Ealing Council demands Heathrow pay up £190 million to offset the impact of a 3rd runway
In its response to the Heathrow consultation, Ealing Council has said it will do everything it can to oppose the expansion of Heathrow Airport – unless it is given £190 million for mitigation measures, investment and new transport links. Ealing Council said the current plans would create unacceptable levels of noise and pollution for its residents. “The council is demanding a £190 million package [it was £150 million in October 2016] of mitigation and investment for the borough, should expansion go ahead. This includes getting better insulation for home owners to combat noise and increasing the catchment area covered by the scheme. The council also wants new investment to improve public transport, so more airport passengers and employees can travel to the airport by greener means, reducing air pollution locally.” Other demands included greater investment in skills and employment – and also a commitment to a total night time flight ban, except in emergencies. The Council Leader said there has to be a balance between economic benefits and the very real noise and environmental impacts on local people, and “Despite some positive engagement, we haven’t really seen much movement on some of the concessions we’ve been seeking.
.
Tweet
Ealing Council demands Heathrow pay up £190 million to offset the impact of the third runway
Leader Julian Bell says there needs to be compensation for noise and environmental impacts
By Ged Cann, Local Democracy Reporter – My London
18 SEP 2019
Ealing Council has said it will do everything it can to oppose the expansion of Heathrow Airport – unless it is given £190 million for mitigation measures, investment and new transport links.
In a formal response to the second round of consultations on the third runway, Ealing voiced concerns the current plans would create unacceptable levels of noise and pollution for residents.
The move comes as a final date of October 17 is set for an impending legal challenge against Heathrow by the No 3rd Runway Coalition group.
In a statement Ealing Council said: “The council is demanding a £190 million package of mitigation and investment for the borough, should expansion go ahead.
“This includes getting better insulation for home owners to combat noise and increasing the catchment area covered by the scheme.
“The council also wants new investment to improve public transport, so more airport passengers and employees can travel to the airport by greener means, reducing air pollution locally.”
Other demands included greater investment in skills and employment.
The council also insisted on a commitment to a total night time flight ban, except in emergencies.
Council leader Julian Bell said: “We understand the importance of Heathrow both locally, nationally and globally and we want it to thrive.
“But, this can’t be at any cost, there has to be a balance between the economic benefits and the very real noise and environmental impacts of expansion on local people.
“As well as increased noise and pollution from flights we remain concerned about the impact of increased traffic in the area.
Mr Bell said he saw Ealing Council taking up the role “of critical friend rather than foe”.
He said: “Despite some positive engagement, we haven’t really seen much movement on some of the concessions we’ve been seeking.
Ealing Council leader Julian Bell says there has to be a balance between the economic benefits of Heathrow and its impact on the environment (Image: Matt Grayson)
“We want to see far more ambition and detailed proposals on health and wellbeing, transport, economy, employment and skills, noise and emissions, and planning and housing; and how these goals will be achieved.
“I’m particularly disappointed that ideas to get people out of their cars which seem like a no-brainer to me, haven’t been progressed.”
“For example, we’ve asked for a segregated cycle link between Southall and the airport which would really help to deliver a significant change in behaviour and give airport workers a greener way to travel.”
Responding to the statements, a Heathrow spokesperson said: “We welcome Ealing Council’s response to our consultation and the constructive nature of their engagement to date.
“We will continue to work with the council as we finalise our masterplan, which will unlock the benefits of expansion for Ealing residents including jobs, enhanced green space and a 6.5 hour scheduled night flight ban.”
The airport said they were offering a noise insulation scheme worth over £700 million for those living closest to the airport.
“Heathrow is also working closely with TfL and other providers to strengthen public transport and active travel routes ahead of expansion.
“Our future plans include a new 20km green loop of dedicated walking and cycling space around the airport and we are in discussions with Ealing Council to ensure that these changes benefit their residents.”
In July, local residents and environmental groups were given another chance to stop the Heathrow expansion after the Court of Appeal granted permission for a fresh legal challenge.
The court date has been set for October 17, and the case is now scheduled to last six days.
Paul Beckford, policy director of the No 3rd Runway Coalition, said the previous High Court judgement in favour of Heathrow had been a judicial review looking at whether the Government had followed the appropriate procedures in allowing the extension, and the rules of climate emissions had since changed.
.
.
See earlier:
Ealing Council Leader voices strong opposition to night flights: “One arrival before 6am is one too many”
Ealing Council have added their voice to the complaints about the recommendation buried in an appendix to the Airports Commission interim report that there could be double the number of Heathrow night flights as at present. Ealing Council is part of the 2M group, which is an all-party alliance of more than 20 local authorities concerned at the environmental impact of Heathrow expansion on their communities. Leader of Ealing Council and 2M spokesman, Cllr Julian Bell, said: “We shouldn’t have to dig deep into a technical document to find out increases in night flights are proposed.” Ealing and the 2M group have fought for years for a ban on night flights, and do not find an increase acceptable. The proposal is one of the short or medium-term recommendations to make maximum use of the existing runways at Heathrow. Under a proposal called ‘early morning smoothing’, Heathrow would be allowed to land additional planes between 5am and 6am, which is classified as the night quota period. The aim is to minimise delays and could allow the airport to manage with one runway for arrivals between 6am and 7am.
.
Ealing Council, that has avoided opposing Heathrow runway, wants £150 million to compensate residents
Last time round when there was nearly a 3rd Heathrow runway, in 2008- 2009, Ealing Council was part of the 2M group of councils opposing it. In the intervening years, there are only 4 councils really taking forward the opposition. Ealing has increasingly been seen as changing its stance, to luke-warm support for the runway. In July 2015, rather than restate its anti-runway stance the Labour group passed a motion “demanding answers” from the Conservative government on what it intended to do at Heathrow, if expansion is permitted. Its MP, Virendra Sharma, who had been against the runway, announced in August that he now supported it. Now the council leader (Labour) Julian Bell says he wants demanding £150 million, so Ealing can cope with the environmental impact of the runway at Heathrow. ”While we welcome the jobs and economic benefits of Heathrow, a 3rd runway will inevitably cause more noise, pollution and traffic that will damage the quality of life of local people. …Straight talking and tough negotiating is what is needed if this goes ahead and I will continue to demand Heathrow Airport provides the best compensation deal for the people of Ealing.” Slough Council got a deal with Heathrow early on in 2015, to try to get financial benefits from the airport, in exchange for not opposing it.
.
.