Where the Labour candidates stand on the 3rd runway

HACAN outlines where the Labour candidates for Party Leader stand on a third runway at Heathrow and, below that, were the London Mayoral hopefuls stand.

Labour leadership candidates

Jeremy Corbyn. AGAINST.

Mr Corbyn told The Independent: “A third runway at Heathrow would mean 4,000 homes demolished and 10,000 people displaced.

It would cause massive increases in noise and air pollution and inflict misery on hundreds of thousands of Londoners.

UK air pollution is already above EU limits, and 30,000 people are dying every year because of it.

We should be ensuring our existing national and regional airports are linked effectively by public transport and work together to maximise existing capacity and help spread economic benefits across the country.”

He is also on record as saying the demand should be managed through ending the tax-breaks the aviation industry enjoys, such as tax-free fuel.

Andy Burham. FOR

Mr Burnham believes it is time to “just get on with it” following the Davies report. He is backing Michael Dugher, one of his supporters, who as shadow Transport Secretary last month dropped Labour’s opposition to Heathrow expansion under Ed Miliband.

Liz Kendall. FOR

Ms Kendall was the first leadership runner to endorse a third runway.

She said: “The country has to get behind this now – the time for fudge and indecision is over.

Many thousands of jobs right across the country depend on Britain maintaining an international hub airport that keeps pace with the rest of the world.

With my leadership, Labour will be a party of jobs and work – so I will back the commission’s decision. We need to act now.”

Yvette Cooper. FOR

Ms Cooper said the Heathrow project should go ahead provided the environmental safeguards proposed by the commission are introduced.

She said: “We have spent a very long time on this; we do need to get on with it.

The experts have looked at it and made a recommendation. I think we should go with it.”

Labour London Mayoral Hopefuls

Diane Abbott, Sadiq Khan and Christian Wolmar. AGAINST

Tessa Jowell and David Lammy. FOR (as long as key conditions on noise and air pollution are in place)

Gareth Thomas. FOR…and wants a 2^nd runway at Gatwick as well

Only 13.2% of Britons Back a Third Runway at Heathrow

Press Release

28/7/15 for immediate use

Only 13.2% of Britons Back a Third Runway at Heathrow

A Mori poll released yesterday shows that only 13% of people in the UK back a third runway at Heathrow. Most people, 60%, want to see more airport capacity in the country but few of them want it at Heathrow. A third of people are against any expansion at all.

Of those who favour expansion, 30% want to see a new airport, 24% support Gatwick and 22% Heathrow. But, when those who oppose all expansion are taken into account, support for a third runway at Heathrow falls to a mere 13%.

John Stewart, chair of HACAN, which opposes a third runway, said, “The politicians who back Heathrow expansion are simply out of tune with public opinion. Moreover, this independent poll shows Heathrow-commissioned polls do not tell the full story”.

Most people thought that concerns about noise and the natural environment were more important than jobs and economic growth when considering where new runway or a new airport should be built.

Gideon Skinner, Head of Political Research at Ipsos MORI, said: “At the moment, the public’s view is dominated by concerns about environmental impact and noise rather than jobs or cost.”

Ends

Notes for Editors:

1. Link to the survey: https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3606/Most-Britons-believe-airport-capacity-should-be-increased.aspx

Research reveals Cabinet sub-committee on Heathrow contains leading supporters of expansion

Press Release

23/7/15 for immediate use

Research reveals Cabinet sub-committee on Heathrow contains leading supporters of expansion

Research by campaign group HACAN has revealed that key members of the Cabinet sub-committee appointed by David Cameron to assess the Airport Commission’s recommendation that a third runway should be built at Heathrow have been outspoken supporters of a new runway. The revelation comes the day after the news leaked out that all cabinet critics of Heathrow expansion have been excluded from the committee.

HACAN, the residents’ group which opposes expansion, has revealed that both business secretary Sajid Javid and environment Secretary Liz Truss have backed a report that called for two new runways at Heathrow. The 2012 report (1), published by the Free Enterprise Group founded by Truss, argued, “The government should grant planning permission for both a third and fourth runway at Heathrow. Britain’s hub airport, Heathrow is currently at 99% capacity, and London’s other airports are nearly as full”

Truss said, “”We do need a hub airport in the south-east of England. If you want to have a hub airport three runways probably isn’t enough. If we’re imaginative about Heathrow, I don’t see why we can’t build four runways there. (2)”

Sajid Javid gave his public backing to the report the year it was published (3).

Communities Secretary Greg Clark is also a member of the sub-committee. While he appears not to have expressed a view on Heathrow expansion, his Tunbridge Wells constituency would be impacted by a second runway at Gatwick.

HACAN chair John Stewart said, “Quite clearly David Cameron has not thought this through. In what looks like a panic move to sideline known opponents of a third runway, he has cobbled together a committee containing some strident supporters of expansion. He’s simply storing up trouble for the future. To exclude the foreign secretary from a decision of such international importance makes no sense at all. ”

In addition to foreign secretary Philip Hammond, also excluded from the committee are Theresa May, Theresa Villiers, Justine Greening, Greg Hands and Boris Johnson.

The Prime Minister is expected to make an announcement on airports in November followed by a period of consultation.

ENDS

Notes for Editors:

(1). http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2012/08/30/feature-britain-s-elusive-aviation-strategy

2). http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2014/07/15/liz-truss-a-not-very-green-environment-secretary

(3), http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/jul/08/tory-mps-press-george-osborne-runways-heathrow

Campaigners pack David Cameron’s holiday suitcase

Press Release

Monday 20^th July for immediate use

The Case Against Heathrow Expansion

On 20^th July, the day before Parliament broke for its summer recess, campaigners from national organizations and local groups opposed to expansion packed David Cameron’s suitcase with material they believe he should read and view on his holiday before he makes up his mind on a third runway. They were joined by the new Twickenham MP Tania Mathias and the veteran opponent of Heathrow expansion, Baroness Jenny Tonge.

Items packed into the suitcase included Heat, a climate change book by George Monbiot, a video showing Harmondsworth, the village facing destruction if a third runway goes ahead and The Transition Handbook. HACAN, the campaign body which had organized the event outside Parliament, donated Why Noise Matters.

Represented at the event were campaigners from Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, Campaign for Better Transport, AirportWatch, the Aviation Environment Federation, HACAN, Stop Heathrow Expansion, the Richmond Heathrow Campaign, Ealing Noise Action Group and CAIAN (which represents many communities west of the airport).

HACAN chair John Stewart said, “This diverse range of groups gives a flavour of the formidable opposition David Cameron will face if he gives the green light to a third runway.”

ENDS

A question of trust

Despite the efforts of Heathrow to be more straightforward and transparent in recent years, there is still as huge legacy of distrust. The almost universal reaction by people – at least those communicating with HACAN – to the list of conditions imposed by the Airports Commission accompanying its recommendation of a third runway has been that Heathrow cannot be trusted to fulfil them. They point to this letter, written almost 20 years ago, where the then CEO of Heathrow said explicitly that the airport did not want a third runway: BAA 1999 letter to resident. Overcoming this trust deficit is possibly the biggest challenge Heathrow faces.

Residents block Heathrow Tunnel in 3rd Runway Protest

The day after the Airports Commission recommended a third runway at Heathrow residents blocked the road tunnel to Heathrow in protest. Check out the video: https://youtu.be/19R0UG2pFWc

And this spectacular picture:

Airports Commission Report – in brief

This is a very brief summary of the main points in the Airports Commission report published yesterday (1st July) The full report is on the Commission’s website. The Commision of course has only made a recommendation. The Government will make the final decision by the end of the year.

The Airports Commission has recommended that a 3^rd runway is built at Heathrow. It said a second runway at Gatwick was ‘credible’ but was not convinced it would provide direct flights to as many destinations in the emerging markets as Heathrow. The Commission said that improved connectivity to these emerging markers was critical to the UK economy and was a key factor in its decision.

The Commission has gone for Heathrow Airport’s proposal for a new runway north of the existing airport in preference to the Heathrow Hub proposal that would have extended the existing northern runway. It said that the Hub proposal had credibility and did not raise safety concerns but it lost out on noise and air pollution grounds.

Legally-binding conditions:

The Airports Commission has said that a third runway should only go ahead if it is accompanied by legally binding conditions which would include:

A ban on all scheduled night flights in the period from 11.30pm to 6am
No fourth runway
A legally binding ‘noise envelope’ putting firm limits on the level of noise created by the airport
A new aviation noise levy to fund an expanded programme of mitigation
An independent aviation noise authority
A legal commitment on air quality

The new flight paths have not yet being released but Heathrow has said they will feature respite from the noise for more areas than at present.

Currently the only areas getting relief are people living under the flight paths in the boroughs of Richmond or Hounslow (and those just over their borders in Wandswoth and Hammersmith). These areas will see their relief cut from 8 hours to 5 to allow for respite for people under the new flight path.

The Airports Commission has accepted Heathrow’s view that fewer people overall will be disturbed with a third runway in place than are today. This, it argues, is because of quieter planes, improved operational practices (such as steeper approaches and descents) and the fact more communities will enjoy respite.

The commission confirms that nearly 800 homes will need to be knocked down to make way for the new runway. Heathrow have said they are prepared to buy nearly 4,000 homes as some people would be so close to the airport that life might become untenable.

The Airports Commission has been guided by the Committee on Climate Change (the Government’s advisers) that one new runway could be built in the UK without breaching climate change targets. But adds that demand might need to be restrained to stay within the carbon change targets. If so, some sort of carbon price would need to be put in place with could add significantly to the price of a ticket.

HACAN backs Frequent Flyers Levy to replace Air Passenger Duty as “both green and equitable”

Press Release

21^st June 2015 for immediate use

HACAN backs Frequent Flyers Levy to replace Air Passenger Duty as “both green and equitable”

Campaign group HACAN has given its backing to the plan for a Frequent Flyers Levy to replace Air Passengers Duty. The proposal, released this weekend (1) and based on reports from the New Economics Foundation and CE Delft (2), suggests that each person is given one tax-free flight a year (if they want to take it) but that the tax rises with every subsequent flight taken (3).

Just days before the Airports Commission is due to publish its recommendation on whether a new runway should be built at Heathrow or Gatwick, the New Economics Foundation report suggests that no new runways would be needed if a Frequent Flyers Levy was introduced. The growth in aviation would be curbed sufficiently to allow existing runways to cope with future demand.

The backers of the Frequent Flyers Levy argue that 85% of the British public would benefit from it: Last year:

52% of us took no flights

22% took one flight

11% took 2 flights

Less than 15% of people took 3 or more flights

15% of people took 70% of flights. These are the people identified as the frequent flyers. Their defining characteristics are that they earn more than £115,000 a year and have a second home abroad. Most of them come from the City of London, Westminster, Kensington and Chelsea and Surrey. And their most popular destination is tax havens! These are predominately not business flights. Business travel by the UK population is declining. It is now just 12% of all flights. It is leisure travel, particularly by the frequent flyers, which has soared.

Work commissioned from the Public Interest Research Centre (PIRC) found that over 50% preferred the Frequent Flyers Levy to Air Passenger Duty

HACAN chair John Stewart said, “The beauty of this proposal is that it ticks both the equity and green boxes. It is a way of controlling the growth of aviation but still allowing ordinary families a holiday in the sun.”

Organisations backing the Frequent Flyers Levy include the Campaign for Better Transport the New Economics Foundation, the Tax Justice Network, Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth.

ENDS

Notes for Editors:

(1). http://gu.com/p/4axmn/stw

(2). The New Economics Report covering the economics: FFL FINAL DRAFT in template_updated and the CE Delft report covering the implementation: Proposal for a Frequent Flyer Levy unformatted_June 5th

(3). More information Frequent Flyers Levy Briefing or http://blog.afreeride.org/faqs/

For further information:

John Stewart on 0207 737 6641 or 07957385650

Government could delay decision on runways until Christmas

Reports have emerged today that the Government will not take a decision about new runways until the end of the year (1). The report of the Airports Commission, which will recommend a new runway at either Heathrow or Gatwick, is expected to be published at the end of this month but it looks as if the Government will delay its decision until shortly before Christmas.

John Stewart, chair of HACAN, which campaigns against a third runway at Heathrow, said, “We can only speculate why the Government is delaying its decision but it is known that there is considerable opposition to Heathrow expansion in the Cabinet with at least five Ministers (2) opposed to a third runway”

Stewart added, “Business will not welcome the uncertainty but it will also mean continued blight for local residents faced with the threat of their homes being demolished or those who face the prospect of living under a new flight path.”

The news comes a day after Richmond MP Zac Goldsmith announced that he is looking to become the Conservative candidate for Mayor of London. Goldsmith is well-known as a staunch opponent of a third runway.

ENDS

Notes for Editors:

(1). The report is in today’s Financial Times http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/19287c5c-0eb9-11e5-9ae0-00144feabdc0.html?siteedition=uk#axzz3cbkgtPGV

(2). Theresa May, Philip Hammond, Theresa Villiers, Greg Hands and Justine Greening are known opponents. And Boris Johnson, a member of the political cabinet, is a vocal opponent.

For more information:

John Stewart on 0207 737 6641 or 0795385650

Campaigners from Heathrow, Gatwick and City airports join forces to demand a voice in flight path changes

Campaigners from Heathrow, Gatwick and London City airports today delivered a joint letter to Patrick McLoughlin, the Secretary of State for Transport, demanding a voice for residents in flight path changes which are expected to be introduced over the next few years. Campaigners have asked for a meeting with the Transport Secretary.

Read the letter here: Gatwick Heathrow and City Airport Flight Path Letter to DfT

The move followes anger from residents at the changes to flight paths which have taken place over the last couple of years. Protest groups have sprung up around Gatwick in response to the changes to both arrival and departure routes. The recent trials at Heathrow sparked a record number of complaints. And in East London furious residents staged public meetings at not being proper consulted about London City’s proposals to concentrate flight paths.

The airspace changes are part of a Europe-wide programme to make more effective use of airspace and are now impacting the whole of the UK. They are designed to enable airlines to save fuel, to allow aircraft to land at and depart from airports more efficiently. In the UK Gatwick and London City have been earmarked as first in line for the changes. Heathrow is expected to have its changes in place by 2019 with national changes by 2020.

Residents fear that the changes will result in excessive concentration of aircraft along selected routes. They are particularly critical of NATS (National Air Traffic Control) and the CAA (Civil Aviation Authority), the two organizations who are driving the changes.

John Stewart, who chairs HACAN, the organisation which gives a voice to residents under the Heathrow flight paths, said, “NATS and CAA are remote from residents. They plan these flight path changes in their hi-tec ivory towers. Our letter to the Transport Secretary contains positive proposals for flight paths that could work for both the industry and for residents. They involve providing all residents with some respite from the noise. HACAN is actively engaging with Heathrow to see what can be done. But it does require NATS and the CAA to play ball”.

Stewart added, “London City Airport have been much less willing to engage with us and seem content to simply do what NATS asks them even if it means the creation of noise ghettos.”