Author: John Stewart

Five years ago in the week between Christmas and the New Year I wrote Victory Against All Odds – the story of how the campaign to stop a third runway at Heathrow was won.  It was five months before the 2010 General Election but I was banking on the fact that Labour, which was promoting the new runway would lose, and that David Cameron  – “No ifs; not buts; there will be No Third Runway” – would become Prime Minister.

Five years on the third runway is back on the agenda.  For a short period when Justine Greening was Transport Secretary, Theresa Villiers was responsible for aviation and Maria Eagle shadowed transport for Labour, it looked as if we might have killed the third runway.

However, I would argue it has been far from a wasted five years and, in one crucial respect, we are in a better place than we were in 2010.  Amongst my concluding words in Victory Against All the Odds were these: “HACAN has been part of a famous victory. But we have work yet to do.  The planes are still roaring over our heads.  During the years of the campaign the noise has become immeasureably worse for many people.  Planes are lining up to join their final approach path further out than before.  Aircraft noise is now a real problem for more people much further from the airport.”

A key task for HACAN in 2010 was to get the authorities to recognise this problem; indeed, more generally, to find ways to improve things for residents under the flight paths of a two-runway Heathrow.  It coincided with a change of attitude from Heathrow Airport, then still called BAA:  they had been chastened by their failure to get a third runway and realized they had to do things differently.

http://www.hacan.org.uk/resources/reports/how.the.heathrow.campaign.was.won.pdf

HACAN commissioned the consultants Bureau Veritas** to carry out a study to assess

if, and how, flight paths over London have changed over the past 10 years. The study,

No Place to Hide, was paid for by a grant from the Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone.

It just covered London. It did not cover areas to the west of the airport, but the findings

outlined would be applicable to those areas.

Key findings:

Aircraft noise has become a London-wide problem.

In places 20 kilometres from Heathrow “aircraft noise dominated the local

environment.” For example, there was “an almost constant background of aircraft noise” in

Kennington Park, close to the Oval Cricket Ground, well over 15 kilometres from the airport.

In some areas of East London flown over by both Heathrow planes and City Airport

noise levels were comparable to those in parts of West London.

Key conclusions:

“The increase in the number of movements between 1996 and 2005 can clearly be seen”

“In terms of geographical spread, the greatest increases have occurred in the early

morning and in the evening – arguably the relatively more sensitive times of day”

“The relatively high levels of aircraft noise that do occur at some distance from the airport

are certainly enough to be noticed by those living in those areas and in certain circumstances

to cause some disturbance and intrusion.”

“The results of this study do explain why aircraft noise from operations at London

Heathrow is a cause for concern beyond the boundary of (the officially recognised*)

contour.”

* The official contour (where the Government and aviation industry acknowledge there may be a noise problem)

contains the area enclosed by the 57 dB(A) LAeq contour. That is, the area where aircraft noise averages

* The official contour (where the Government and aviation industry acknowledge there may be a noise problem)

contains the area enclosed by the 57 dB(A) LAeq contour. That is, the area where aircraft noise averages out at 57

decibels over the course of the summer – roughly between Barnes and Heathrow.

Key reason for the increase:

The growth in the number of aircraft using Heathrow (and in some areas, City Airport)

has required changes to be made to landing patterns:

 Many more routes between the holding stacks and the airport are now in use;

 Planes are forced to take less direct routes from the stacks, resulting in many more

turning movements (which has increased noise levels).

Not one of those presented here lives within eight miles of Heathrow, and not one of them

knowingly chose to live under a flight path. The flight paths came to them, without any kind of a

public process, without any meaningful avenue of complaint, without any hope of redress. Each

has written as honestly as they can of the way in which their lives are blighted by aircraft

overhead, but reading accounts is not really enough: one has to be directly subjected to the level

of aircraft noise these people experience day and night to understand the way it eats into a

person’s life.

http://hacan.org.uk/resources/reports/hacan.living_under.pdf 2002 Living under Heathrow’s flight paths

http://hacan.org.uk/resources/reports/hacan.flight.paths.study.pdf

Santa gets it.  He knows just how much of London and the South East is impacted by aircraft noise from Heathrow.    Most people don’t.  They tend to only know their own patch.  Not so Santa.  The nature of his job means he’s familiar with every square mile.

He wouldn’t be surprised that most years the majority of complaints received by HACAN some from south, south-east and even east London.  He senses most people in west London have learnt to live with the noise.  On the whole, they don’t want any more of it – and they certainly don’t want to loose their respite periods – but in some ways aircraft noise has become part of the fabric of life in west London.

Certainly the biggest demand for ear defenders each year comes from south and south east London.  But Santa has been known to bring them down the chimneys in places as far from Heathrow as Walthamstow, Hackney and Leytonstone.  He suspects part of the reason for the problem in East London is the fact they get City Airport planes as well.  It always amazes him the noise levels of aircraft from City and Heathrow are assessed separately.  That’s not how his customers hear noise!

Genial though he is, Santa can get annoyed when he hears whispered conversations that people who don’t like noise shouldn’t have moved under the flight path.  He accepts that may be true of people who moved into west London in recent years but it is a silly thing to say about folks living over 20 miles away in south east London.   And even in west London it not always true – in these times of austerity many people have no choice but to move to where they can get a job.

Of course Santa is aware that not all the 766,000 people who are officially impacted by the noise are disturbed by it.  He knows that the he only has to glide silently down the chimney of around 10% of homes.  If he could deliver during the day, it would be a bit less.  Still, more than any other city in Europe.

In his letters this year one big – and at first sight, rather surprising – request.  The residents of Teddington, Ascot, Englefield Green and one or two others places were adamant:  no present that included “free trials”.

So, what will be the big requests for Christmas 2015?  Santa likes to collect his letters a year in advance to give himself and his elves plenty of time to prepare.

Top of the list came the call for official periods of respite from the noise.

Heathrow wanted respite plus a third runway.

And then there was the annual call for an end to night flights.  Santa feels that could be a game-changer….and make his job so much easier.

The residents of the Heathrow villages wanted still to be in their homes this time next year.

Back Heathrow wanted a knighthood for the CEO of Populus for services to polling.

Santa doesn’t like to disappoint.  But some of the requests appear contradictory. However, he’ll do his best.  He senses he has a chance of pulling something off.

Have as peaceful a New Year as you can.

The Sunday Times expose of Back Heathrow’s methods is significant – http://hacan.org.uk/?p=2753 . Not because Back Heathrow has hidden the fact it has received considerable funding from Heathrow Airport.  It has made it clear from the early days that Heathrow had put money in.  Much more because the Sunday Times reveals how Back Heathrow fails to spell out to the public it is trying to influence where its funding comes from.  As the Sunday Times said, “Three of the four newsletters delivered during the past year fail to disclose that Back Heathrow is funded by the airport.”

This matters.  If we get a leaflet through our door this Christmas extolling the virtues of Sainsbury’s mince pies over other brands, we will take much more notice of it if we believe it comes from a neutral body.  Similarly, when a Back Heathrow leaflet warns that “114,000 jobs are at risk if Heathrow shuts down”, we are much more likely to be concerned if we believe Back Heathrow is a neutral body.

Concerned people sign up to Back Heathrow.  Back Heathrow then can claim 50,000 supporters.  The impression is given to politicians that there is growing support for a third runway at Heathrow.

The reality is different.  There is no hard evidence that support for a 3^rd runway is growing (or declining).  We spelt this out in a blog in May of this year –     http://hacan.org.uk/blog/?p=281:

“Last week Heathrow Airport claimed that there was more support now for a 3^rd runway than when it was proposed by the last Labour Government.  It cited a recent opinion poll of more than 1,000 local residents by Populus which showed 48% are in favour of a third runway while 34% oppose: http://www.populus.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Heathrow-Borough-Poll-March-2014.pdf

The reality is different.  HACAN unearthed a Populus poll which revealed that in 2007 50% supported a 3^rd runway and 30% against were against: http://www.populus.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/download_pdf-170907-BAA-Heathrow-Future-Heathrow-Poll.pdf”

Support for expansion has always hovered just under 50%, with around a third of people remaining firmly opposed.  In actual numbers, that means hundreds of thousands of people don’t want expansion.  That was enough to kill it off last time.  Back Heathrow need to give politicians the impression that has changed; that a 3^rd runway is deliverable.  And they are prepared to use some questionable methods to do so.

Back Heathrow’s methods exposed

The method’s of the controversial pro-expansion group Back Heathrow have been exposed in the Sunday Times (30/11/14)

“HEATHROW came under fire from senior politicians and environmentalists this weekend after bankrolling a community campaign group that claims to represent the “silent majority” who want a third runway at the airport.

Hundreds of thousands of homes in London have received a series of glossy newsletters and surveys from Back Heathrow, a group that says it is “building a community of support for Heathrow airport”.

Designed like a tabloid newspaper, the leaflets include stark warnings that “114,000 jobs are at risk if Heathrow shuts down”. Three of the four newsletters delivered during the past year fail to disclose that Back Heathrow is funded by the airport.

Critics claim the group is a version of an aggressive lobbying tactic called “astroturfing” — when a movement is portrayed as a grassroots initiative but is actually run on behalf of corporate interests.

“This is straight out of Big Tobacco and anti-climatechange-type strategies where you simply scaremonger through an ‘astroturf’ group that you set up and fund at arm’s length,” said Jeff Gazzard, a spokesman for the pressure group Aviation Environment Federation.

Back Heathrow denied it was a front for the airport and Heathrow said it had “always been transparent” about the fact it helped fund the group.

The most recent newsletter, which was delivered to up to 750,000 homes, claimed more than 50,000 residents were supporting Back Heathrow’s campaign.

“People from all ages and walks of life are joining Back Heathrow and this silent majority is beginning to have its voice heard,” it said.

Back Heathrow’s campaign co-ordinator, Rob Gray, is a former director of the Aviation Foundation, a lobbying group established by the industry.

He set up Back Heathrow as a limited company in July 2013 with Nathan Fletcher, a senior PR officer at the airport. Fletcher, who is now Heathrow’s head of news, resigned as a director in April.

Michael Appleton, Back Heathrow’s communications manager, is a former communications officer at the airport.

Gray refused to reveal how much funding Back Heathrow had received from the airport, saying only that it was more than £100,000. He said the group had also received a donation from Heathrow Hub, a group that has submitted a rival plan to expand the airport, as well as smaller donations from residents and businesses.

Matthew Gorman, the airport’s director of sustainability and environment, was questioned about Heathrow’s support for the group during a heated meeting last Thursday of around 150 residents in Putney, southwest London.

Gorman insisted the airport had been “very open” that it had “provided some funding to set Back Heathrow up and we continue to provide some funding”.

Asked by The Sunday Times after the meeting how much funding the airport had provided, he replied: “I don’t know exactly.” He then refused to answer further questions.

Justine Greening, the Conservative cabinet minister and MP for Putney, accused Back Heathrow of “making out that they are some sort of residents’ group”.

Ravi Govindia, the Tory leader of Wandsworth council, said Heathrow was not being “open” about its relationship with the group, and Ray Puddifoot, the Hillingdon council leader, who has been criticised in Back Heathrow’s literature, said his local authority regarded the airport with “disdain because of the tactics that they are using”.

Back Heathrow states on its website that it was “initially launched” with money from the airport but does not admit it continues to receive donations.

One of its leaflets, delivered in September last year, discloses it is “supported and financed” by Heathrow.

Gray said: “The uncomfortable truth for those opposed to Heathrow expansion is that the levels of support we have attracted from residents reflect what almost all independent polls show — that there is majority support in local areas for growth at the UK’s hub airport.”

A Heathrow spokeswoman said the airport “continued efforts to give a voice to those who had previously not been heard in the debate on the airport’s future”.