Gatwick expansion DCO inquiry begins – and will last for 6 months

The inquiry, by the Planning Inspectorate, into the DCO concerning Gatwick Airport’s plan to use its emergency runway for routine flights started with an open session, and many people – both in favour of the plan, and against, allowed a brief time to speak.  All those in favour were businesses, or business groups – or people in some way linked to the airport, and hoping its expansion would be good for their business in the short to medium term, and perhaps provide more good jobs. Those against were local councils and local residents who – with passion – put forward the range of negative impacts that the expansion would bring.  Those would include the climate impacts of thousands more tonnes of CO2 per year; surface transport impacts; air pollution; noise pollution, especially at night; and social impacts of the pressure on local infrastructure, from many more workers at the airport, and many more air passengers. The inquiry is being held in Crawley, and is due to last six months.  The submissions gave the impression that the businesses only looked at possible economic benefits, giving no consideration to local residents, or the environment – in the short or long term.
.

 

Gatwick Airport runway inquiry hears from businesses and locals

28.2.2024

By Bob Dale, BBC News, South East

The inquiry into Gatwick Airport’s plan to use its emergency runway for routine flights has heard from business groups in favour and local people opposed to the scheme.

Chambers of commerce from Sussex, Surrey and Kent argued it would bring hundreds of millions to the area’s economy.

Local people highlighted the disruption flights already bring to their lives.

The inquiry being held in Crawley is due to last six months.

Anna Christie, the chief executive of the Sussex Chamber of Commerce who was also speaking on behalf of the Surrey chamber, told the hearing “future development will continue to support growth and jobs”.

She said the chamber would act as a “critical friend” to the airport over its environmental impact.

Richard Lavender, from the Kent Invicta Chamber of Commerce, also fully supported the expansion plan, saying it would “improve the resilience of air traffic in the South East” with “quieter, more efficient and greener aircraft”.

Gavin Stewart, the executive director of the Brighton and Hove Economic Partnership, said the extra passengers the expansion would bring could represent an extra £630m being spent by tourists.

And Charlie Cooper, the operations manager at a local building firm which is a contractor at Gatwick Airport, described the proposed growth as “simply a no-brainer, the benefits will outweigh the negatives”.

“These plans give us the confidence to invest and develop,” he said.

Local people say they fear noise and disruption will increase if the plan is allowed
Jane Shufflebotham, who lives near the airport, said she was “passionately and wholeheartedly against this plan”, which she said would be “profoundly damaging to the environment”.

She said: “It’s not just a bad idea, but an environmental catastrophe in the making… a decision based on pure greed.”

Another local resident, Patricia Routledge, said even now people living near Gatwick could not open their windows or enjoy their gardens in the summer.

“If Gatwick has its way, this hell will increase,” she told the hearing.

“No consideration is being given to those living beneath the flight path. It’s a cheap, inadequate fix for Gatwick.”

And Dr Roger Hood, who lives in the village of Capel, 5 miles (8km) west of the airport, questioned the economic need for its expansion.

“London already has five international airports,” he said.

Responding to the issues raised on Wednesday, John Rhodes from Gatwick Airport said: “Gatwick Airport really does take its environmental responsibilities very seriously.”

In terms of its ground operations he said the airport had put forward a carbon action plan which it was hoped would make the airport achieve net zero by 2030, a plan which would happen regardless of whether the northern runway wins approval.

He also assured those concerned with night flights that the new runway would not be used between 23:00 GMT and 06:00 except in emergencies.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-68424671

.

Planning Inspectorate website: 

There is a transcript, and a YouTube recording, of the Gatwick DCO hearings on 28th Feb, looking at various issues for the airport. They are at onsenting.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/projects/TR020

 

There are transcripts and recordings (YouTube) of the inquiry days at

https://national-infrastructure-consenting.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/projects/TR020005/documents

.

People can sign up for updates 

https://national-infrastructure-consenting.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/projects/TR020005/get-updates/start


Campaigners protest over Gatwick runway plans as crucial hearings get underway

MERIDIAN
Wednesday 28 February 2024

ITV News Meridian’s James Dunham reports on the demonstration

Includes a video

Gatwick’s bid to bring its emergency runway into regular use has been met with protest ahead of crucial hearings by the Government’s planning team to examine the details.

Protestors outside the Sandman Hotel in Crawley. Picture: Mark Dunford

Protestors outside the Sandman Hotel in Crawley. Picture: Mark Dunford

The rally, involving community groups, residents and activists took place at a hotel in Crawley where the first public hearing is taking place.

The airport is looking for permission to move its emergency runway and bring it into regular use to create what it says would be tens of thousands of jobs each year and an extra £1 billion to the region.

Campaigners are desperate for the airport’s decade-long expansion plan to to be halted claiming that the plans will bring environmental destruction during a climate crisis.

Protesters from many groups including Safe Landing, aviation workers for a sustainable future gather at Gatwick Airport

Sally Pavey, chair of Communities Against Gatwick Noise and Emissions, (CAGNE) the umbrella aviation community and environment group for Sussex, Surrey, and Kent said, “If this application to build a new runway is permitted, it will have a devastating impact on both people’s lives and the environment.

“That is why it is so important that CAGNE are here – not just today, but every day of the hearing, with our qualified team of Kings Council, plus surface transport, aviation noise and air quality expert team, as well as supporting NGO’s tackling the subject of Jet Zero and the environmental destruction of our planet.”

Protesters against the expansion of Gatwick airport at the Sandman Signature London Gatwick Hotel on 28th Feb 2024 Banners are held reading "Gatwick is Big Enough", "No New Runways" and "Flying To Extinction"

Chair of the Gatwick Area Conservation Campaign (GACC) Peter Barclay said, “In the past twelve months the government’s own Climate Change Committee has said there should be no airport expansion.

“Temperatures are the highest ever recorded and weather patterns are becoming increasingly extreme – who could conceive allowing such a project to go ahead?”

GACC Vice Chairman, Jonathan Essex added, “The government should not permit Gatwick to compete with Heathrow to be the UK’s biggest climate polluter.

“Instead there should be a moratorium on airport expansion until a framework to limit demand for air travel is in place, as called for by the UK’s official climate change advisors.”

The examination phase of the application process is the furthest point Gatwick has reached so far.

Inspectors will spend six months scrutinising the proposals and will also visit the runway and terminal buildings.

Bosses at the airport will highlight Gatwick’s commitment to reach net zero by 2030 and initiatives to help cut carbon emissions.

This week, it was revealed the airport’s vehicle emissions have been cut by 90% because they’re now fuelled by recycled vegetable oil instead of diesel.

Steve Kelso, Head of Engineering, London Gatwick, said, “The implementation of Hydrotreated Vegetable Oil to power our 300 diesel vehicles is an exciting milestone for London Gatwick’s sustainability journey and a big step in our fleet transition.

“It is vital we invest in sustainably sourced HVO to reduce emissions in all areas as soon as possible on our journey to reach net zero for our own Scope 1 and 2 emissions by 2030.

“From the buses that pick passengers up from the long-stay car parks, to operations vehicles that patrol the airfield, HVO is now being used to fuel vehicles throughout the airport.

“As we continue to grow, we are making sustainability part of everything we do here at London Gatwick and we are committed to finding solutions and working differently to meet our ambitious targets.”

Gatwick Airport says within ten years of the operation going live, there will be less noise at the airport than there was in 2019.

Once inspectors have made their recommendation to the Government the Secretary of State for Transport will then decide on whether to approve or refuse the runway application.

In an election year, the future of Gatwick Airport will likely be high up the campaign agenda.

https://www.itv.com/news/meridian/2024-02-28/campaigners-protest-over-gatwick-plans-as-crucial-hearings-get-underway

.


Gatwick Airport runway planning inquiry begins

28.2.2024  (AOL)

A six-month inquiry into plans by Gatwick Airport to use its emergency runway for routine flights has begun.

The airport hopes to double capacity to 78 million passengers by making use of its existing northern runway.

It said plans would create 14,000 jobs and provide a £1bn economic boost – but campaigners have voiced opposition.

Before the inquiry in Crawley, 10 councils have also raised concerns that the proposals will not ensure noise and air quality levels are not exceeded.

In a joint statement on Monday, the authorities surrounding the airport added: “We also do not consider that the transport network has the capacity to meet the sustainable needs that will arise from the almost doubling of passengers using the airport.

“We have been working together to ensure that if the proposal were to be approved, the required controls, mitigations and where appropriate, compensations are put in place to limit the environmental impacts and to maximise the economic and community benefits.”

Councils and campaigners have raised concerns about the development
Gatwick’s chief executive, Stewart Wingate, previously told the BBC the existing main runway was routinely used for all landings and take-offs. He said the northern, or standby runway, which is also an emergency runway, was normally used as a taxiway.

“What we are proposing to do is to stop using that as a taxiway, and to start using that routinely to allow the take-off of the aircraft that routinely fly to and from Europe,” he said.

He said the runway would be used by “the sort of aircraft that EasyJet or Ryanair would fly”.

Countryside charity CPRE Sussex issued a statement expressing surprise that climate change was not among topics proposed for an issue-specific hearing during the inquiry. The charity has made a request for a hearing to look at the issue.

Ben Benatt, climate campaigner and specialist in biodiversity, said it was important climate change was taken “fully into account”.

“I would reach out to the people here as human beings and people with families and children,” he said.

“It is imperative this development does not go ahead.”

Sally Pavey, chairwoman of Cagne (Communities Against Gatwick Noise Emissions), said: “There are so many questions that need to be answered. Very little has changed since Gatwick was turned down in 2015 for a new runway and let’s be clear, this is a new runway.”

Campaigners from Cagne plan to be outside the inquiry as it enters its second day on Wednesday.

https://www.aol.com/gatwick-airport-runway-planning-inquiry-204121443.html


See earlier:

Changes to Gatwick DCO in November, since the original application

The planning changes at Gatwick, converting the emergency runway for routine take-offs, is an attempt to “sneak” a second runway through the back door.  Critics argue that the timing of Gatwick Airport’s proposed changes to its expansion plans could result in people who have already commented on the plans mistakenly thinking their feedback still stands, even though the plans have now changed. Gatwick’s expansion plans, to take the airport the size of Heathrow currently, are being examined by PINS, the Planning Inspectorate. Their examination may conclude in June 2024. Local group, CAGNE, says there are now some changes to the Gatwick expansion plans that were not in the original consultation.  They say there will be a large increase in lorry movements due to replacing an incinerator with a waste sorting plant, not included in the Development Consent Order, traffic modelling or air quality, an incinerator that at the time of obtaining planning permission was meant to heat the north terminal.  PINS needs to decide if the changes can be made to the application and included in the examination. Comments for the examination need to be submitted by 21st January 2024.

Click here to view full story…

.

Gatwick submits plans for second runway to double passenger numbers

Gatwick has formally submitted plans for a £2.2bn second runway, as the airport looks to double its passenger numbers to 75 million a year.  There are the usual claims of more jobs and “a £1bn annual boost to the region”, which ignores the impact of yet more holiday flights, taking money out of the region and reducing tourism spend in the UK.  The additional flights would significantly worsen noise and air pollution, as well as carbon emissions, from the airport.  The 30,000-page application for a Development Consent Order to convert its standby runway for routine use was lodged with the Planning Inspectorate on 6th. The process is expected to take about a year before it reaches the Transport Secretary for final approval.  The project will convert the emergency runway by moving its centreline 12 metres north, allowing planes to take off while others come in to land on the existing runway. There are road changes with additional local road lanes and flyovers. Gatwick has hopes work will start in 2025 for the runway to be in use by 2030. The political decision may potentially be just before or after a general election in 2025.  The extra million tonnes of CO2 per year are totally inappropriate, with worsening climate change and global heating already apparent.

Click here to view full story…

 

.

.

.

 

 

Read more »

Heathrow new CEO likely to want expansion in numbers, but no new runway

Thomas Woldbye, Heathrow’s new chief executive, is understood to have begun disbanding the 3rd runway team, and the airport’s runway plans have been shelved, as leaked details of the airport’s “better not bigger” strategy can be revealed.  Woldbye is instead understood to be exploring how to squeeze millions more passengers through the airport without expanding its footprint.  This comes with Heathrow’s Spanish owner Ferrovial facing a protracted process to sell its stake to a Saudi-backed consortium for £2.4 billion.  It is believed that a new Heathrow team is pulling together plans under the internal strapline of “better not bigger”, which was originally coined by anti-expansion campaigners. Leaked details of the plans reveal that annual passenger numbers could hit 96 million by 2036, up from the record 80.9 million in 2019, if all of its initiatives can be realised. A “core” case is understood to forecast a rise to 86 million passengers. One way to increase passenger numbers is to make more efficient use of the runway so that planes could take off and land closer together. They will also want to increase Heathrow’s annual flight cap from 480,000 to 505,000, though this would require government consent.
.

 

Heathrow third runway shelved as airport seeks to be ‘better not bigger’

Chief executive Thomas Woldbye exploring how to squeeze millions more passengers through the airport without expanding its footprint

By Oliver Gill, The Sunday Times
Sunday February 25 2024

Thomas Woldbye, Heathrow Airport’s chief executive, is understood to have begun disbanding the third runway team

Heathrow’s third runway has been shelved as leaked details of the airport’s “better not bigger” strategy can be revealed.

New chief executive Thomas Woldbye is understood to have begun disbanding Heathrow’s third runway team in favour of exploring how to squeeze millions more passengers through the airport without expanding its footprint.

The move comes with Heathrow’s Spanish owner Ferrovial facing a protracted process to sell its stake to a Saudi-backed consortium for £2.4 billion.

City sources said that a new Heathrow team was pulling together plans under the internal strapline of “better not bigger”, which was originally coined by anti-expansion campaigners. Sources close to Heathrow insisted that they “did not recognise” the motto.

Leaked details of the plans reveal that annual passenger numbers could hit 96 million by 2036, up from the record 80.9 million it welcomed in 2019, if all of its initiatives can be realised. A “core” case is understood to forecast a rise to 86 million passengers.

The 2019 record was previously considered the maximum number of passengers it could support without expansion. But one source familiar with the new plans said: “There’s loads that can be done without spending billions.”

Among the proposals to increase passenger numbers is a plan to use more buses to transport passengers from the terminal to the aircraft so that planes can be parked further afield. Other initiatives include more efficient use of the runway so that planes could take off and land closer together.

Increasing Heathrow’s annual flight cap from 480,000 to 505,000 is also under consideration, though this would require government consent.

City sources said that there was limited appetite among shareholders for big spending on a radical expansion of the airport. In 2018 it was estimated that building the third runway would cost £14 billion.

“Longer term, we’re reviewing our plans to make sure the airport has the capacity the UK economy needs, while boosting the resilience of our operations for our customers and meeting our sustainability commitments.”

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/e4eea062-560c-4d9b-a580-c992f94529c9

.


But, see also:

SUNDAY 25 FEBRUARY 2024

Heathrow denies report that third runway plans have been shelved

BY: GUY TAYLOR (City AM)

The Sunday Times reported the Hounslow hub had begun disbanding its third runway team in favour of exploring how to expand capacity without expanding its carbon footprint.

Heathrow has denied a report that its long-delayed third runway proposals have been shelved as part of a leaked new strategy.

The Sunday Times reported the Hounslow hub had begun disbanding its third runway team in favour of exploring how to expand capacity without expanding its carbon footprint.

City sources told the newspaper Heathrow had begun drawing up the plans under the header “better not bigger,” a term originally used by anti-expansion campaigners.

The sources said there was limited appetite among shareholders for big expenditure on a radical expansion of the hub.

But Heathrow has hit back at the report.

“The speculation in today’s Sunday Times is wrong, and the plans and actions described are not reflective of our strategy for future growth,” a Heathrow spokesperson said in a statement today.

“Heathrow connects the whole of the UK to global growth, but we’re operating almost at capacity which limits the UK’s economic potential. Of course we’re looking at how we can optimise the current airport to achieve short-term growth within our current infrastructure,” a spokesperson said.

“Longer term, we’re reviewing our plans to make sure the airport has the capacity to drive more global connectivity for the UK economy, while boosting the resilience of our operations for our customers, increasing competition for passengers and meeting our sustainability commitments.”

In an interview with City A.M. last week, chief executive Thomas Woldbye said the plans to expand were “hugely important.”

He told City A.M. the airport was picking apart the details to “make sure we take the right decision at the right time… this is so important that we have to make sure we get it right and we can’t rush it”.

“We’re coming up with the updated strategy during the next couple of months and that will include a piece on how we handle capacity, and also how do we can handle capacity until we get to the third runway, because that is by nature quite a few years into the future,” he said.

The news comes at a time when Heathrow looks likely to fall into the hands of a number of Middle East investment funds from the UAE, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

https://www.cityam.com/heathrow-denies-report-that-third-runway-plans-have-been-shelved/

.


 

See earlier:

Some possible changes at Heathrow, to persuade ever more passengers to use it

People already badly affected by Heathrow are concerned about what might happen, with new Saudi ownership, after Ferrovial. The Saudi-backed consortium is poised to seize control of the airport, but it is far from a done deal. However, plans are already underway that could have ramifications for those living nearby.  According to sources close to the bid, they have a multi-pronged strategy to broadly increase the number of passengers, even without — for the foreseeable future, at least — the construction of a third runway.  Updating Heathrow’s technology is key in the strategy, with things like scrapping airline-specific check-in desks. There could be an App to get passengers to the shortest queue to drop off their luggage. Luggage tags could also be scrapped in favour of computer chips or QR codes linked to passenger booking information. And other changes. The thinking is that if the new owners can improve life for passengers, making it less stressful and decreasing waiting times, airlines will be able to persuade more people to fly. And more passengers mean more revenue for Heathrow, which currently gets £26.77 per person from its airline customers.

Click here to view full story…

More Heathrow shareholders plan to sell stakes alongside Ferrovial

Ferrovial agreed to sell its 25% stake in Heathrow in November for £2.4bn to French private equity company Ardian (15%) and the Saudi Public Investment Fund (10%).  Now 3 other Heathrow shareholders that together own 35% of the airport, have said they want to sell out too, as part of £2.4bn Ferrovial deal agreed.  It has been suggested, by someone in the know, that Canadian pension fund Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec (CDPQ), Singapore sovereign wealth fund GIC and the UK’s Universities Superannuation Scheme all intend to exit. So with 25% and 35%, that is 60% of Heathrow’s ownership.  As part of the Ferrovial deal, the airport’s other shareholders were given the option to sell their own stakes at the same valuation, with the Saudis and Ardian offered first refusal. This could be a problem for the Ferrovial sale, and the £2.4bn deal could collapse if all the shareholders cannot find buyers.  Ferrovial said it was a “condition” of the transaction that the “tagged shares” were also sold.  Neither Ardian nor the Saudis are compelled to buy the new shares on offer. The Saudis don’t want more than 10%. They might be able to find a 3rd investor to come in and buy the 35%.

Click here to view full story…

Heathrow considering smaller ways to increase flights, rather than a 3rd runway

Heathrow is exploring options for expansion that would prioritise smaller improvements before considering if it could go for a 3rd runway.  New Chief Executive, Thomas Woldbye, who joined in October, has apparently launched an internal review into the options to increase its capacity.  No decisions have yet been made. One option under consideration is a new plan to initially focus on easier and cheaper improvements within the airport boundary, as there are serious concerns about the feasibility of a 3rd runway.  The world has moved on since Heathrow got consent for a new runway, with travel demand altered since Covid, and a different political and regulatory environment, as well as far higher construction and financing costs than before.  The cost estimate was £24 billion in 2019.  Heathrow is also in the middle of a change in ownership, as Ferrovial agreed to sell their 25% stake to a consortium lead by Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth fund (PIF).  One major problem for a 3rd runway is having to put a section of the M25 into a tunnel (very costly) and demolishing local homes. The Climate Change Committee says there should be no airport expansion, unless the sector has a way to genuinely cut CO2 emissions.

Click here to view full story…

Ferrovial to sell its 25% stake in Heathrow for $3 billion to Ardian (15%) and Saudi Arabia’s PIF (10%)

Infrastructure giant Ferrovial has reached an agreement with two different buyers to sell its entire 25% stake in Britain’s busiest airport, Heathrow, for £2.37 billion ($3.01 billion) the company said in a statement on Tuesday.  Ferrovial said the buyers for the stake in FGP Topco – the parent company of Heathrow Airport Holdings Ltd – were private equity fund Ardian and Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund (PIF). Ardian would acquire a 15% stake and PIF a 10% stake.  The transaction is subject to regulatory conditions and must comply with the right of first offer and full tag-along rights, which may be exercised by the other FGP Topco shareholders, Ferrovial added.  Ferrovial expects to complete the sale by mid-2024. Ferrovial also has a 50% stake in three other British hubs: Aberdeen, Glasgow and Southampton. It also has a 49% stake in the new Terminal One at New York City’s JFK airport.

Click here to view full story…

.

.

 

Read more »

Southampton Airport wants to cut down some trees, and cut the tops off others

Southampton Airport wants to cut off the tops of 25 trees in a 200-year-old woodland, Marlhill Copse, on grounds of aircraft safety.  But the bid is set to be thrown out by city development chiefs, as it will harm the conservation area.  However, a second application to remove 15 trees in the same woodland is recommended to approve the cutting down of 14 of them.  In October 2023, Southampton City Council received the planning application from the airport which outlined its plan to reduce the tops of 24 individual trees and one group of broadleaf trees within Marlhill Copse in Bitterne Park, on the southern side of the airport over the M27.  According to the report by officers recommending refusal, the reduction in height of the 25 trees included one oak by more than 13 metres, another by 12, metres and one Douglas Fir by more than 10 metres. The airport said the work related to the Civil Aviation Act, which gives the secretary of state powers to make direct orders restricting the height of trees; however, the order hasn’t been received, meaning the application had to proceed via the usual council’s planning process.  The council’s planning committee is set to decide both applications on February 20th. 
.

 

Southampton Airport wants to cut into Marlhill Copse trees

18.2.2024

By Natalia Forero (Southern Daily Echo)

Southampton Airport wants to cut off the tops of 25 trees in a 200-year-old woodland – and cut down 15 more.

But the bid is set to be thrown out by city development chiefs.

The airport applied to reduce the height of 25 trees in the woodland area but it is set to be rejected since it will harm the conservation area.

However, a second application to remove 15 trees in the same woodland is recommended to approve the cutting down of 14.

READ MORE: Southampton Airport loses bid to work on trees at Marlhill Copse

In October 2023, Southampton City Council received the planning application from the airport which outlined its plan to reduce the tops of 24 individual trees and one group of broadleaf trees within Marlhill Copse in Bitterne Park, on the southern side of the airport over the M27.

According to the report by officers recommending refusal, the reduction in height of the 25 trees included one oak by more than 13 metres, another by 12, metres and one Douglas Fir by more than 10 metres.

The airport said the work related to the Civil Aviation Act, which gives the secretary of state powers to make direct orders restricting the height of trees; however, the order hasn’t been received, meaning the application had to proceed via the usual council’s planning process.

Daily Echo: Marlhill Copse has been the scene of protests by environmentalists opposed to the felling of treesMarlhill Copse is a nationally registered garden within the Itchen Valley conservation area. It is estimated that trees there were planted around 1800.

The report indicates that the woodland is a “fine example of mature oak trees grown as standards” and added: “During the 1920s and ’30s, these were thinned, and the glades were planted with many unusual trees and shrubs, particularly Rhododendrons, Magnolia and Nothofagus, some of which remain today.”

The council’s historic environment officer presented its objection, saying the proposal’s negative impact on the woodland, would “diminish” the woodland and would “fail to preserve and hence cause harm to, the character or appearance of the Itchen Valley Conservation Area.”

Ten public comments were also received objecting to the proposal. One objector said that the application is absolutely “shocking” and will add more noise and pollution to the area.

They added: “I am sure there are ways for this airport expansion to proceed without this destruction of protected trees, which we have seen many times before, protected trees are not protected.”

Another resident said: “It would be a bit hypocritical that, after objecting to the runway extension, the council should now allow this action, which will facilitate the airport’s intentions of increasing air traffic along with more emissions over Southampton as they take off. So much for a ‘greener’ city.”

More comments said: “This will harm local wildlife and the conservation area. Why can’t the airport continue to manage these slow-growing trees in the way it has successfully done before, instead of this? This would cause harm to the individual trees from the huge ‘crown reductions’. It would cause harm to other trees within the wood resulting from so much removal of vegetation, exposing them to wind and more light.”

The planning authority will also consider a second planning application. However, in this case, it is proposed to fell 15 trees at the same location, of which officers recommend 14 are approved and one refused.

The reason for the felling is based on grounds of safety. However, the proposal includes provision for Monterey pines to be planted along the boundary of Marlhill Copse.

The council’s planning committee is set to decide both applications on Tuesday (February 20).

https://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/24126634.southampton-airport-wants-cut-marlhill-copse-trees/

.


See earlier:

 

Southampton Airport loses bid to work on trees at Marlhill Copse

2nd July 2023
By Jamie Shapiro  (Southern Daily Echo)

Marlhill Copse has been the scene of protests by environmentalists opposed to the felling of trees

Seven trees at Marlhill Copse – owned by Southampton Airport – have been protected by Southampton City Council.

The trees are protected by TPOs (Tree Protection Orders) so the airport has to apply to the city council for permission to do any work.

Certain work was outright refused on two of the trees; an ash and a pine – and limitations were put on all the others, including other applications on the ash and the pine.

A spokesperson from Southampton Airport attended the council’s planning meeting on June 27 to give his feedback on the tree officer’s conditions.

He said the airport ‘fully supports the recommendations’ – and explained why the work needs to be done.

“It’s very much about public safety,” he said.

“The airport has a duty of care as the owner of Marlhill Copse to ensure we keep the area safe for visitors, adjacent properties – as well as adjacent roads.

“Given the use of Marlhill by a lot of the public now we treat safety as we do at the airport as our number one priority for all members of the public.

“Since Marlhill has come under the airport’s ownership both access and safety of Marlhill has improved significantly.”

Marlhill Copse is a 16-acre of ancient deciduous woodland that is separated from the airport by the M27 motorway.

Late last year a planning inspector dismissed an appeal lodged by the airport after an application to fell 91 trees was rejected by the city council.

Airport bosses said the proposed felling amounted to good forestry but the scheme was contested by Airport Expansion Opposition Southampton (AXO), which has also fought plans to extend the runway.

The inspector said the existing trees were clearly visible from a number of vantage points in the city and formed part of a landmark.

He added: “Any reasons given to justify the proposed works need to be compelling.”

In 2020 the High Court refused to let the airport fell three pine trees.

https://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/23624427.southampton-airport-loses-bid-work-trees-marlhill-copse/

.

.

 

Read more »

Even with government money, Cardiff airport continues to make a loss

Cardiff Airport is continuing to make a loss as it struggles to attract passengers back to pre-pandemic levels.  It lost £4.5m in the year to March 2023 according to company accounts, after receiving a government grant of £5.3m. The company, which is owned by the Welsh government, is hoping to make more use of its land to raise money.Welsh government ministers are currently supporting the airport through a grant worth £42.6m over four years. Over the years it has received millions in government loans. In 2021 Labour ministers wrote off a £42.6m loan they had given the airport, leaving it to repay £26.3m by 2045. The number of  passengers using the airport in the year up to March 2023 was only 58% of the number using it before Covid. 
.

 

Cardiff Airport continuing to make losses

14.2.2024  (BBC)

By David Deans, BBC Wales political reporter

Cardiff Airport is continuing to make a loss as it struggles to attract passengers back to pre-pandemic levels.

It lost £4.5m in the year to March 2023 according to company accounts, after receiving a government grant of £5.3m.

The company, which is owned by the Welsh government, is hoping to make more use of its land to raise money.

The Welsh government said the airport is working to restore flights to the facility and diversify its business.

Cardiff Airport said it facilitates 4,000 jobs related to aviation in the Vale of Glamorgan, where it is located.

The accounts report the first full financial year after Covid travel restrictions were lifted, and the year that Wizz Air pulled out.

Welsh government ministers are currently supporting the airport through a grant worth £42.6m over four years.

Cardiff Airport to be loaned more taxpayers’ cash

Over the years it has received millions in government loans. In 2021 Labour ministers wrote off a £42.6m loan they had given the airport, leaving it to repay £26.3m by 2045.

Some 910,000 used the airport in the year to March 2023, which was 380% more than the previous 12 months.

However it was only 58% of the figures from the last reported pre-pandemic year.

The accounts record pre-tax losses for 2022-23 of £4.5m.

However Cardiff Airport also uses a different measure, EBITDA which records earnings before tax, interest and other items, to report on its financial performance.

Using EBITDA Cardiff Airport said it reported a profit of £863,000 in 2022-23. It says its underlying losses fell by £2.1m from the year before, when it received a £7.9m grant.

Rather than just relying on passengers, Cardiff Airport is hoping to increase its income by making more use of its runway and land.

The accounts say that the decision of Wizz Air to close its operations in early 2023 reinforces “the need to ensure that dependence on passenger activities for the majority of revenues is reduced”.

There were hopes Qatar Airways would recommence flying from Cardiff Airport by the end of last year, but it is yet to return to the airport.

In an interview with Walesonline, Cardiff Airport Chief Executive Spencer Birns said there was a “commercial negotiation taking place” and the airport was working on a resumption with Qatar “as soon as possible”.

‘Losses will only grow’
The Welsh Conservatives’ Natasha Asghar said: “We were told Qatar Airways were coming back in December, yet here we are in February and there is no sign of flights to Doha.

“Diversification of the airport has to be the utmost priority for Labour’s Transport Minister, if more operators do not come on board Cardiff Airport’s losses will only grow.”

A Welsh government spokesperson said: “We’re committed to maintaining an airport in Wales because of the benefits it brings to the Welsh economy and its local supply chain.

“The airport generates over £240m GVA to the Welsh economy, annually. The executive team continues to work hard to restore flights and diversify the business as part of its recovery from the pandemic.

“Commercial discussions remain ongoing between Cardiff Airport and the airline regarding the resumption of the Qatar Airways’ Doha service from Cardiff.”

‘4,000 jobs’
Mr Birns said Cardiff Airport drives “over £246m of direct economic benefit to Wales annually”.

“We facilitate just over 4,000 aviation-related jobs in the Vale of Glamorgan, by ensuring safe and secure airport operations across both the Cardiff and St Athan airfields,” he added.

“The largest employer, British Airways, has been operating from their maintenance centre in Wales for over 30 years.

“The airport typically drives over £246m of direct economic benefit to Wales annually. It’s a vital part of the nation’s economic infrastructure.”

Ryanair is due to add routes to five destinations in the summer of 2024, he added.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-68294274?


See earlier:

 

Anglesey to Cardiff PSO route scrapped by Welsh government – with the money going to public transport

The Welsh Government has scrapped its North to South Wales funded, PSO funded, air service, between Anglesey and Cardiff, saying it will instead use the annual £2.9m public subsidy to improve integrated public transport. The route had been suspended since March 2020 and will not be re-started. The Welsh Government said pre-Covid some 77% of people using route did so for work, but that a shift to hybrid and home-working has cut demand. There is far less demand for business flying.  Instead the money saved from running the service will be used to improve public transport in north Wales. This will benefit more people and help reach the Welsh net zero target by 2050. The decision follows an independent study commissioned by the Welsh Government into the carbon impact of the service on the environment. It said this shows the service had a more negative impact on the environment than any other form of travel between Anglesey and Cardiff. Often travel by rail was actually faster, door to door, than by plane.

Click here to view full story…

‘A total waste of Welsh taxpayers money’ What people really think about Cardiff Airport

Cardiff airport was bought by Welsh Government for £52m in 2013.
In March 2021, the airport was given another £42m of taxpayers’ cash, while another £42.6m it owed in debt to the Welsh Government was being written off.
It was valued at around £15m in 2021.  It continues making huge losses
 

Welsh Assembly Member questions £21m Cardiff Airport loan from taxpayer – on top of an earlier £38m loan, not yet repaid

Monmouth AM Nick Ramsay has criticised the Welsh Government for its ‘blank cheque’ approach to funding for Cardiff Airport. Mr Ramsay said: “The Welsh Government has committed to this new loan without providing any detail on what the money is for or when it will be paid back. This comes on top of a previous loan of £38 million in 2015 which has also yet to be paid back. Transport minister Ken Skates said the funding – in the form of a loan the airport will pay back – would support “ambitious plans for the future” including a target of two million passengers a year.  Mr Ramsay questioned the fairness of the loan, saying: “Businesses in my constituency do not receive this level of support from the Welsh Government and will understandably be questioning the fairness of these funding priorities.  We need far more clarity on what this money is being provided for and when we will see an end to what effectively amounts to a “blank cheque” for the Airport. … the public have the right to expect a coherent and rigid timetable for this money to be recovered.” But following the transport minister’s announcement, the Welsh Conservatives said Cardiff Airport would do better if it were re-privatised, where it would not need Welsh taxpayers to shoulder the financial burden.

https://www.airportwatch.org.uk/2019/10/welsh-assembly-member-questions-21m-cardiff-airport-loan-from-taxpayer-on-top-of-an-earlier-38m-loan-not-yet-repaid/

 

Read more »

Jenny Dawes granted permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal against the dismissal of her application for judicial review of the 2nd Manston Airport DCO.

On 7 February 2024, the Rt Hon Lord Justice Warby granted Jenny Dawes permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal against the dismissal of her judicial review application challenging the decision of the Secretary of State to make a development consent order (DCO) for the re-opening of Manston Airport.  In his Order, Lord Justice Warby reasoned that certain aspects of the High Court decision warranted appellate scrutiny and that the remaining arguments relating to “need’ were properly arguable with a reasonable prospect of success.  Those pushing for the re-opening of the airport claim that something that could be seen as “critical infrastructure” should not be delayed by legal challenge. In fact, there are serious questions about the “need” for this airport. In 2019 the Examining Authority ultimately concluding that a DCO (Development Consent Order) should not be granted as there was no need for it, with other factors also weighed against the development, including climate change.  As well as the need argument, the impact on Manston of the potential growth of other London airports must be considered.
.

 

Permission to appeal granted!

By Jenny Dawes

Feb.12th  2024

On 7 February 2024, the Rt Hon Lord Justice Warby granted me permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal against the dismissal of my judicial review application challenging the decision of the Secretary of State to make a development consent order (DCO) for the re-opening of Manston Airport.

In his Order, Lord Justice Warby reasoned that certain aspects of the High Court decision warranted appellate scrutiny and that the remaining arguments relating to “need’ were properly arguable with a reasonable prospect of success.

The following day, a partner at BDB Pitmans, (RSP’s solicitors) Mustafa Latif-Aramesh, posted a commentary on BDB Pitman’s website that was picked up and echoed in posts by RSP, Sir Roger Gale MP, Craig Mackinlay MP, and by airport supporters.

The thrust of these various attacks on the reasoned decision of an experienced judge of the Court of Appeal, is largely based in the argument that because Manston Airport is ‘critical infrastructure’, it shouldn’t be delayed by legal challenge. In the case of BDP Pitmans, Mr Latif-Aramesh further suggested that, since “people have had their fair go”, access to justice had been served and Aarhus costs protection (whereby the liability of the Claimant to pay the costs of the other side if they lose is capped at £5,000 for an individual and £10,000 in other cases, and the costs of the Defendant and Interested Party are likewise capped at £35,000 each) should no longer apply.

Sir Roger Gale MP, supported by Craig Mackinlay MP, is proposing to complain to the Lord Chancellor, seemingly on the basis that the Court of Appeal has dared to decide that there are valid legal questions to consider.

A DCO facilitates the compulsory purchase of land. Ann Gloag acquired Manston Airport – and its debts – in 2013. When early attempts to persuade her to sell it on failed, an American company, RiverOak Investment Corp (ROIC) tried to push the local district council to affect a compulsory purchase. When that failed, ROIC applied for a DCO before handing over to the newly formed RiverOak Strategic Partners Ltd (RSP).

The statutory examination of RSP’s application ran from January 2019 to July 2019. It is true that many people had their say through this process, which concluded with the Examining Authority ultimately concluding that a DCO should not be granted because there was no need case for Manston Airport and there were various factors that weighed against the development, including climate change.

The Secretary of State at the Department for Transport (DfT) did not agree with this expert advice but failed to give proper reasons why, when granting the first DCO in July 2020. Following an application for judicial review of this decision, the DfT conceded that the decision was unlawful and the DCO was quashed in February 2021. It is worth noting that, had RSP thought the Secretary of State’s decision was defensible, they could have continued to defend the decision in the High Court. They chose not to do so.

A second DCO was granted in August 2022. This time, the decision not only went against the recommendations of the Government’s own Planning Inspectors, but also against the opinion of the Independent Aviation Expert appointed by the Secretary of State.

To find support for the case for expansion where no independent advisors thought it existed, the Government relied on outdated and untested evidence collected by RSP’s expert and on a report submitted at the eleventh hour and not open to public comment.

So, while most of the evidence relating to this development has been subject to intense scrutiny, and on the basis of that evidence, the experts and government advisors concluded it should not go ahead, the Government clung to two pieces of evidence that were not opened to proper public scrutiny to get round this unwelcome advice. To put it another way, the essence of this case is that people have not had “their fair go”.

In these circumstances, it is hard to see how anyone can object to proper legal scrutiny through the courts, including the Court of Appeal. Especially given that the same processes are also available to the Defendant and to the Interested Party.

Opposition to the Secretary of State’s decisions has been funded by hundreds of people, some of whom could only afford to give £5 while a few have been able to contribute several thousand pounds. The one thing they all have in common is that they do not believe Manston Airport counts as “critical infrastructure“, nor that RSP’s proposals amount to “a significant investment in the National Interest”. Our opponents have deep pockets; the DfT is funded by the public purse while RSP is funded by anonymous “investors”.

Removing Aarhus costs protection would effectively amount to pricing individuals out the justice system. To do so would prevent a legitimate challenge being raised in the courts about an infrastructure project that is not supported by the Government’s own expert advisors. Such an argument would prevent access to justice, precisely what Aarhus was set up to avoid.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/support-judicial-review-of-sec

By Jenny Dawes

Feb. 7th, 2024

The Rt Hon Lord Justice Warby has granted permission to appeal on the “need” grounds but refused permission to appeal on the “climate change” issue.

The “need” grounds, approved by Mrs Justice Lieven in March last year, are:

Ground 1(a) which is that it (1) was procedurally unfair to rely upon the Azimuth Report without having the underlying evidence or submitting that evidence to scrutiny by Interested Parties (2) the reliance on the IBA* report which the IPs were not afforded the opportunity to comment on.
Ground 1(c) irrationality – i.e. that in determining whether there is a need for the development, the Defendant irrationally relied on qualitative, rather than quantitative evidence, despite having asked for quantitative need to be demonstrated in his Statement of Matters.
Ground 1(d) which is there was an error of law as to treatment of potential growth at other airports; the minister erred in law because he was unlawfully advised in the briefing that the potential for growth at other airports was not a material consideration.


See earlier:

 

Local campaign group is Campaign Against the Re-opening of Manston Airport  http://thecarma.co.uk/
and news about Manston (Kent) at   NO Night Flights  Blog site    

Application to appeal against Manston airport court decision denied

An appeal, by Ms Jenny Dawes, against a court decision not to quash the development consent order (DCO) for Manston airport has been rejected. A bid for a Judicial Review into the decision to give the Manston airport project the go ahead was dismissed last month but claimant, Ramsgate resident Jenny Dawes, then appealed that judgement.  Now Mr Justice Dove has refused the appeal application and notice of the refusal was sent by the Judge’s clerk on October 9th.  The DCO was initially granted in July 2020  when the Department of Transport approved the application to create an air freight hub at the site. Ms Dawes may now apply to the Court of Appeal for permission to appeal. This would ask the court to overturn Mr Justice Dove’s decision and his refusal to allow an appeal of that decision. Ms Dawes has 21 days to apply to the Court of Appeal for permission to appeal.

Click here to view full story…

JR application to stop Manston airport Development Consent Order denied by judge

An application for Judicial Review of the Manston airport DCO has been rejected by a judge. The DCO was initially granted in July 2020 when the DfT approved the application by RiverOak Strategic Partners to make the airport an air freight hub.  That was refused in the High Court in February 2021 following a legal challenge by Ramsgate resident Jenny Dawes and supporters which resulted in the DfT Secretary of State conceding the decision approval letter issued from the Minister of State did not contain enough detail.  The DCO was granted for a second time in August 2022 by then Transport Minister Karl McCartney.  In response Jenny launched a 2nd JR application, trying to stop the airport plans. The application was initially dismissed by Mr Justice Lane in January but then allowed on partial grounds in a review by Mrs Justice Lieven in March. The latest hearing was before Honourable Mr Justice Ian Dove in July. Jenny plans to appeal the judgement, and remains “firmly of the view that the government’s decision to proceed with Manston Airport, in the face of expert evidence to the contrary and in the context of the worsening climate crisis, is nonsensical.”

Click here to view full story…

Permission for a second judicial review granted, challenging plans to become a freight airport

23.3.2023,  By Michael Keohan, BBC News

A judge has granted a judicial review for plans to turn Manston Airport into an air freight hub.  The government granted permission for the project last year, after the High Court ordered the Department for Transport to reconsider its decision to give the go-ahead for the works in 2021.  The site’s owners said the development could face further delays. North Thanet MP Sir Roger Gale said the news was “bitterly disappointing.” At an appeal hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice, judge Mrs Justice Lieven granted the review on three points, and asked for one on climate change to be addressed in writing within a week.  This is the second time a development consent order for Manston Airport has faced a judicial review.  Tony Freudmann, the director of RiverOak, which owns the site, said the review could delay plans to get flights taking off in 2026.  Sir Roger said the announcement was “simply wasting time”. Manston Airport closed in May 2014.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-65054928

 

.

.

.

 

Read more »

Andrew Boswell’s legal case, needing the emissions from future use of infrastructure, could be vital

Environmental campaigner and retired scientist, Andrew Boswell, is challenging the granting of development consent for 3 major road building schemes near Norwich. The latest challenge in the ongoing case was heard in the Court of Appeal on 16th January.  The case is about the need for new infrastructure schemes, such as roads or airports, to have the increased carbon emissions from their operation taken into account, not merely the carbon from their construction – which is the current legal position.  Andrew Boswell claims former transport secretaries Grant Shapps and Anne-Marie Trevelyan’s allowing the schemes was unlawful as the DfT and National Highways failed to properly consider their cumulative emissions impact. His first  challenge to the granting of DCOs was heard in the High Court last May, then subsequently dismissed by Justice Thornton in July 2023. He was later granted permission by the Court of Appeal on 18 October, with the Judge noting that Boswell’s case “has a real prospect of success” and acknowledging that “assessment of combined carbon emissions has potentially wide implications”. A date for the outcome of the Appeal Court hearing has not yet been determined.
.

 

Norfolk roads legal case spells overhaul of emissions data capture and transparency

05 FEB, 2024

BY BELINDA SMART (NCE)

The findings of an appeal case concerning the carbon emissions of three major Norfolk road schemes could see significant changes to carbon emissions calculations and data transparency for UK infrastructure.

Environmental campaigner Andrew Boswell and his supporters’ latest challenge in the ongoing case was heard in the Court of Appeal on 16 January.

Boswell, a retired scientist, is challenging the granting of development consent for the rebuild of Thickthorn roundabout on the outskirts of Norwich and the dualling of stretches of the A47 from Blofield to North Burlingham and from Easton to North Tuddenham.

Boswell claims former transport secretaries Grant Shapps and Anne-Marie Trevelyan’s greenlighting of the schemes was unlawful on the grounds that the Department for Transport and National Highways failed to properly consider their cumulative emissions impact.

Boswell’s first challenge to the granting of DCOs was heard in the High Court last May, then subsequently dismissed by Justice Thornton in July 2023. However, that challenge was later granted permission by the Court of Appeal on 18 October, with the Judge noting that Boswell’s case “has a real prospect of success” and acknowledging that “assessment of combined carbon emissions has potentially wide implications”.

Boswell told NCE a case has to be considered strong to be granted permission to proceed to a full appeal hearing. “The bar is set fairly high in these cases,” he said. If the challenge is successful, the case could have implications for other major road schemes in the government’s roads programme, including the £10bn Lower Thames Crossing, he said.

Boswell noted that The Infrastructure Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017 require a cumulative assessment of the environmental impact of emissions.

He told NCE his own modelling showed that overall, cumulative greenhouse gas emissions from the three roads involved in the case were dangerously high. It showed the overall absolute greenhouse gas emissions in Norwich was estimated to be 0.4% to 0.5% of the whole sixth Carbon Budget – the volume of greenhouse gases the UK can emit during the period 2033-2037.

“If you think of that 0.5% as a percentage of the whole of the UK, those figures are very out of kilter with where we need to be,” he said, adding that a key issue in his campaign and court case was that data used to model emissions from traffic models are not transparent.

“If you look at this in light of the Fujitsu Horizon software scandal, the public does not have any way to validate or scrutinise those figures. One of the things I want to achieve from this is greater transparency in terms of modelling methodologies, which again has particular importance in light of the Post Office scandal.”

Between 1999 and 2015, 700 sub-postmasters were accused of theft, fraud and false accounting based on faulty Horizon data from Fujitsu procured by the Post Office. A key factor in the wrongful convictions was lack of transparency and proper scrutiny of data collection, Boswell said.

He added: “We make so many decisions based on the outputs given to us by data, but we have to be sure of that information.”

Boswell told NCE: “I’m not someone who thinks we must stop all roads, but given that we are in a climate emergency, we’re very off track.”

He cited a report from the Climate Change Committee on 30 January, which noted a “delivery gap” to the UK’s Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) of reducing emissions by 68% by 2030. That report said agreements made at Cop28 required “a sharper domestic response” and that achieving the 2030 NDC would require the rate of emission reductions outside of the electricity sector to quadruple from that of recent years. It said, “addressing these gaps in a transparent way remains one of the most important ways for the UK to show climate leadership”.

Following the appeal hearing on 16 January, Boswell said in a statement: “Government climate policies are failing, and especially for transport which is the UK’s largest carbon emitting sector. Each time a minister approves a new road scheme whilst stubbornly refusing to consider the full climate impacts, the national challenge of meeting our climate targets is severely undermined.”

Broadcaster Chris Packham and Sir David King, the former government chief scientific advisor, are both supporting the legal challenge.

Packham commented: “Dr Boswell is courageously challenging this unsustainable approach in the Court of Appeal by questioning the routine underestimating of the emissions caused by increasing traffic. I salute him and all those challenging Government climate policies in the courts.”

The case is also supported by the former chief scientific adviser to the UK government, Sir David King, who went on to become global Climate Crisis Advisory Group (CCAG) founder and chair.

King said the case indicated that “all decision making on infrastructure projects must be re-examined to see that investments today are fit for purpose over the coming decades”.

Lewis Hadler, speaking on behalf of Richard Buxton Solicitors, the law firm instructing Boswell’s representation at the Court of Appeal, said: “This is an important climate case that will have wider implications for the way in which cumulative carbon emissions are considered. Our client and the many people who have supported his case are right to expect proper scrutiny of this important aspect of the assessment of infrastructure projects and for the Government to be held to account for its commitments to address climate change.”

A date for the outcome of the Appeal Court hearing has not yet been determined.

https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/norfolk-roads-legal-case-spells-overhaul-of-emissions-data-capture-and-transparency-05-02-2024/ 

.


See earlier:

 

Norfolk A47: Climate activist wins right to appeal road projects

19th October 2023  (BBC)

Artist's impression of a traffic interchange
IMAGE SOURCE,NATIONAL HIGHWAYS

A campaigner objecting to three road schemes has won the right to appeal the legality of the project – at the second attempt.

Dr Andrew Boswell’s first legal challenge – against government planning permission for improvements to the A47 in Norfolk – was turned down by the Court of Appeal in July.

His case centres on carbon emissions caused by the road improvements.

The government has been asked to respond to the latest appeal ruling.

In granting Dr Boswell the right to appeal July’s decision, allowing the project to go ahead, Lord Justice Coulson said his appeal had “a real prospect of success”.

Artist's impression of the plans to dual the A47 at Blofield and North Burlingham
IMAGE SOURCE,NATIONAL HIGHWAYS

In a statement Dr Boswell said: “My determination to see carbon emissions properly assessed on road schemes has been vindicated.

“We are not seeing any real reduction in carbon pollution from UK roads, or Norfolk roads, and success in the Appeal Court would have wider implications for the government’s failing climate strategy, especially on transport.

“The legal case for appeal from my lawyers is very clear, and very strong, and we will now put all our energies into winning this case.”

The three A47 proposals signed off by the government last year were:

  • A new dual carriageway and junctions between Blofield and North Burlingham
  • Another dual carriageway and junctions between North Tuddenham and Easton
  • Redevelopment of the Thickthorn junction to the south of Norwich where the A11 meets the A47

Dr Boswell’s appeal is against the Secretary of State for Transport.

Dr Andrew Boswell, climate campaigner
IMAGE SOURCE,ANDREW BOSWELL
The ruling means climate campaigner Andrew Boswell can now appeal a decision allowing the A47 road projects to go ahead

The plans were first put on hold in December after a judge gave Dr Boswell leave to launch his action, which was funded by 1,500 donors.

It had been hoped the Blofield scheme would be completed in the summer of next year, with the Tuddenham upgrade opening in the winter of 2025.

The Thickthorn redevelopment was scheduled for completion in early 2025.

Chris Griffin, for National Highways in the East, said: “This is a disappointing and difficult turn of events for those who recognise and support the safety case to upgrade this very busy road.

“However, we respect the decision of the court, and will now take some time to consider our next steps ahead of the appeal against the Secretary of State for Transport’s decision to grant Development Consent Orders (DCOs) on three A47 improvement projects.”

Map showing the planned improvements to the A47
Image caption,

The plans will likely be delayed again as a result of the appeal

.

.

 

 

Read more »

How Carlyle’s bet on unsuccessful Southend airport did not work out

Southend airport, barely used now, is at the centre of an escalating dispute between one of the world’s largest private equity groups and an impoverished infrastructure company.  The $426bn investment firm Carlyle Group is demanding the early repayment of a £125mn loan made to the airport in 2021, when the aviation industry was reeling from international travel restrictions due to Covid.  Carlyle says it has made multiple attempts to resolve the conflict with Southend airport’s London-listed owner, Esken, and that the airport has breached the terms of the loan on multiple occasions. Known as Stobart Group until a rebranding in 2021, Esken emerged in 2007. Among its first deals was the bet on Southend Airport, which it bought in a 2008 agreement worth around £21mn. The airport was doing reasonably well until Covid, but then cash-strapped airlines consolidated around larger hubs, every airline left.  It cannot attract airlines. Nor can Esken’s other airport, Carlisle. Esken wants to sell Southend and repay shareholders.  Southend was never likely to succeed in getting many passengers.
.

 

How a US buyout giant’s bet on an empty London airport turned sour

By Philip Georgiadis and Will Louch in London and Euan Healy in Southend  (FT)

10.2.2024

Carlyle is pursuing the owner of London Southend through the courts over a £125mn loan

Southend was once hailed as the UK capital’s fastest-growing airport, processing more than 2mn passengers a year. Then the pandemic struck

On a rain-lashed Thursday afternoon in early February, the departure lounge at Southend Airport is empty. There are just two flights taking off from the terminal 36 miles east of central London that once aspired to break into the top tier of British aviation.

Away from the tarmac, the near-deserted site in Essex is at the centre of an escalating dispute between one of the world’s largest private equity groups and a penny stock infrastructure company.

The $426bn investment firm Carlyle Group is demanding the early repayment of a £125mn loan made to the airport in 2021, when the aviation industry was reeling from international travel restrictions.

Carlyle says it has made multiple attempts to resolve the conflict with the airport’s London-listed owner, Esken, and that the airport has breached the terms of the loan on multiple occasions.

But for Esken chair David Shearer, Carlyle’s motives are clear: to pick up a potentially valuable London airport at a knockdown price.

“We are just at an inflection point when you see the real value of this airport over the next two or three years, and they have concluded ‘Wait a minute, let’s take this airport’,” he said.

Known as Stobart Group until a rebranding in 2021, Esken emerged in 2007 through a reverse takeover deal that allowed Eddie Stobart — the motorway haulage company known for its distinctive red and green trucks, range of toys and even a fan club — entry into the London Stock Exchange.

Among its first deals was the bet on Southend Airport, which it bought in a 2008 agreement worth around £21mn.

Its plans for the site were ambitious: seeking to establish it as an alternative to busier local rivals like City Airport and Stansted, and at first, things progressed smoothly. The runway was extended and a new terminal opened in 2012, ready to profit from a surge in tourists during that year’s London Olympics.

After a decade of ownership, Esken’s thesis had been borne out. Southend was processing more than 2mn passengers a year and was ranked London’s best airport by consumer group Which? six times. A 2019 analyst note described the airport as “the jewel in the crown as London’s fastest-growing airport”.

John Strickland, an aviation consultant who advises regional airports, said Southend had “found its way”.

“They make the pitch as an overspill airport when others are full . . . They really went out aggressively to get the main airline protagonists in, but no sooner had they done that than Covid hit.”

As cash-strapped airlines consolidated around larger hubs, every airline left. Amazon logistics deliveries were left as Southend’s only flights.

But Carlyle saw an opportunity. The buyout fund manager had previous experience investing in airports, though on a slightly different scale to Southend. Carlyle is a significant investor in the development of a new terminal at New York’s JFK Airport.

The firm, founded by billionaires including David Rubenstein, initially approached Esken in April 2020, Shearer said. By August the following year, Carlyle agreed to provide a convertible loan of £125mn to the company giving it a nominal valuation of £400mn.

Things have not gone to plan. Despite commercial flights at the airport restarting in May 2022, Southend’s recovery has been far slower than rivals, which are back close to pre-pandemic passenger numbers.

Just 89,017 passengers travelled through the airport between February 2022 and February 2023. Southend expects to welcome 500,000 people this summer, a far cry from the 2mn in the year before the pandemic.

Southend’s core problem was a struggle to lure airlines back as larger and more established peers were also competing to rebuild their airline networks, Strickland said.

“That made it much harder for an airport that was relying on others being full to the gunnels,” he said.

Last year, Esken decided to cut its losses and put the airport up for sale, following a strategic review that had begun in autumn 2022. But a lack of progress has further frustrated Carlyle.

As relations soured, the private equity firm turned to the courts.

Last September, Carlyle filed a claim in the UK High Court alleging the airport was in breach of the loan agreement. The investment group is now seeking the repayment of nearly £200mn four years early, a figure that includes the original sum lent to Southend as well as the interest due up to maturity.

Under the loan agreement, Carlyle was supposed to approve capital expenditure by the company above a certain level, a person familiar with the terms said. After one outlay, the US investor deemed Esken to be in breach.

“There have been many repeated and continuing defaults of the convertible loan agreement by London Southend Airport since 2022,” Carlyle said. “Carlyle will take all necessary steps to vigorously defend its investment in light of the defaults that have occurred.”

Esken this week announced to the London Stock Exchange that it had investigated Carlyle’s claims and believed there had been no default.

Carlyle maintains it just wants to get its money back. “Carlyle has made numerous proposals to Esken and the airport to secure the airport’s long-term future, including up to £32mn of new funding,” the firm said.

For Esken, the airport remains the last remnant of an empire that once spanned haulage, energy and infrastructure.

The company is currently without a chief executive or a chief financial officer. Its market capitalisation has shrivelled to £4.3mn. Another investment in Carlisle airport has also been battered by the pandemic.

It plans to wind down and return money to shareholders after the airports are sold.

Shearer said if he was able to do that, then he would look back on the chapter with “a degree of pride”.

“My sole objective is to make sure the airport doesn’t close. But if Carlyle decided to adopt a scorched earth policy, who knows what might happen.”

https://www.ft.com/content/aa179561-47af-49de-93f8-edd2cf1c57d5

.

.

.

 

 

Read more »

Schiphol Airport’s new report demands a reduction of aviation demand, to cut CO2 emissions

On 24th Schiphol airport published new research, showing the need for a strong reduction of air traffic demand in order to halt climate heating. The airport proposes the ‘Polluter pays’ principle, with measures such as a worldwide kerosene tax and a tax for business class and private flights.  Schiphol’s research showed that at least a 30% CO2 reduction (when compared to 2019) is needed for Schiphol and European aviation to be on track in 2030. That’s more than the current Dutch goal of a 9% reduction. The research was commissioned by Schiphol to investigate what is needed in order to bring its CO2 emissions in line with the Paris Agreement, and it explains why “technological breakthroughs will come too late” and so-called “Sustainable Aviation Fuel” production has limits. It concludes that: “Demand management measures are necessary to align the aviation sector with the goals of the Paris Agreement.” One of the measures proposed is to convert the Dutch air passenger tax to a distance-based tax, and it should include long haul flights – which make up about 80% of emissions. Several other measures include expanding the European ETS to long haul flights.
.

 

Schiphol Airport’s new report demands a reduction of aviation

26 Jan 2024

From Stay Grounded

On 24th Schiphol airport published new research, showing the need for a strong reduction of air traffic in order to halt climate heating. The airport proposes the ‘Polluter pays’ principle, with measures such as a worldwide kerosene tax and a tax for business class and private flights.

“This report is a ray of light on the aviation horizon. It is rare that the industry, in this case one of the five biggest European airports, actually acknowledges the need for degrowth. We hope this opens the eyes of further airports and policy makers to the urgency of implementing the proposed measures”, says Magdalena Heuwieser from the global Stay Grounded network.

Schiphol’s research showed that at least a 30% CO2 reduction (when compared to 2019) is needed for Schiphol and European aviation to be on track in 2030. That’s more than the current Dutch goal of a 9% reduction.

The Netherlands Aerospace Centre (NLR) and research institute CE Delft were commissioned by Schiphol to investigate what is needed in order to bring Schiphol’s CO2 emissions in line with the Paris Agreement. The CE Delft report explains why “technological breakthroughs will come too late” and so-called “Sustainable Aviation Fuel” production has limits. It concludes that: “Demand management measures are necessary to align the aviation sector with the goals of the Paris Agreement.”

The following measures are proposed by Schiphol Airport:

  • Convert the Dutch air passenger tax to a distance-based tax. 20 percent of flights (long haul) are responsible for 80 percent of emissions. This tax would be in line with existing distance-based taxation in Germany and the UK.
  • Additional tax for business class and private flights.
  • Divert flight tax proceeds back to help the Dutch aviation sector accelerate its move away from fossil fuels. This would also create a competitive advantage for the development of sustainable aviation initiatives in the country.
  • Expand the European emissions trading scheme to include intercontinental flights. This currently only applies to flights within Europe.
  • Introduce a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) in Europe to prevent carbon leakage and maintain a level playing field.
  • Commit to a worldwide kerosene tax and blending obligation through the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).

“These measures are a great deal more realistic about the scale of change needed than most industry proposals about emissions are. Aviation is the pinnacle of climate injustice, with 1% being responsible for 50% of aviation emissions. It is mostly the global elite who are super-emitters, and they should pay for it via taxes, and extra charges for business class.

Still, these are mostly market-based measures, which fall short of actually reducing flights in a fair way: instead of a tax on private flights, we need a ban on private flights as well as short-haul flights, a frequent flying levy and clear caps on flights at airports. The tax revenues should be used to invest in reliable, sustainable train networks”, concludes Magdalena Heuwieser from Stay Grounded.

https://stay-grounded.org/schiphol-airports-new-report-demands-a-reduction-of-aviation/

.

Read the studies here:

.

.

.

 

Read more »

East Midlands Airport face criminal charges for River Trent pollution

Multiple criminal charges are being brought against East Midlands Airport Ltd by the Environment Agency for pollution entering the river system surrounding the airport. The prosecution follows a sustained campaign by the Derby Railway Angling Club, who have been working with Fish Legal to highlight chronic pollution of the Diseworth Brook and River Trent linked to discharges of de-icer used on aircraft and runways at the airport. East Midlands Airport Ltd is legally required to comply with an environmental permit issued by the Environment Agency for discharges of contaminated drainage water and provide data to the regulator to assess the impact of pollution coming from the airport on river water quality. The charges being brought relate to permit breaches and discharges of contaminated site drainage that took place in 2021 and 2022. The fishing organisations want revisions to the airport’s permit to better control emissions of polluting de-icers into nearby rivers and for investment to raise standards of treatment of contaminated water from the site in line with other airports.
.

East Midlands Airport face criminal charges for River Trent pollution

3rd January 2024 (Fish Legal)

Multiple criminal charges are being brought against East Midlands Airport Ltd by the Environment Agency for pollution entering the river system surrounding the company’s international airport near Castle Donington. The prosecution follows a sustained campaign by the Derby Railway Angling Club, who have been working with Fish Legal to highlight chronic pollution of the Diseworth Brook and River Trent linked to discharges of de-icer used on aircraft and runways at the site.

East Midlands Airport Ltd is legally required to comply with an environmental permit issued by the Environment Agency for discharges of contaminated drainage water and provide data to the regulator to assess the impact of pollution coming from the airport on river water quality.

The charges being brought against East Midlands Airport Ltd, disclosed to Fish Legal by the Environment Agency following a first hearing at Derby Magistrates Court, relate to permit breaches and discharges of contaminated site drainage that took place in 2021 and 2022.

Each winter, members of the Derby Railway Angling Club have witnessed and reported fungus that thrives in low oxygen conditions covering the riverbed downstream of East Midlands Airport’s discharge point.

The angling club, working with Fish Legal, have been seeking revisions to the permit held by East Midlands Airport to better control emissions of polluting de-icers into nearby rivers and for investment to raise standards of treatment of contaminated water from the site in line with other airports.

Geoff Hardy, Solicitor at Fish Legal, said: “We welcome this action by the Environment Agency, which send a strong message to the owners of East Midlands Airport that they can’t continue to run the operation of this profitable and expanding airport at the cost of the health of local rivers and wildlife. We are also heartened to see that in this case, the regulator has investigated the chronic pollution taking place and has taken tough enforcement action.”

He added: “We will be keeping an eye on the progress of this prosecution which follows sustained pressure from our member and Fish Legal. It doesn’t rule out the angling club taking its own legal action against East Midlands Airport Ltd in the event that the airport fails to clean up its act.”

Gary Cyster of Derby Railway Angling Club said: “I’m sure many people wouldn’t associate an airport with river pollution. But I have seen firsthand, over a long period, how a failure to properly treat water contaminated with chemicals sprayed on planes and runways in cold weather can seriously damage the ecology of local streams and rivers.

He added: “It’s been a very long time coming, but hopefully this criminal prosecution will force the owners of East Midlands Airport Ltd to start taking their responsibilities to the environment and the local community seriously.”

https://fishlegal.net/2024/01/03/east-midlands-airport-face-criminal-charges-for-river-trent-pollution/ 

.

.

.

 

Read more »

Huge new airport planned near Warsaw, for up to 100 million annual passengers

Poland is planning a £7 billion new airport, about 25 miles west of Warsaw, that will be central and eastern Europe’s biggest ever transport project.  Centralny Port Komunikacyjny (CPK) – which translates as ‘central communication port’ – has not yet had full construction permissions.  The first phase of building will be 2 runways and a terminal for up to 40 million passengers annually, due to be completed in 2028. They then want 2 more runways, to eventually handle 100 million passengers annually.  It aims to link air, rail and road transport and sprawl over ​​approximately 3,000 hectares.  Deputy minister Marcin Horala said: “It involves phasing the construction according to the current market needs.”  Approvals have been granted in recent months by Polish ministers and the Civil Aviation Authority and the next stage is to be granted approval for a decision on location and a building permit. Various sites had been considered, 20 years ago. Now Wikipedia says “the land for the airport was first acquired under the Voluntary Acquisition Program. By the time the program ends (April 7, 2023), over 1,300 owners have registered with plots with a total area of ​​almost 3,550 ha, which is 80% of the area for the construction of the airport”.
.

 

 

Poland’s anticipated massive £7bn new airport will be Europe’s biggest ever transport project

Centralny Port Komunikacyjny airport has been called a “cornerstone in the transformation of European transport” and hopes to see 100 million passengers annually.

By MIEKA SMILES, News Reporter (Express)
Jan 28, 2024

More about the airport on Wikipedia here

Poland has started work on a £7 billion new airport that will be [central and eastern] Europe’s biggest ever transport project.

Centralny Port Komunikacyjny (CPK) – which translates as ‘central communication port’ – has not yet had full construction permissions but work has started on the site 40km (25 miles) west of Warsaw.

The first phase of the airport will feature two runways and a terminal for up to 40 million passengers annually and is due to be complete in 2028. It’s then hoped that two further runways will be built serving 100 million customers annually.

The hub will link air, road and rail on an area of ​​approximately 3,000 hectares.

Polish president Andrzej Duda said the project was “one of the most important that Poland is carrying out in the 21st century”, reports New Civil Engineer.

The first phase of the airport will feature two runways and is set to be completed by 2028

He added: “We have to move forward continuously, and our direction is the CPK.

“The Second Polish Republic had its Gdynia, a port, a city and a shipyard, built on sand from a tiny fishing village. Now, we have a plan … construction of one of the largest airports and transport systems not only in Europe, but in the world. Do we need it? Yes!”

Deputy minister Marcin Horala said: “Our project is passenger-focused, tailor-made, forecast-based and flexible. It involves phasing the construction according to the current market needs.

“CPK is not just a Polish project, it is a key initiative for the whole of Europe. Its implementation is a cornerstone in the transformation of European transport, raising mobility standards on the continent.

“Thanks to CPK, the future of European transport looks brighter than ever before.”

Approvals have been granted in recent months by Polish ministers and the Civil Aviation Authority and the next stage is to be granted approval for a decision on location and a building permit.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1859371/poland-s-7bn-airport-europe-s-biggest

 

Read more »

WordPress › Error

There has been a critical error on this website.

Learn more about troubleshooting WordPress.