Residents face just 4 hours free from aircraft noise if 3rd Heathrow runway goes ahead
Sarah Olney, the new MP for Richmond Park, has criticised the Department for Transport for not being open with residents that a 3rd runway at Heathrow could mean just 6 or 4 hours per day respite from aircraft noise. Currently residents under many of Heathrow’s flight paths can expect up to 8 hours without being disturbed by incoming and outgoing flights from Heathrow. However, hidden away in the public consultation on a third runway (the draft NPS) is an admission from the Government that whilst residents can expect more ‘certainty’ over when respite periods will be, the number of hours they can expect to be free from aircraft noise will drop to just 6, or even 4, hours. Sarah Olney raised the issue in the House of Commons on 30th March, asking the Transport Secretary, Chris Grayling, to explain why the consultation did not make this evident. Responding for the Government, he failed to answer the question, stating only that the consultation “set out in broad terms the impact of the changes”. Speaking after their exchange in the House of Commons Sarah Olney commented that the government is treating local residents with contempt. If Chris Grayling cannot even give a proper reply in Parliament, either he isn’t aware that residents will suffer from more noise (if not, why not, if he is Minister in charge of the process), or he isn’t willing to admit it. [No questions of ministers on Heathrow are ever answered properly – always evasively].
.
Tweet
RESIDENTS FACE JUST 4 HOURS FREE FROM AIRCRAFT NOISE IF THIRD RUNWAY GOES AHEAD AT HEATHROW
30.3.2017 (Sarah Olney MP press release)
A London MP has slammed the government for not being open with residents that a third runway at Heathrow could mean just 6 or 4 hours a day respite from aircraft noise.
Currently residents can expect up to 8 hours without being disturbed by incoming and outgoing flights from Heathrow.
However, hidden away in the public consultation on a third runway is an admission from the Government that whilst residents can expect more ‘certainty’ over when respite periods will be, the number of hours they can expect to be free from aircraft noise will drop to just 6, or even 4, hours.
Liberal Democrat MP for Richmond Park and North Kingston Sarah Olney raised the issue in the House of Commons today (30th March), asking the Minister to explain why the consultation “failed to mention that this respite would be reduced from 8 hours a day to just 6 or even 4 hours.”
Transport Secretary Chris Grayling, responding for the Government, failed to answer Mrs Olney’s question, stating only that the consultation “set out in broad terms the impact of the changes”.
Speaking after their exchange in the House of Commons Sarah Olney commented:
“When it comes to a third runway at Heathrow, the Tories are treating local residents with contempt.
“Not only have they failed to make this cut in respite hours clear in the consultation, when questioned about it in Parliament the Transport Secretary couldn’t even admit they are cutting the noise-free period. Either Chris Grayling isn’t aware that residents will suffer from more noise, or he isn’t willing to admit it.
“It is completely unacceptable that the government aren’t being clear with residents across Richmond and South West London that their respite from aircraft noise will be so dramatically reduced if a third runway gets the green light.”
NOTES:
The Government’s consultation on a third runway at Heathrow (the draft National Policy Statement on Aviation) is open until 25th May and is available here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/draft-airports-national-policy-statement
The draft National Policy Statement on Aviation states that Heathrow expansion should be “more acceptable to its local community” and that this is achievable through the offer “a predictable, through reduced, period of respite for local communities”.
A transcript of the exchange between Sarah Olney MP and Transport Secretary Chris Grayling during Transport Questions in the House of Commons on 30th March is as follows:
· Sarah Olney (Richmond Park) (LD)
Can the Secretary of State explain why the consultation on the draft national policy statement promoted improved certainty of respite from aircraft noise from an expanded Heathrow, but failed to mention that that respite would be reduced from eight hours a day to just six, or even four?
· Chris Grayling
We have tried to set out the impact of the change in broad terms. It is certainly the case that in comparison with Gatwick and its fully mixed-mode operation, Heathrow, across three runways, is able to offer respite in a way that was not assumed by the Airports Commission in its consideration of both proposals. The impact on neighbouring communities is one factor among many that the commission considered, as did the Government.
Paul Edgeworth
Office of Sarah Olney MP
Liberal Democrat Member of Parliament for Richmond Park and North Kingston