Councils and campaigners take first step towards legal challenge against government support for Heathrow runway

Solicitors Harrison Grant acting on behalf of Hillingdon, Richmond, Wandsworth and Windsor and Maidenhead Councils, together with Greenpeace and a Hillingdon resident have (17th November) sent a letter, under the Judicial Review Pre-Action Protocol, to the Secretary of State for Transport. The letter gives the Government a period of 14 days in which to withdraw its decision, issued on the 25 October to support a 3rd runway at Heathrow.  If it fails to do so, judicial review proceedings will be commenced in the High Court, without further notice to the Government, on the basis that the Government’s approach to air quality and noise is unlawful and also that it has failed to carry out a fair and lawful consultation exercise prior to issuing its decision.  The 33 page pre-action letter sets out comprehensive grounds for legal challenge, drawing on a broad range of statute and legal precedent, as well as highlighting the many promises and statements made by senior politicians confirming that the third runway would not be built.  The move comes shortly after the Government’s air quality plans were overturned in the High Court, putting ministers under greater pressure to reduce illegal levels of air pollution in places like Heathrow. The latest court ruling rejected the current government plans to tackle emissions as inadequate and based on over optimistic assumptions.
.

Councils and campaigners take first step towards Heathrow legal challenge

Thursday 17th November  2016

Wandsworth Borough Council website

.

Hillingdon, Richmond, Wandsworth and Windsor and Maidenhead Councils, together with Greenpeace and a resident of Hillingdon, have today written to Transport Secretary Chris Grayling demanding he withdraws Government support for Heathrow expansion or face court action.

The pre-action protocol letter, sent on behalf of the claimants by Harrison Grant Solicitors, gives ministers 14 days to reverse their decision to back a third runway. If they fail to comply judicial review proceedings will commence in the High Court.

The letter argues that the Government has failed to recognise the project’s unlawful air quality and noise impacts and that ministers failed to carry out a fair and lawful consultation prior to issuing the decision.

The 33 page pre-action letter sets out comprehensive grounds for legal challenge, drawing on a broad range of statute and legal precedent, as well as highlighting the many promises and statements made by senior politicians confirming that the third runway would not be built.

The move comes shortly after the Government’s air quality plans were overturned in the High Court, putting ministers under greater pressure to reduce illegal levels of air pollution in places like Heathrow. The latest court ruling rejected the current government plans to tackle emissions as inadequate and based on over optimistic assumptions.

Cllr Ray Puddifoot Leader of Hillingdon Council said: “I was in the High Court in March 2010 at the last JR on Heathrow expansion when the judge referred to the third runway plans as ‘untenable in law and common sense’. Six years on it is unbelievable that the current Government are promoting an expansion that is still untenable in law and common sense and it is simply not acceptable in this country. This is the first round of this legal challenge and whilst we should win by a knockout in the first round we are prepared for a long fight if necessary.”

Lord True Leader of Richmond Council said: “Heathrow expansion is one of the worst government decisions in modern times – dishonest, in that it reverses a clear commitment; incompetent, in that it took six years to get to Base A (from which it will never proceed); indefensible economically, in that it is the most costly and polluting option and the most likely to involve charges on public funds; illogical, in that it is the slowest to deliver and a staggering affront to every principle of competition and careless of the public good, in that is the most polluting and the most disruptive of the public.  This legal challenge is only one route to block the Heathrow juggernaut. There will be others.”

Leader of Wandsworth Council Ravi Govindia said: “Heathrow expansion is incompatible with environmental legislation and the process leading up to this decision has been deeply flawed. Ministers have not listened to our warnings so we have no choice but to take legal action. The simple truth is that Heathrow is in the wrong place for a major airport and its location amplifies its damaging impacts to world beating levels. Expansion will make this dire situation much worse. An objective assessment from the High Court is bound to conclude that you can’t mitigate against such a bad location.”

Leader of Windsor and Maidenhead Council Simon Dudley said: “The Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead will hold Government to account for its decisions and protect our residents from such decisions should they prove to be unlawful.”

Greenpeace UK executive director John Sauven said: “It’s clear that the government has greenlighted the third runway despite having no solution to the huge air and noise pollution problems it will cause. This is reckless and unlawful. Expanding Heathrow will heap more misery on hundreds of thousands of Londoners already breathing illegal air pollution, expose more people to aircraft noise, and drive carbon emissions through the roof. It will make it practically impossible for the government to comply with air pollution laws and court rulings. Either the laws of physics will be suspended, or the laws of the land will be broken. If ministers are hell bent on disregarding the laws that protect our health, a courtroom is where we’re going to hold them to account.”

Harrison Grant Solicitors has been working with the claimants over several months to develop the case against Heathrow expansion.

An alliance between Greenpeace and local councils successfully overturned the Brown Government’s backing for a third runway in the High Court in 2010, which prompted the incoming Cameron Government to emphatically rule it out.

The claimants say today’s Heathrow expansion scheme is even bigger and has more severe environmental impacts than the 2010 proposal, and will fail the same legal tests. They argue that new evidence on the severe health impacts of air and noise pollution make the new scheme far less likely to pass judicial review.

Sign up for campaign updates at www.wandsworth.gov.uk/enews

http://www.wandsworth.gov.uk/news/article/13650/councils_and_campaigners_take_first_step_towards_heathrow_legal_challenge

.


this is also on the Hillingdon Council website

Legal Challenge on Heathrow Expansion

18.11.2016

Hillingdon Council website

.


And on Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead council website at 

https://www3.rbwm.gov.uk/news/article/152/legal_challenge_on_heathrow_expansion

.

.

.


By contrast, Hounslow:

By contrast with the four strong councils, below is the feeble statement put out by Hounslow council, which is more concerned to try to get jobs and some trickle down economic benefits:

Proposed by Councillor Steve Curran and Seconded by Councillor Amrit Mann
“This Council notes the decision of the Conservative Government on Tuesday 25 October to approve the expansion of Heathrow Airport and the building of a third runway.
We recognise that this decision will have huge implications for our borough and that, while many residents and businesses are directly involved in Heathrow and its supply chain, potential adverse consequences must be addressed.
This Council reaffirms its continuing commitment to a better and not bigger Heathrow and resolves to redouble its efforts to ensure that residents are protected from any adverse consequences of the Government’s decision.
Council further resolves to:
1.    Bring forward new measures to reduce the impact of congestion, pollution and noise locally.
2.    Seek compensation and appropriate mitigation from Heathrow Airport Ltd for all residents who will be adversely affected by the implementation of the Government’s decision.
3.    Ensure that the voice of Hounslow’s residents and businesses is heard in the forthcoming national policy statement consultation.
4.    Work with Heathrow Airport Ltd to achieve the best possible outcome for our borough.”
.
.
.