The discussion over the airport expansion is being played out with few facts and much emotive fervour: if we don't expand, Hong Kong will no longer have the great airport we have all become so used to. And that is, of course, a horrible idea, as I don't know any airport that is as efficient.
Digging through the avalanche of slick advertising, the appendices of the technical report reveal the assumptions of growth behind the third runway. But where is all this growth going to come from?
After all, Hong Kong's population is flatlining and the forecast growth in passengers goes well beyond the wildest arrival forecasts of visitors who intend to stay in Hong Kong for at least one night, or head for one of our gambling cruises.
As for cargo, the growth numbers are even more staggering. The anticipated volumes are well beyond what we make or consume in Hong Kong. So where are the flows supposed to come from?
Neither of these questions are answered. Rather than using detailed gravity models, growth in both passengers and cargo is forecast based on simple linear regression models along the lines of 'gross domestic product will go up, people and cargo will move'. But does that make sense?
For a long time, Hong Kong was the only provider of international flights and quality cargo handling in the Pearl River Delta. Today, it handles 80 per cent of all international passengers and 90 per cent of all international air cargo in the delta. To assume it will retain that role is rather arrogant.
Proponents of a third runway say Guangzhou's new cargo handling capabilities are not as efficient, and their customs operations are cumbersome. Surely Guangzhou will say they are ironing out the issues.
