinet as remarking: “While the new high-speed link is a good idea, there had been no need to rule out a third runway. Why close off an option at this stage?”

David Wilshire, Tory MP for Spelthorne, near Heathrow, said he was “alarmed and disappointed” by his party’s decision.

However, the Tories’ decision has gladdened environmental groups in Britain.