Sir Sadiq Khan has denied that London could lose Government funding because of his opposition to the expansion of Heathrow airport. The mayor insisted the Government would not be “petty” enough to withhold desperately sought-after cash, such as the £500m a year needed by Transport for London from this summer’s spending review, as a punishment for his outspoken views. It came as a cross-party coalition of councils began to reform to fight the imminent expansion plans – with Sir Sadiq hinting that he could lead a “rainbow alliance” seeking to block the proposals on noise, air quality and climate grounds.

Labour mayor Sir Sadiq said he was not bound by “collective responsibility” with Labour colleagues in Government and could freely express his opposition, despite Chancellor Rachel Reeves putting a third runway at Heathrow at the heart of her growth plans. Speaking to The Standard, he said: “Unlike the previous Tory government, this Government isn’t petty. Unlike the previous Tory government, this Government is pro-London.

“Unlike the previous Tory government, this Government understands that for the country to benefit and prosper, so does our capital city. They understand the patriotic case for London. “The joys of living in our democracy versus America’s is [that] you can disagree with your leader and still get on. You can disagree agreeably. “There are many, many things that I agree with Rachel Reeves about. This one, we disagree.”.

The Lib-Dem leaders of Richmond, Kingston and Windsor and Maidenhead councils are due to meet the Tory leader of Hillingdon and the Labour leader of Wandsworth in the coming weeks to discuss how to oppose a third runway, The Standard has learned. In 2020, council opposition was instrumental in securing a Court of Appeal ruling against the Government that effectively blocked Heathrow’s previous expansion plans – though this was later overturned by the airport in the Supreme Court.

Gareth Roberts, the Lib-Dem leader of Richmond council and a Lib-Dem member of the London Assembly, told The Standard: “If the Chancellor thinks she can railroad this through, she can think again. “We stand ready, as a cross-party group of local councils, to work with the mayor, our MPs and local groups and residents against her plans to expand Heathrow.”. Asked if he was willing to lead a “rainbow coalition” against another Heathrow expansion bid, Sir Sadiq said he would wait for any proposals to emerge and then “study them carefully”.

He added: “History tells me that there are people across our great city, on a cross-party basis, who agree on some issues. “We worked together with other parties and they supported us on cleaning up the air. We are working together on cleaning up our river. “I’m sure there are chances in the future we are working together, including – as we did in the past – opposing a new runway at Heathrow airport.

“I think when you look at the obstacles there are – noise pollution concerns, air pollution concerns, our obligation to the climate change targets – it’s very difficult for us to see how Heathrow can come up with a plan that meets those concerns. “The runway would be built across the busiest motorway in the country, the M25. Who is paying for a tunnel under the M25? Who is going to pay for the A4 to be re-routed?.

“What about the new trains required for the Piccadilly line? The new trains required for the Elizabeth line?. “As the mayor of London, I would rather that taxpayers’ money was used on other infrastructure, like [the Bakerloo line extension], like the DLR extension [to Thamesmead], like the West London orbital, like Crossrail 2, where all of us agree on those infrastructure plans, rather than this one where there is a city that is divided.”.

He added: “I’m the mayor of London – collective responsibility doesn’t apply to me, and nor should it.”. After Ms Reeves gave her support for a third runway on January 29, Richmond, Wandsworth and Hillingdon councils issued statements making clear their opposition. “The environmental damage, increased noise pollution, and disruption to local communities are simply too high a price to pay, especially when viable alternatives exist that can support sustainable economic growth without compromising our health or our future,” Mr Roberts said.

“Growth should never come at the expense of the wellbeing of our communities or the health of our planet,” he said. “The Chancellor’s decision to prioritise short-term economic growth over the long-term health of our communities and the environment is deeply disappointing.”. "As a borough we have fought the spectre of these proposals for more than 25 years and we'll continue fighting for as long as it takes.".