Voters in Maidenhead need proper representation in opposing the negative effects of 3rd runway
With an unexpected election, residents in the Prime Minister’s constituency – Maidenhead – have the chance to elect an MP who opposes the Heathrow 3rd runway. Back in 2009 Theresa May on numerous occasions voiced her avid concerns about its impact on her constituency. In May 2010, when the runway was stopped by the coalition government, she said: “Like many local residents, I strongly welcome the cancellation of the third runway at Heathrow……and today’s announcement is a victory for all those who have campaigned against it.” But that was all reversed, and Mrs May U-turned on the issue. Two letters in the local paper express the frustration and disappointment of constituents. One writes: “… since her elevation to Prime Minister, Maidenhead residents no longer have a voice for their views.” … Maidenhead needs an MP who opposes the necessity for the local council to spend tens of thousands of £s on legal action against the proposed runway. … “Also the Department for Transport in their “Sensitivities” report outline that the Net Benefit to the country, after construction costs etc is only from £0.2bn to £6.1bn over 60 years, i.e. divide this by 60, so a miniscule percentage of the UK Economy” ….We need an MP who “properly represents the interests of Maidenhead constituents.”
Letters to local papers in the Prime Minister’s constituency – Maidenhead
A chance again for proper representation.
I am surprised to again be contemplating a general election. However it a welcome opportunity to re-state the need for our MP – the Prime Minister, Theresa May – to properly represent the interests of her Maidenhead constituents.
In 2008 to 2010 our MP, Theresa May strongly opposed the previous plan for a Heathrow third runway, making numerous statements, which included the following:
December 2008: “I hope …… that the Government will recognise the widespread hostility to Heathrow expansion and say no to a third runway.”
January 2009: “I hope that the Secretary of State recognises that … nobody will take this Government seriously on the environment again. When Terminal 5 was announced, the then Secretary of State promised us a cap on the number of flights a year of 480,000. The Government have now broken their word, and this Secretary of State is playing the same game. In today’s statement he says: ‘I want there to be a limit on the initial use of the third runway so that the increase in aircraft movements does not exceed 125,000 a year’.”
However current plans for a third allow for more than twice the number, 260,000 additional flights per annum.
June 2009: “Noise from Heathrow Airport is a big concern for local residents. I know from the letters and emails that I receive that people have strong views about this.”
May 2010, after cancellation of the previous plan: “Like many local residents, I strongly welcome the cancellation of the third runway at Heathrow……and today’s announcement is a victory for all those who have campaigned against it.”
[These are statements from Theresa May’s own website].
MPs including Dr Tania Mathias, John McDonnell, Adam Afriyie, Ruth Cadbury and Sarah Olney continue to represent their constituents in Parliament on the matter, however since her elevation to Prime Minister, Maidenhead residents no longer have a voice for their views. Zac Goldsmith also strongly opposed a third runway, as did Boris Johnson and Justine Greening until the Prime Minister curtailed their ability to do so.
We need to elect an MP who properly represents the interests of Maidenhead constituents. In doing so they will also avoid the need for RBWM and the London Councils of Hillingdon, Richmond, Wandsworth and maybe others, supported by Greenpeace and the London Mayor, from having to spend £300k opposing the Government’s decision for a third runway and in turn avoid the cost of around £500 for every household across the country for supporting infrastructure (moving the M25, A4/Bath Road etc, etc) for a runway that we neither want or need. This is money much better spent on priorities of NHS, social care, schools etc.
From a resident of Maidenhead constituency (name and address supplied)
From the DfT Further Review and Sensitivities Report Page 72 (October 2016)
We hope that the Maidenhead Conservative Party will choose a parliamentary candidate in the forthcoming election that will always put the constituency first in their House of Commons representation.
Given that Mrs May previously stated that Heathrow expansion would undoubtedly harm the constituency with ever more pollution, noise, congestion & infrastructure overload, it is important to have a candidate that will irrevocably put the constituency first in Parliament, and will be irrevocably against expansion of this adversely life-altering metropolis.
Mrs. May will clearly not fit the bill, and therefore another more suitable candidate MUST be considered. One whose credentials will pass this simple loyalty test.
Residents Against Aircraft Noise