Colnbrook Views has submitted an FoI request after Slough Borough Council refused to allow publication of its agreement with Heathrow, made in February. Slough and Spelthorne are the only two councils openly backing a 3rd Heathrow runway. While the Council’s CEO is telling business leaders that Slough will be the premier place for businesses to relocate by 2019, there is a veil of secrecy over the nature of its agreement with the Airport , though some bits have been made public. Heathrow has apparently agreed on various conditions including a guaranteed £100,000 annual contribution by the airport for 15 years toward a new “strategic partnership”. Communities in Colnbook and nearby are not persuaded that they will get much benefit, though the Council CEO has said there will be more noise insulation, some “improved infrastructure, roads, bus services” etc. There appears to be little on mitigation for those most affected. However, the heads of agreement from February sets out a commitment to a range of measures to boost the wider Slough economy, improve access to the airport from Slough town centre, and support airport-related expansion beyond Heathrow’s extended perimeter and existing commercial zones in the borough.
Slough refuses to reveal details of secret agreement with Heathrow
Colnbrook Views yesterday submitted a Freedom of Information request after Slough Borough Council refused to allow publication of its agreement with Heathrow.
Slough CEO Ruth Bagley is telling business leaders today that Slough will be the premier place for businesses to relocate by 2019.
Slough Borough Council has thrown a veil of secrecy over the nature of its agreement with Heathrow Airport – insisting it has given “quite a lot of detail” already.
The agreement reached between SBC and Heathrow in February saw the Council commit to support Heathrow’s plans for expansion into the parish in return for measures including a guaranteed £100,000 contribution by the airport for 15 years toward a new “strategic partnership”.
We have given quite a lot of detail about what we’re discussing with Heathrow in our press releases
In its press release accompanying the agreement the Council said the new partnership would provide specific support and mitigation “for communities closest to the airport, including Colnbrook”. On being pressed by Colnbrook Views in February on what that entailed, Slough responded viaStreetlife to say:
“This includes the enhanced noise stuff – which is almost unlimited – but also improved infrastructure, roads, bus services (so people who are nearest don’t have to go on a convoluted journey to actually get there) and similar. Exact details still being thrashed out”.
However the 3-page “heads of agreement” signed on February 3, seen by Colnbrook Views and others in the community, actually has more far-reaching aims, and (so far) little if anything to do with mitigation for those most affected.
It sets out a commitment to a range of measures to boost the wider Slough economy, improve access to the airport from Slough town centre, and support airport-related expansion beyond Heathrow’s extended perimeter and existing commercial zones in the borough. Given its earlier statement in February that it would be looking for Heathrow’s help to redesignate green belt for housing that’s a double-whammy for any defence to the SIFE Pre-Inquiry which begins on Monday.
What the agreement does NOT include is any specific mitigation for those most affected communities beyond what has already been previously announced by Heathrow before the Airports Commission consultation ended (and subsequently dismissed by Sir Howard as less than “world class”).
And, disturbingly, half the first year’s Partnership funding is already earmarked to a project which will increase the misery for Colnbrook residents. We can’t say what that involves while Slough’s gagging order remains in place – but needless to say it covers a topic never too far from of our thoughts (given it dominates the local skyline).
The Council spokesperson said more information would be made available in due course:
We appreciate residents, particularly in Colnbrook, are keen to know as much about this as possible and we will be publishing more information as and when we can.
The full impact of the agreement – and the extent of Slough’s sellout of its easternmost ward – has to be seen to be believed. For this reason we are pushing for the document to be released at the earliest opportunity.
SBC’s refusal to share the document publicly, despite being widely “leaked” already, suggests the Council is worried about a backlash.
The Council decision came through just before close of business on Friday.
Slough Borough Council lists its financial demands on Heathrow, if it gets a 3rd runway
January 26, 2015
Slough Borough Council is supportive of a 3rd runway at Heathrow. With Spelthorne, they are the only two councils near Heathrow that do back a new runway. Slough has now submitted their council response to the Airports Commission consultation, but it includes many points on which the council wants extra funding, if there is a new runway. Slough Council expects to be compensated for loss of council tax from residential properties, loss of business rates from commercial land lost; and loss of business rates from closure of the Colnbrook incinerator. They want Heathrow to pay for insulation of public buildings, especially schools, throughout the whole of Slough; fixed noise monitoring stations across all affected areas of Slough, with the airport paying for their operation; and replacement of the Grundon incinerator, with no break in service, all at Heathrow’s expanse. They also expect extension of the Slough Mass Rapid Transit bus system to Heathrow, which has been halted due to lack of money. And Slough wants Heathrow to contribute towards the cost of air quality monitoring, recognising much is due to the airport. And the list continues …
Losses made by Prestwick airport have increased over the past year, since it was bought by the Scottish government for £1 in November 2013. The airport made a loss of £4.1 million in 2014/15 which was larger than the loss of £3.9 million the previous year. They said it was “another challenging year” but said there were “promising signs in a number of areas” including freight business and military activity. However, the loss of some Ryanair flights (to Glasgow Airport from October 2014) could be “more severely felt” in the current financial year. Pre-tax losses for 2014/15 stood at £8.9 million – almost double the £4.6m loss before tax the previous year. The airport’s loan from the Scottish government has also increased, rising from £4.5 million at the end of March 2014 to £10.8m at the end of March this year. That could increase further, with ministers having budgeted for a total of up to £25 million of loan cash for the airport by the end of 2015/16. (Presumably with little prospect of the taxpayer getting much of that back). The government hopes to return Prestwick to a profit before selling it back to the private sector, ministers have warned that could take time. By buying the airport, some 3,200 jobs were safeguarded. The number of passengers using Prestwick was 1,660,811 in 2010; 1,295,676 in 2011; 1,067,243 in 2012; and 1,145,561 in 2013 and 912,400 in 2014.
Prestwick accepted it had been “another challenging year” but said there were “promising signs in a number of areas”.
The annual reports from TS Prestwick Holdco Limited – the company set up up to acquire the airport on behalf of Scottish ministers – warned the loss of some Ryanair flights to Glasgow Airport could be “more severely felt” in the current financial year.
Pre-tax losses for 2014/15 stood at £8.9m – almost double the £4.6m loss before tax the previous year.
Return to profit
The airport’s loan from the Scottish government has also increased, rising from £4.5m at the end of March 2014 to £10.8m at 31 March this year.
That could increase further, with ministers having budgeted for a total of up to £25m of loan cash for the airport by the end of 2015/16.
The Scottish government took the airport into public hands after former owner Infratil earmarked it for closure.
While the government hopes to return it to a profit before selling it back to the private sector, ministers have warned that could take time.
The annual report said there had been “positive signs in a number of areas” at Prestwick, including freight business and military activity.
But it added: “The largest driver of revenue is linked to passenger volumes and the associated passenger spend.”
While it said load factors had increased, it added the number of flights has “seen an overall decline as total capacity has been reduced”.
The report warned: “This will be more severely felt in the next financial year to 31 March 2016 following Ryanair’s decision to open a base at Glasgow Airport from October 2014.”
Airport chief executive Iain Cochrane said: “Following another challenging year the airport continues to work to turn around the financial performance and there are promising signs in a number of areas, though growing the passenger business remains a challenge whilst air passenger duty exists at its current level.
“The airport is a frontrunner in the process to become the first designated UK spaceport and is continually looking for opportunities to maximise both income and the broad scope and opportunity offered as a strategic national asset.
“The recent appointment of four high-calibre non-executive directors brings considerable new knowledge and experience to help drive the business forward.”
A Scottish government spokesman said that by stepping in to save the airport, it had safeguarded 3,200 jobs and secured a vital infrastructure asset that contributes more than £61m annually to the Scottish economy.
He added: “These financial results are as we expected. As we made clear at the start of the acquisition process, this is a long-term investment. There is no quick fix to turn Glasgow Prestwick Airport around but there are real opportunities to improve in all areas of the business.
“Our investment is on a commercial basis and takes the form of loan funding. This attracts a market rate of interest in line with state aid rules. The recent Audit Scotland report confirmed that we are highly likely to generate a return on this investment.”
Scottish Conservative transport spokesman Alex Johnstone said the latest figures were a “massive blow for Scotland’s transport, business, infrastructure and tourism industries.
He added: “As one of Scotland’s busiest airports, Prestwick should be thriving not operating at a loss.
“When it was announced that the airport was to be publicly owned, we issued an warning at the time, stating that it would take an enormous effort to get the airport back in to profit.
“The Scottish government needed to have the courage to do what was necessary, rather than simply pouring money into something without accruing any benefit.”
Prestwick Airport to be sold to Scottish Government for £1 – and other failing regional airports look to business parks and housing
Infratil, which currently owns Prestwick Airport, has said the airport is expected to be sold to the Scottish Government for £1. The sale is due to be completed by Wednesday, 20 November. Infratil said the airport’s value had been “fully impaired” – effectively written off – after Prestwick and sister airport Manston in Kent were collectively valued at £11 million in March. Infratil bought Prestwick from Stagecoach in 2001 for £33m. Manston is being sold to Stagecoach founder Ann Gloag for an expected £400,000. Scottish Ministers are taking over Prestwick airport, which is losing £7m a year, to avert its closure and safeguard 1,400 jobs, including 300 at the airport. Infratil described its investment in the airports to have been “unsuccessful for Infratil” and that while such regional airports looked like a good investment 5 years ago, they now are not as they are reliant on “robust air traffic growth driving demand.” Other failing airports are looking to create business parks on their land, and housing – to try and make money out of them. http://www.airportwatch.org.uk/?p=18387
Glasgow Prestwick Airport may be given to the Scottish Government for nothing
October 11, 2013 The owners of Glasgow Prestwick, New Zealand company Infratil, have suggested they may give away the airport for nothing. The Scottish government has announced it is negotiating to buy the unprofitable airport, and hopes to conclude detailed negotiations with the company by 20 November. Scottish government said it was the “only realistic alternative to closure”. In a statement on its website, the company said it did not expect any transaction “to give rise to material proceeds”. Prestwick was put up for sale last March after heavy annual losses. Several investors expressed interest but no offers were made. Infratil has also been trying to sell its other unprofitable UK airport, Manston. In May 2013, Infratil announced that it had written down the value of both airports to £11m. Infratil has agreed to ensure the airport is kept fully open and operational during the negotiation process. In 2012 Prestwick had around 1 million passengers, compared to 2.4 million at its peak in 2005.
The SNP have 56 MPs, and each was only voted by an average of about 23,000 voters, which is a much smaller number than even Conservative MPs, and massively less than LibDems, UKIP or the Greens. Nevertheless. Nicola Sturgeon says the SNP will decide on whether a runway is built at Heathrow or Gatwick (they are not wise enough to appreciate no runway is needed). The SNP transport spokesman Drew Hendry said the party was “neutral” between Heathrow and Gatwick, while earlier it had been thought they favoured Heathrow. The SNP will “negotiate” with both airports, to see which gives them a better deal and they will vote for whichever gives Scottish people the cheapest flights, and “guaranteed connections with international flights” which Scotland has not been able to provide for itself. The SNP is aware that people in England, especially those to be adversely affected (or evicted from their homes) by a runway did not get the chance to vote for or against the SNP. The runway is largely an English matter. But Zac Goldsmith warned SNP MPs would be “crossing the line in terms of our democracy” if a deal is struck for cheaper flights for Scottish travellers in return for votes. (Combined anti-Heathrow party votes of LibDems, UKIP and Greens were 7.45 million. SNP votes were 1.45 million).
Nicola Sturgeon: Decision over third Heathrow runway will be decided by SNP vote
Nicola Sturgeon today blew the battle between Heathrow and Gatwick wide open by saying her 56 MPs at Westminster will vote for the airport that gives a better deal for Scots.
In an exclusive interview with the Standard, SNP transport spokesman Drew Hendry declared the party was “neutral” between a third runway at Heathrow and a second at Gatwick.
The SNP would decide which airport to back after hearing how each would answer Scottish demands for cheaper ticket prices and guaranteed connections with international flights.
“That does not mean we do not care about environmental issues or the effect it would have on people locally,” he said. “Whatever decision must be made in the most balanced way.
“But my primary job is to represent the people of Scotland.”
The prospect of Scottish MPs acting as kingmakers on a decision affecting millions of resident and businesses in the South-East is bound to infuriate some Londoners, but Mr Hendry said Scottish interests were also at stake.
It will dismay bosses at Heathrow who thought the SNP’s support for a third runway was guaranteed.
Heathrow lobbyists have been pressing for a free vote at Westminster to settle the matter, in the belief that Scottish and Northern Irish MPs would automatically back them on the basis of better connections offered by the UK’s hub airport.
But Mr Hendry said he would be negotiating with both airports and with the Government on behalf of Scots. “We are absolutely neutral at the moment,” he said. “The Airports Commission report has given Heathrow the nod but it specifically did not rule out Gatwick either.” Setting out Scottish demands he said: “The key thing for us is that for too long Scotland has done pretty badly in terms of maintaining routes from regional airports, particularly Inverness and even Aberdeen.”
Ticket prices were routinely higher for Scots going abroad via London, he said: “The first thing we will be looking for is a fair deal in terms of onward flights. It is costing Scottish consumers much more per head. Onward connections are much more expensive — the prices are ridiculous.”
Asked if his stance should alarm west London residents worried about noise and air quality, he said: “We share common purpose. We want to make sure we get the best overall solution.”
The SNP did not want people to “suffer undue noise” and was concerned about keeping the country’s carbon footprint as low as possible.
But Zac Goldsmith, Conservative MP for Richmond Park and frontrunner to be his party’s mayoral candidate, warned SNP MPs would be “crossing the line in terms of our democracy” if a deal is struck for cheaper flights for Scottish travellers in return for votes.
Mark Field, Tory MP for the Cities of London and Westminster, argued that the SNP should abstain on a Westminster vote on locating a new runway in the South-East.
The SNP obtained 1,454,436 votes at the May 2015 general election and they have 56 MPs.
The LibDems obtained 2,415,862 votes and they have 8 MPs.
UKIP obtained 3,881,099 votes and they have 1 MP.
The Greens obtained 1,157,613 votes and they have 1 MP.
Neither the LibDems, UKIP nor the Greens want a Heathrow runway. They had between them 7,454,574 votes. (By contrast, the SNP has 1,454,436 votes.)
And the SNP says it will be the deciding party in a vote on a runway??
Number of votes per MP
Just 25,970 voters on average elected each SNP MP.
Compared to 3.8 million voters for one UKIP MP.
And 1.1 million voters for one Green MP.
32,900 voters per English Conservative MP.
349,000 voters per Lib Dem MP.
and so on.
Comment by an AirportWatch member:
Always assuming the outcome would be decided by a free vote in the Commons which I have already read is highly unlikely particularly in view of Tory divisions over the issue of airport expansion.
The SNP’s former position was for expansion at Scottish airports;
“Meanwhile, the Scottish government has said the focus should be on the continued development of direct long haul services to and from Scotland and the north of England.
Air Passenger Duty
Scotland’s First Minister Alex Salmond argues that will require major changes to the way Air Passenger Duty (APD) is levied.
The aviation industry says reducing or abolishing APD would strengthen the business case for new international routes from Scotland.
Mr Salmond said: “We’re actually inhibited by the concentration of international flights at Heathrow, where they can’t cope because of huge congestion problems.
“It would be far better to have an effective devolution of Air Passenger Duty which would allow us to attract more direct international flights into Scotland and, indeed, the north of England.”
(BBC News 12/11/2014)
The total number of flights (ATMs) using Birmingham airport was around 89,000 in 2014, compared to around 88,000 in 1998. The number rose to a peak of around 116,000 in 2003. But due to larger planes and higher load factors, the actual number of flights has fallen in recent years. See below. The airport handled 6,607,000 passengers in 1998. In 2014, the number of passengers using Birmingham airport was about 9,698,340 (6.4% up on the 9,118,570 in 2013 – and 46.8% more than in 1998). By comparison, the growth in air passengers across all UK airports last year was 4.3%. Birmingham says the number of passengers in June was 2.8% above the number in June 2013, and the number in May was 1.3% higher than in May 2014. The airport says there was an increase of 20% in long haul routes compared to June 2014, and “demand continues to grow in this market.” The airport CEO Paul Kehoe said: “We’re expecting our long-haul traffic to increase further in the coming months, following the recent launch of direct charter flights to Beijing, which will operate throughout the summer with Hainan Airlines.” Most passengers are on European leisure flights. A single runway airport could handle over 30 million passengers per year, so Birmingham is very far below its capacity.
Record June as Birmingham Airport welcomes 1m passengers
21 JULY 2015 (Birmingham Post)
BY GRAEME BROWN
A total of 988,916 people used the airport across the month, which represented a 2.8 per cent rise on June last year
Birmingham Airport has enjoyed the busiest June in the its history after almost a million passengers passed through.
A total of 988,916 people used the airport across the month, which represented a 2.8 per cent rise on June last year.
Long-haul traffic experienced significant growth in June, up 20 per cent compared to the same period last year, according to Paul Kehoe, Birmingham Airport’s chief executive.
He said: “Throughout 2015, we’ve seen passenger records smashed almost on a monthly basis and June was no different. It was particularly pleasing to see long-haul traffic increase by 20 per cent too, compared to the same period last year; a clear sign that demand continues to grow in this market.
“We’re expecting our long-haul traffic to increase further in the coming months, following the recent launch of direct charter flights to Beijing, which will operate throughout the summer with Hainan Airlines. The route is proving to be incredibly popular with inbound and outbound passengers, offering plenty of encouragement for the future.”
June’s passenger numbers mean the Airport has now achieved five record-breaking months in 2015, as January, March, April and May also saw a record number pass through the terminal.
A rise in demand for scheduled routes to Keflavik, Perpignan, Amritsar, Madrid and New York JFK boosted the statistics.
January 549 150 ( 611 171 )
February 577 627 ( 629 541 )
March 654 376 ( 736 735 )
April 759 568 ( 770 468 )
May 893 874 ( 904 484 )
June 960 506
July 1 049 499
August 1 103 605
Sept 1 007 684
Oct 877 123
Nov 646 275
Dec 621 457
Birmingham Total Passengers in 2014 9 698 349 (6.4% up on 2013)
Birmingham Total Passengers in 2013 9 118 579
Airport passengers for the UK as a whole rose by about 4.3% in 2014, compared to 2013)
Record Passenger Numbers for Birmingham Airport in May
25 June 2015
Birmingham Airport has recorded the busiest May in its history, as over 900,000 passengers passed through the terminal last month.
Latest figures reveal the Airport handled a total of 904,860 passengers in May, beating its previous record for the month set in 2014 by 1.3%, according to Birmingham Airport.
May’s passenger numbers mean the Airport has now achieved four record-breaking months in 2015, as January, March and April also saw a record number pass through the terminal.
Scheduled traffic in May accounted for 81% of the total figure, with charter passengers making up the remaining 19%
Paul Kehoe, the airport’s chief executive, said: “May has been another great month for Birmingham Airport in 2015, seeing records smashed yet again. Passenger numbers in May were given a significant boost thanks to the launch of new routes to New York JFK with American Airlines and Barcelona with Spanish airline Vueling, both offering a British Airways codeshare, allowing customers to redeem BA air miles and Avios points.
“Last month represents the fourth record-breaking month this year, which tells me the demand to fly from Birmingham is getting stronger and stronger. This summer alone, we’re getting ready to welcome a series of 34 direct charter flights between Birmingham and Beijing with Hainan Airlines, as well as Emirates introducing a third daily service to Dubai.”
One hundred percent growth was seen on scheduled routes to New York JFK, Madrid, Athens, Reykjavik and Rome, as well as growth to La Rochelle (+92.5%), Guernsey (+80.3%) and Amritsar (+68.9%).
Charter services to Catania (+185.2%), Cancun (+114.5%) and the Greek island of Lesbos (+100%) also experienced significant growth.
Writing in the Guardian, Sandra Laville reports on how some residents of the Heathrow villages, facing eviction and loss of their homes and communities, refuse to be cowed by the airport threat. Some, who have never broken the law before have been forced by circumstances not of their choosing, to adopt civil disobedience as they fight to save their way of life. Some of the 13 activists from Plane Stupid, who cut through Heathrow’s perimeter fence and occupied land close to the northern runway last week came from Sipson. They felt their actions were justified not only because of the homes to be bulldozed and the community to be lost, but because of the hugely increased carbon emissions that a runway would cause. They will appear at the Uxbridge magistrates’ court on 19th August, accused of aggravated trespass. One commented: “I find the whole idea of direct action and of being arrested very stressful. But I feel it has to be done.” On the 20th July local builder, Neil Keveren (previously chairman of anti expansion group, SHE) went to court for his action in blocking the access tunnel to Heathrow Terminals 2 and 3 for 20 minutes recently. He was given a £895 fine. Some think this may become like the long battle for Greenham Common.
Villagers turn to civil disobedience in battle against third runway at Heathrow
Faced with destruction of Harmondsworth and other villages, residents began taking matters into their own hands – and things escalated sharply
With its 11th century church, listed buildings and 15th century timber barn managed by English Heritage, Harmondsworth is a paean to reverence, tradition and antiquity.
Faced with destruction of their village as they know it, to make way for a third runway at Heathrow, however, some residents have begun to adopt tactics such as civil disobedience as they fight to save their way of life.
That campaign escalated sharply last Monday, when 13 individuals cut through the patrolled perimeter fence around Heathrow in the early hours of the morning, chained themselves together and lay down on the northern runway in the name of the campaign group Plane Stupid, closing the runway for three hours and cancelling 13 flights.
Harmondsworth could be the Greenham Common of a generation say protesters as court dates set
20 JULY, 2015 (Colnbrook Views)
As court dates are set for protesters involved in the two separate incidents at Heathrow Airport in recent weeks, activists warn that Harmondsworth will be the Greenham Common of a generation and the defining battleground for “a fight against catastrophic climate change”.
The Guardian yesterday reported that protesters from Plane Stupid arrested following the protest on the northern runway last Monday will appear at Uxbridge Magistrates’ Court on August 19.
Twelve protesters were arrested in total, charged with “aggravated trespass” and “entering a security restricted area of an aerodrome”, according to the paper.
During the protest Police told the activists they could face civil claims from the airport running into millions of pounds for the disruption, but the airport appears to be taking a softly softly approach. Heathrow’s vast media machine completely ignored the protest, posting only a brief note about the disruption itself.
Neil Keveren, previously chair of Stop Heathrow Expansion, who carried out a separate unofficial protest in the access tunnel to Terminals 2 and 3, appeared in court today. Keveren said he had never broken the law before but felt it had to be done.
They took away our democratic choice by kicking the Davies commission decision into the long grass before the election.
He spent six hours in a police cell following his protest.
On 20th July, the day before Parliament broke for its summer recess, campaigners from national organizations and local groups opposed to expansion at Heathrow packed a holiday suitcase for David Cameron’s summer holiday – with material they believe he should read and view on his holiday before he makes up his mind on a 3rd runway. They were joined by the new Twickenham MP Tania Mathias and the veteran opponent of Heathrow expansion, Baroness Jenny Tonge. Organised by HACAN, some of those at the event were campaigners from Greenpeace, FoE, CBT, AEF, SHE , RHC and CAIAN. Items packed into the suitcase included “Heat,” a climate change book by George Monbiot; a video showing Harmondsworth; the most recent IPCC report; AirportWatch briefings on economics, noise, carbon emissions, and air quality; maps showing areas of London to be impacted by flight paths from a 3rd runway; a “No Ifs, No Buts, No third runway” beach towel; and John Stewart’s book “Why Noise Matters.” The case was then wheeled off in the direction of Downing Street. HACAN chair John Stewart said, “This diverse range of groups gives a flavour of the formidable opposition David Cameron will face if he gives the green light to a third runway.”
On 20th July, the day before Parliament broke for its summer recess, campaigners from national organizations and local groups opposed to expansion at Heathrow packed a holiday suitcase for David Cameron’s summer holiday – with material they believe he should read and view on his holiday before he makes up his mind on a third runway.
They were joined by the new Twickenham MP Tania Mathias and the veteran opponent of Heathrow expansion, Baroness Jenny Tonge.
The items for David Cameron
Items packed into the suitcase included “Heat,” a climate change book by George Monbiot; a video showing Harmondsworth, the village facing destruction if a third runway goes ahead; the most recent IPCC report; AirportWatch briefings on economics, noise, carbon emissions, and air quality; maps showing areas of London to be impacted by flight paths from a 3rd runway; a “No Ifs, No Buts, No third runway” beach towel; and The Transition Handbook. HACAN, the campaign body which had organized the event outside Parliament, donated the book “Why Noise Matters.”
Beach towel, from Greenpeace
AEF (Aviation Environment Federation) with a reminder about the IPCC report
Represented at the event were campaigners from Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, Campaign for Better Transport, AirportWatch, the Aviation Environment Federation, HACAN, Stop Heathrow Expansion, the Richmond Heathrow Campaign, Ealing Noise Action Group, Teddington Action Group and CAIAN (which represents many communities west of the airport).
Having put their reading suggestions in the suitcase for the Prime Minister’s holiday reading, it was they wheeled off in the direction of Downing Street.
HACAN chair John Stewart said, “This diverse range of groups gives a flavour of the formidable opposition David Cameron will face if he gives the green light to a third runway. This is a fun event but with a serious message. We are saying loudly and clearly to the Prime Minister that there is widespread and diverse opposition to a third runway and that he would do well to spend at least part of his summer holidays reflecting on the case against expansion of Heathrow.”
An abandoned Spanish airport which cost about €1.1bn to build has been sold for €10,000 (about £7,000) in a bankruptcy auction. The deal includes the runway, hangars, the control tower and other buildings. However, the terminal and parking facilities were not part of the sale. Ciudad Real’s Central airport, located about 235km south of Madrid, became a symbol of the country’s wasteful spending during a construction boom that ended with the financial crisis of 2008, the year the airport opened. It was meant to be an alternative to Madrid’s Barajas airport. The operator of the airport went bankrupt in 2012 after it failed to draw enough traffic. Ryanair used it briefly. A group of British and Asian international investors, Chinese group Tzaneen International, tabled the single bid in Friday’s auction. There was no other interest. The receiver had set a minimum price of €28 million. If no better bid is received by September, the sale will go through. Tzaneen reportedly plans to invest €60 – €100 million in the airport and make it a cargo hub. The offer is for the airport infrastructure only, not adjacent land. It has a long runway and was designed to handle 2.5 million passengers per year. It is thought that Chinese companies want to make it their “main point of entry into Europe”.
Billion-dollar Spanish airport sold for 10,000 euros
Chinese company only bidder in auction for Ciudad Real’s Central airport, whose operator went bankrupt in 2012.
An abandoned Spanish airport which cost about 1.1bn euros ($1.2bn) to build has been sold for 10,000 euros in a bankruptcy auction.
Ciudad Real’s Central airport, located about 235km south of the capital Madrid, became a symbol of the country’s wasteful spending during a construction boom that ended with the financial crisis of 2008, the year the airport opened.
The operator of the airport went bankrupt in 2012 after it failed to draw enough traffic.
Chinese group Tzaneen International tabled the single bid in Friday’s auction, Spanish news agency Europa Press said.
The receiver had set a minimum price of 28m euros. If no better bid is received by September, the sale will go through, the news agency said.
Tzaneen International reportedly plans to invest up to 100m euros in the airport and make it a cargo hub. The offer is for the airport infrastructure only, not adjacent land.
Central has one of Europe’s longest runways and was designed to handle 2.5 million passengers a year.
The construction was heavily funded by the Caja Castilla La Mancha savings bank, the first of Spain’s troubled savings banks to be bailed out in 2010.
Another largely unused airport and symbol of wasteful spending is Castellon, on Spain’s eastern coast. It cost about 150m euros and opened in 2011.
British investors buy Spain’s €1bn Don Quixote airport for just £7,000
Ciudad Real airport, in the central Castilla-La Mancha region, has been closed since 2012, despite opening only four years prior to closure.
The regional authorities raised an estimated €1billion in private investment to build it. They had hoped it would draw millions of visitors each year to Ciudad Real and the surrounding area, which is known as the home of Miguel de Cervantes’s fictional knight Don Quixote.
But the airport itself soon became seen as a quixotic venture, drawing just 33,000 travellers in 2010.
The airport was previously made available at a price of €80 million, with that sale expiring on July 10 without any takers, allowing lower offers to be made.
The purchaser is Tzaneen International, a group of Britsh and Asian investors, who were the only group to have made an offer in an auction.
Although three weeks remain for counter offers, little interest has been reported in the airport on the part of other companies.
The deal will include the landing strip, hangars, the control tower and other buildings. However, the terminal and parking facilities were not part of the sale.
Despite paying such a low price for the facilities, Tzaneen International said in a statement that it plans to invest between €60m and €100 million in the airport and that “several Chinese companies are interested in making it into their main point of entry into Europe”.
Initially, Ryanair was the only carrier to use it, before abandoning the facility. The regional government then subsidised three flights a week by low-budget airline Vueling before it too pulled out.
Sad story of Ciudad Real Airport – a massive white elephant – that sits abandoned in central Spain
February 18, 2013
Ciudad Real International Airport in central Spain opened in 2009 to much hype and fanfare. The airport, which was meant to handle overflow from Madrid’s Barajas airport, cost some €1.1 billion to build, including a large amount of public funding for infrastructure. The site is next to a town of just 72,000 people on the sparsely populated Castilian plain and lies more than 140 miles from Madrid. It was even named after Don Quixote, the deluded Castilian gentleman of Cervantes’s famous novel, before wiser heads renamed it simply “Central”. Although launched by local private investors, the project has been fulsomely supported by the regional government of Castilla La Mancha and was financed by CCM, the regional savings bank, or caja. There were initially intended to be huge Don Quixote themed attraction nearby, which did not materialise. Only Vueling flew there. The airport closed, as a massively loss-making white elephant, in April 2012 and now sits almost abandoned – except for some car testing.
Airports are usually noisy places, but at Ciudad Real in central Spain the silence
on a weekday morning is broken only by the sound of birdsong.
As Spain struggles to cut its budget deficit to avert another eurozone sovereign
debt crisis, and as its politicians prepare for local elections, Ciudad Real Central
– one of the country’s largest and most modern international airports – has become
a monument to the financial folly born of the property boom and exacerbated by
“It’s the silent airport,” says an airport employee, finishing her coffee in
the cavernous departure hall. It is a Thursday, and there are no passengers because
not a single flight is scheduled to depart.
“An airport in the middle of the desert. It’s scandalous,” says Lorenzo Bernaldo
de Quirós, partner at Freemarket Corporate Intelligence and a fierce critic of
what he sees as excessive devolution leading to waste of public money. “Every
province wants an airport, just as they all want a university.”
One airline – Vueling, the low-cost arm of Iberia – runs two flights a week to
Paris and four to Barcelona, with help from regional government subsidies. In
winter, private jets occasionally bring wealthy hunters to shoot partridge and
To critics of Spain’s devolved system of government, with its 17 autonomous regions,
50 provinces and 8,100 municipalities, the airport was a predictable but avoidable
The site is next to a town of just 72,000 people on the sparsely populated Castilian
plain and lies more than 140 miles from Madrid. It was even named after Don Quixote,
the deluded Castilian gentleman of Cervantes’s famous novel, before wiser heads
renamed it simply “Central”.
The airport, which has been in bankruptcy proceedings since mid-2010, officially
cost €450m ($620m), but the bill reaches about €1bn when publicly funded infrastructure
and running costs so far are included.
Although launched by local private investors, the project has been fulsomely
supported by the regional government of Castilla La Mancha and was financed by
CCM, the regional savings bank, or caja. In 2009, CCM became the first Spanish caja to
be rescued during this economic crisis. It received €3bn in aid from a deposit
guarantee fund, now the airport’s largest shareholder, and was absorbed in a merger
backed by €1.5bn from the public bank rescue fund.
“In Spain, given the tremendous growth of recent years, people thought that anything
could be done, that it would be easy and quick and would make lots of money,”
says Francisco Cañizares, a municipal councillor in nearby Ciudad Real and a member
of the right-wing Popular party (PP), which opposes the Socialists currently in
charge of the central government and the region of Castilla La Mancha.
“In principle it was a private airport, but the ones who put in most money were
public, essentially CCM.”
PP leaders, who are expected to do well in this year’s regional elections against
their Socialist rivals, sense the public mood is turning against waste and bureaucracy
in Spain’s multi-tiered system of government. “Spain can’t compete in Europe or
the world with autonomous regions aspiring to become mini-nations,” said José
María Aznar, former PP prime minister, recently.
Bond market investors appear to have accepted that Spain has brought its central
government deficit under control, but they are now focusing on the growing burden
of regional and municipal debt.
When new regional governments take over after the May elections, says Mr Bernaldo
de Quirós, they are likely to find the accounts in worse shape than previously
believed, as happened in Greece in 2009 and in the Spanish region of Catalonia
at the end of last year. “People will question the reliability of the public accounts,”
Defenders of the status quo insist Spain is no worse than most other European
countries. “The level of development that Spain has now would have been impossible
without the autonomous regions, because it’s impossible to run a country with
the centralised territorial system of the 19th century,” says Javier Burón Cuadrado
of law firm Cuatrecasas, Gonçalves Pereira, who advises the association of municipalities
Even the airport has its defenders. They point out that it was conceived when
Madrid’s Barajas airport was congested, was supposed to have a high-speed railway
station, and was opened in 2008 in the depths of the economic crisis. José María
Barreda, Socialist premier of Castilla La Mancha, insists the airport’s moment
will come, and denies it was a “get-rich-quick scheme”.
Meanwhile, tranquillity reigns at the sleepy airport. There is, briefly, a noise
like that of an approaching aircraft. But it is only the whoosh of a high-speed
train on its way from Seville to Madrid.
Heathrow has got some 270 business people, many from companies with a clear direct financial interest, to write an open letter to David Cameron to ask him to get on quickly with building a Heathrow runway. They make the usual claims about the lack of a runway holding back the growth of UK business across the UK, and of limiting future investment in the UK. The actual connection between the runway, and all these good things, is never clearly set out, and the runway would in reality largely be used for holidays or visiting friends and family. The business people say in their letter that the runway would ” improve connectivity both within and outside the UK, driving exports and stimulating growth across the country.” Curiously, they never mention stimulating imports. They want the UK to be macho and show it is willing and able to “take the steps needed to maintain its position as a well-connected open trading economy in the 21st century” and “doing nothing will put Britain’s economy in a perilous position.” It claims “a majority of people in Heathrow’s local communities” back the runway. No evidence for that is given. Meanwhile Heathrow is encouraging passengers to send an easy-to-fill-in-with-no-effort postcards, to David Cameron, asking him to expand Heathrow immediately. Daniel Moylan tweeted: “Move fast on Heathrow? Before we work out the cost to taxpayer and passenger and the harm to residents? Got it.”
Over 270 business leaders unite to call on the Prime Minister to back Heathrow expansion
19.7.2015 (Heathrow airport press release) – Business chiefs urge the Prime Minister to back the clear and unanimous recommendation from the Airports Commission to expand Heathrow
– Lack of capacity at Heathrow is holding back the growth of UK businesses across the country and limiting future investment in the UK
Over 270 of Britain’s business leaders signed an open letter to the Prime Minster demanding the Government implement the Airports Commission’s clear and unanimous recommendation to expand Heathrow.
The letter – sent from signatories ranging from FTSE chiefs and Britain’s key business and trade associations, to leading global brands and SMEs spanning the whole of the UK – sends a clear message that UK business growth and productivity is being held back by lack of capacity at Heathrow. As the UK’s biggest port and only hub airport, businesses rely on Heathrow’s global network to reach fast-growing emerging markets – more capacity will improve connectivity both within and outside the UK, driving exports and stimulating growth across the country.
Further delay will be increasingly costly and will be seen, nationally and internationally, as a sign that the UK is unwilling or unable to take the steps needed to maintain its position as a well-connected open trading economy in the twenty first century.
The Prime Minister set up the Commission in 2012 to find the best way to maintain the UK’s status as an aviation hub. The business leaders signing the letter join SMEs from up and down the UK, politicians from across the political divide, major trade unions and a majority of people in Heathrow’s local communities in backing Heathrow’s expansion plans.
The choice the Prime Minister faces is clear – action on Heathrow is the only way to secure Britain’s future as a powerhouse in the global economy, whilst doing nothing will put Britain’s economy in a perilous position.
Heathrow CEO John Holland Kaye said:
“The Prime Minister showed leadership in establishing an independent Airports Commission. It unanimously concluded that expanding Heathrow is the best way of securing Britain’s future as a powerhouse in the global economy.
Now the Prime Minister has the opportunity to show he is serious about delivering Britain’s long-term economic plan by listening to businesses from across the UK and backing Heathrow expansion. This debate has never been about a runway – it is about the future of our country. Let’s get on with it.”
— ENDS —
Notes to Editors:
The full letter and signatory list is copied below:
The Rt Hon David Cameron MP
10 Downing Street
17 July 2015
Dear Prime Minister,
The independent Airports Commission has made a clear recommendation that Heathrow is the right location for airport expansion. Heathrow’s new expansion plan ensures this can be done sustainably. The Commission’s final recommendation follows nearly three years of extensive consultation, evidence gathering and analysis. Now your Government must support this recommendation to expand Heathrow.
Heathrow puts Britain right at the heart of the global economy and has helped it become one of the world’s great trading nations.
But Heathrow – the UK’s only hub airport – has been operating at capacity for the past decade. This lack of hub capacity is holding back the growth of UK businesses who want to fly directly to emerging markets; trade and transport their goods via air freight; create more jobs and connect to the UK’s regions.
The Commission is clear: further delay will be increasingly costly and will be seen, nationally and internationally, as a sign that the UK is unwilling or unable to take the steps needed to maintain its position as a well-connected open trading economy in the twenty first century.
Now is the time for Government decision and action. Your Government must support UK businesses by implementing the Airports Commission’s recommendation and expand Heathrow.
More than 270 business leaders have called on David Cameron to end years of indecision and give the go-ahead to a third runway at Heathrow.
The chairmen of FTSE 100 engineering giant Babcock International, British Land and the AA have put their names to an open letter from Heathrow chairman Sir Nigel Rudd urging ministers to support expansion of the west London airport.
The Prime Minister is under growing pressure to approve the measure after the government-appointed Airports Commission earlier this month made a “clear and unanimous” recommendation for a new runway at the site. Mr Cameron has promised a decision before 2016.
“Now is the time for government decision and action,” the letter says. “Your Government must support UK businesses by implementing the Airports Commission’s recommendation and expand Heathrow.”
The commission, led by Sir Howard Davies, spent almost three years and an estimated £20m deliberating how to tackle the impending aviation capacity crisis in the south-east of England. Heathrow is effectively fulland Gatwick is close behind. The commission reviewed more than 50 proposals before concluding that another runway at Heathrow was the “best answer”.
Company executives including easyJet boss Carolyn McCall, O2’s Ronan Dunne, and Ted Baker chief operating officer Lindsay Page are now encouraging ministers to act on the recommendation. They are joined by the heads of business lobby groups and trade associations including Sir Gerry Grimstone, the chairman of TheCityUK, who is also the chairman of Standard Life, and Paul Drechsler, the incoming president of the Confederation of British Industry.
Sir Mike Rake, the outgoing deputy chairman of Barclays, has also signed the letter in a personal capacity, as have a host of small businesses across the UK.
“Heathrow puts Britain right at the heart of the global economy and has helped it become one of the world’s great trading nations,” the letter says. “But Heathrow – the UK’s only hub airport – has been operating at capacity for the past decade. This lack of hub capacity is holding back the growth of UK businesses that want to fly directly to emerging markets; trade and transport their goods via air freight; create more jobs and connect to the UK’s regions.”
The runway is opposed by prominent Conservatives Boris Johnson and Zac Goldsmith, and five Cabinet ministers are also thought to be against expansion. Furthermore, backing Heathrow would leave Mr Cameron open to accusations that he has broken his “no ifs, no buts” promise in 2009 to block a third runway.
Heathrow also faces competition from Gatwick, which continues to campaign for another runway of its own. A second landing strip at the West Sussex airport failed to win a commission recommendation.
It is a no brainer that a third runway at Heathrow would be an unmitigated disaster for London’s already poor environment, health and quality of life. I’m not just talking about areas in the immediate vicinity of Heathrow. I live in East Sutton and even here the noise of aircrafts ascending, descending or hovering over could be deafening. Not looking forward to more aircrafts and noise for the benefit of these business leaders who would shuttle away to their country mansions to relax over the weekend whilst the rest of us suffer bad noise and health.
All a waste of time. The Chinese have just bought for £7000 (or is it Euros?) their own European airport. They don’t need Heathrow or Gatwick, Schipol, Franfurt or CdG or any other overblown shopping centre with airport attached.
Are bribes being offered? Why else would 270 business ‘leaders’ ask for west London to be thrown into the hell of a third runway – two are bad enough. Can the leaders of this country think of anything other than corporate profit?
So by far the highest number of flights in the world are through London airports and we still need another two runways?
A new study by Kings College, London, commissioned by the GLA and TfL, has shown that London’s pollution killed 9,500 people in 2010. It showed that about there were about 3,537 early deaths in 2010 due to PM2.5s, and about 5,879 deaths from NO2 (ie a total of about 9,416 in 2010. NO2 is largely created by diesel cars, lorries and buses, and affects lung capacity and growth. The findings have prompted Boris to renew his calls for abandoning the expansion of Heathrow Airport on air quality grounds, saying: “My greatest priority remains to protect the well-being and environment of Londoners.” Roads around Heathrow are among those in breach of EU rules. Johnson’s office said that the latest study means “the government must now rule out expansion of Heathrow.” But Boris has also said that he will not resign as Mayor, or as MP for Uxbridge, if the Conservative party back a Heathrow 3rd runway. He had earlier said he would lie down in front of the bulldozers to stop it. Now he says the runway plan is “crackers” and “I don’t think the Heathrow third-runway option has ever been credible … It’s just going to be politically undeliverable, and we need a better long-term solution.” But Zac Goldsmith has said he would resign as an MP, and stand as an independent, if the Tories back the Heathrow runway.
London’s pollution killed 9,500 people in 2010, the first study to quantify the full danger showed, prompting Mayor Boris Johnson to renew his calls for abandoning the expansion of Heathrow Airport on air quality grounds.
About 5,900 deaths were the result of nitrogen dioxide, a pollutant produced by diesel engines, according to the report released on Wednesday by King’s College London for the mayor’s office. The remainder were due to particulate pollution known as PM2.5s.
“I need the help and strong support of the government and the EU to effectively win London’s pollution battle and target the enormous amount of toxic air transported into our great capital,” Johnson said. “My greatest priority remains to protect the well-being and environment of Londoners.”
The study is the first to quantify deaths from NO2, a gas whose emissions authorities in London have struggled to contain as the use of diesel engines spreads. The capital has been in breach of European Union limits on NO2 since 2010, and the government projects it won’t comply until at least 2030, opening the country up to legal action and fines from EU authorities.
“Evidence on the health effects of nitrogen dioxide has strengthened in recent years, including evidence linking long-term exposure to nitrogen dioxide with mortality,” said Heather Walton, an environmental researcher at King’s College. “It is now thought that there is an additional effect beyond that previously quantified for the effects of long-term exposure to PM2.5.”
Roads around Heathrow, the most busy U.K. airport, are among those in breach of EU rules. Johnson’s office said that the latest study means “the government must now rule out expansion of Heathrow.”
Heathrow Chief Executive Officer John Holland-Kaye said on July 1 that the hub’s plans will meet air-quality rules. The government’s Airports Commission two weeks ago said the hub presents the “strongest case” for expansion of airport capacity in southeast England.
The Airports Commission left a final decision in the hands of Johnson and Prime Minister David Cameron’s Conservative government, which is split on the issue. Cameron has said he’ll make a decision by the end of the year.
Johnson has brought in measures to clean up the exhausts of taxis and the capital’s bus fleet. He’s also planning an “Ultra-Low Emission Zone” for central London, which will encourage vehicles to be low- or zero-emissions from 2020.
Johnson Wouldn’t Quit Over Heathrow, Says Plan Still Non-Starter
by Kari Lundgren and Christopher Jasper
17.7.2015 (Bloomberg Business)
London Mayor Boris Johnson lowered the stakes in his personal campaign to block growth at Heathrow airport, saying he won’t resign from City Hall or give up his parliamentary seat if expansion plans go ahead.
Speaking in an interview Friday, Johnson reiterated his opposition to a project he’s called “crackers.” But he said he wouldn’t feel it necessary to step down should Prime Minister David Cameron, his Conservative Party colleague, decide to act on a government-commissioned study recommending a new runway be built at Heathrow.
“I don’t think the Heathrow third-runway option has ever been credible,” Johnson said on Bloomberg Television. “It’s just going to be politically undeliverable, and we need a better long-term solution,” he said. “I certainly won’t be resigning as an MP, nor indeed as mayor of London, and I will be keeping my powder dry on any other positions I may wish to resign from.”
“I don’t think the Heathrow third-runway option has ever been credible”
Johnson’s reluctance to put his career on the line over Heathrow contrasts with the stance of Zac Goldsmith, a fellow Tory lawmaker from west London. Goldsmith said after publication of the Airports Commission’s findings that he’d resign his parliamentary seat under the Heathrow flightpath and stand again on an anti-expansion ticket if Cameron breaks a previous pledge not to sanction a new runway.
Goldsmith is also bidding to be the Conservative candidate for mayor when Johnson steps down in 2016.
Cameron has said he’ll take a decision in the fall on whether to develop Heathrow into a 135 million-passenger-a-year superhub at a cost of 18 billion pounds ($28 billion) following the verdict of a study he ordered in 2012.
Johnson, who attends cabinet meetings on political issues after Cameron gave his potential successor a government role following May’s election, had lobbied for a completely new airport in the Thames estuary — dubbed Boris Island by the U.K. media — on the grounds that it would have less of an impact on people in terms of noise and pollution.
That option was dismissed early on by the Airports Commission as too costly and complex and likely to have a more detrimental impact on the natural environment.
Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne and other senior Conservatives back Heathrow, as do key figures in the Labour opposition. Johnson declined to comment on his own ambitions to replace Cameron, or those of Osborne, who he said is doing a “superb job.”
Nearly 9,500 people die each year in London because of air pollution – study
Counting impact of toxic gas NO2 for the first time suggests more than twice as many people as previously thought die prematurely from pollution in UK capital
By Adam Vaughan
Nearly 9,500 people die early each year in London due to long-term exposure to air pollution, more than twice as many as previously thought, according to new research.
The premature deaths are due to two key pollutants, fine particulates known as PM2.5s and the toxic gas nitrogen dioxide (NO2), according to a study carried out by researchers at King’s College London.
The study – which was commissioned by the Greater London Authority and Transport for London – is believed to be the first by any city in the world to attempt to quantify how many people are being harmed by NO2. The gas is largely created by diesel cars, lorries and buses, and affects lung capacity and growth.
London, Birmingham, and Leeds are among the UK cities that have been in breach of EU safety limits on NO2 for five years, prompting legal action that led to a supreme court ruling in April that the government must publish a clean-up plan by the end of the year.
Previous research attributed 4,267 annual premature deaths to PM2.5s in 2008, based on 2006 levels of the particulates.
Subsequent falls in those particulates and a change in methodology that excludes natural sources of the pollutant sees that figure fall to 3,537 for 2010 levels of PM2.5s in the new study.
However that fall is more than cancelled out by the addition of an estimated 5,879 deaths from NO2 each year, bringing the total early deaths from both pollutants in 2010 to 9,416.
Matthew Pencharz, the deputy mayor for environment and energy, said that local authorities could only do so much and the government needed to step in. “It’s [the new research] an important message for government, where the supreme court judgment has already focused minds.”
Although the report found that a larger proportion of deaths caused by PM2.5 were from particulates that originated outside the city than within it, it found that most of the deaths linked to NO2 were because of NO2 emissions from diesel vehicles and other sources within the capital.
Last year, mayor Boris Johnson came in for criticism after a King’s researcher published figures showing Oxford Street had the worst NO2 levels in the world, largely because of its high concentration of diesel buses. The mayor later called for a diesel scrappage scheme to tackle pollution in the capital.
But Pencharz said London was a pioneer when it came to tackling air pollution, with the mayor due to introduce an Ultra Low Emissions Zone (ULEZ) in 2020 that will see the most polluting HGVs and coaches charged £100 to enter.
“No other city is doing half what we’re doing, when it comes to the ULEZ which is a world first, zero emissions taxis which is a world first, the regulations on construction equipment due in September,” he said.
But campaigners said the evidence showed the need for more action. Alan Andrews, a lawyer at the NGO ClientEarth, which brough the case which lead to the supreme court ruling, said: “This new research piles more pressure on the government to come up with a clear and credible plan to cut pollution from diesel vehicles.”
He added: “As shocking as they are, these deaths are really only the tip of the iceberg. For every person who dies early from air pollution, many more are made seriously ill, have to visit hospital or take time off work.”
Dr Penny Woods, chief executive of the British Lung Foundation, said: “Exposure to air pollution increases the risk of lung cancer, impairs child lung development and increases the risk of hospitalisation among people with a pre-existing lung condition. It is time we stop talking and take immediate action to prevent more people being needlessly killed by the air that they breathe.”
Jenny Bates, air pollution campaigner at Friends of the Earth, said: “People have no choice with the air they breathe. This means we have to redouble our efforts, stop tinkering around the edges, and take really bold immediate action with a mix of cleaner vehicles and cutting traffic levels, massive investment in safe cycling and walking, and London-wide road charging.”
On Tuesday, the London Assembly’s environment committee published a report blaming diesel vehicles for the capital’s NO2 problem. Assembly member Stephen Knight, who is on the committee, said: “As petrol engines become cleaner with time it’s becoming clear that diesel emissions are a large part of the problem.”
The study also looked at the impact of short-term exposure to PM2.5s and NO2 during high pollution episodes, such as the one that affected much of England in April, and found that 2,411 hospital admissions for respiratory problems a year could be blamed on the pollutants.
The government’s scientific advisers on the issue, the committee on the medical effects of air pollutants, are expected to conclude later this year that across Britain up to 60,000 early deaths annually can be attributed to the two pollutants, because NO2 will be factored in for the first time. The figure would represent a doubling on the current 29,000 from PM2.5s, and would put air pollution much closer to smoking, which kills around 100,000 people a year.
A King’s study due to be published in the autumn is expected to put the figure for deaths annually in the UK for the two pollutants at 80,000 compared to London’s 9,416, Pencharz told the Guardian.
The mayor launched a consultation today on measures for boroughs to tackle pollution hotspots. All but two boroughs, Bromley and Sutton, failed to meet EU limits on NO2 in 2013, the latest year for which data is available.
TfL announced on Wednesday that two bus routes, the 507 and 521, will be run by 51 100% electric buses from next year, which do not have any tailpipe emissions. The first fully electric double decker bus will enter service in October, Johnson said last month.
On 17th July the Administrative Tribunal of Nantes rejected all appeals by opponents of the new airport to be built at Notre Dame des Landes. The legal challenge was on two areas of environmental law, on destruction of wetlands and movement of protected species. It ruled that the project does not pose environmental concerns. This was one of the last legal confrontations between opponents and supporters of the transfer of Nantes-Atlantique airport to the village of Notre-Dame-des-Landes (building a new airport there instead, to be called L’aeroport du Grand Ouest). This battle has been going on since the plan was first proposed in 1967. Those wanting the new airport hope work could start very soon, but Europe Ecologie-Les Verts believe appeals are not yet completed and work on the airport cannot resume. The “zadistes” (ZAD – Zone À Défendre) have been occupying the site for 5 years, and farmers hostile to the project do not intend to give up. Opponents of the airport ACIPA and CEDPA) also intend to appeal and challenge with a prefectural order for the protection of the water vole. There are also problems of crested or marbled newts, great horned beetles and the floating plantain, an endangered water plant. In addition the CGT trade union is opposed to the new airport believing that modifying the old airport is a better option.
Notre-Dame-des-Landes : la justice rejette tous les recours contre l’aéroport
Notre-Dame-des-Landes:justicedismissedallactionsagainst the airport
17.7.2015 (Le Monde, France)
Poor translation into English from the original French:
It was one of the last legal confrontations between opponents and supporters of the transfer of Nantes-Atlantique airport to the village of Notre-Dame-des-Landes (building a new airport there instead, to be called L’aeroport du Grand Ouest).
On Friday, July 17, the Administrative Tribunal of Nantes rejected all appeals by opponents of the new airport to cancel two environmental laws enacted by the Loire-Atlantique Prefect allowing the developer (Vinci Airports) to destroy wetlands and move protected species, prior to the work. The court therefore dismissed the appeals filed “By fourteen judgments against the decisions taken by the prefect of Loire-Atlantique in the context of achieving the Grand Ouest Airport project at Notre Dame des-Landes, declared of public utility by decree of 9 February 2008.”
Magistrates transfer thereby the very old case dossier – the site of Notre-Dame-des-Landes was chosen in 1967 – to politicians. The government has often stated that the runway would begin as early as the ultimate judgement. The Prime Minister, Manuel Valls, has therefore immediately welcomed the decision of the court, “which should lead to the resumption of work” .
Europe Ecology-The Greens believe that a call by opponents of the project is “legitimate and necessary” , appeals are not yet completed and “the work cannot resume.” The party believes that “Any contrary decision of the executive would be a provocation.”
It is still an issue that remains at high risk: the “zadistes” have been occupying the site for five years, and farmers hostile to the project do not intend to give up.
Opponents of the airport – the intermunicipal citizen Association of populations affected by the airport project (ACIPA), the Collective of elected representatives doubting the appropriateness of the airport (CEDPA), etc. – also intend to challenge a prefectural order that is in preparation for a protected species, the water vole. https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arvicola_amphibius Forgotten in the previous text, the little rodent which appreciates the wetland area of Nantes, has invited itself into the debate.
In early April, the National Nature Conservation Council (CNPN), an advisory body of the Ministry of Ecology has issued an unfavorable opinion (and Advisory) on the request for exemption to the prohibition of destruction of this protected species. “This adverse opinion by CNPN reinforces the views of naturalists, refers to the weak record of the airport project on the environment and weakens the position of the State and of Vinci” , noted François Beaulieu, a member of the group of naturalists fighting the airport project.
On the side of the prefecture, it is argued that the draft decree on the water vole is ready. “This problem must be ruled on before any work can commence; it takes about a month of public consultation, considers Stéphan Ribou, the sub-prefect in charge of the case of Notre-Dame-des-Landes. Apart from this particular point, if all is validated by the court on Friday, the project restarts.”
Besides the problem voles, crested or marbled newts, great horned beetles or even flûteaux nageants (the floating plantain, an endangered water plant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luronium ), and of moving them, which can only be done at certain times of year, opponents of the arguments have rested ultimately on economically and social arguments.
Reinforcement of the CGT
Aerial view of the site is to be built where the international airport of Notre-Dame-des-Landes, taken on 11 May 2013. JEAN-SEBASTIEN EVRARD / AFP
The transfer of Nantes-Atlantique Airport in the town of Bouguenais, 10 km south-west of Nantes, to Notre-Dame-des-Landes, 20 km north of the town, is not necessary – according to them. In their demonstration of the viability of the current airport, they just received a weighty and rather unexpected reinforcement: the CGT Loire-Atlantique. [The CGT is the General Confederation of Labour (French: Confédération générale du travail, CGT) a major trade union].
Union activists have put out a leaflet and a brochure explaining the choice, at the national gathering of opponents in Vigneux-de-Bretagne, over the weekend of July 11th and 12th. For four years, the CGT has studied all facets of the airport issue. The union sums the situation up saying: “The maintenance of the airport on the current site, with all the necessary improvements (…), has more advantages than the construction of a new airport at Notre -Dame-des-Landes.”
This rally, which has hardly enchanted the local Communist Party, which supports the new airport project, echoes the intense work done by the opponents. The Citizen Workshop, which has brought together over seven months individuals, expert or not, has published two books, “Economy and jobs” and “Finance”, the findings, they say, without appeal. “We scoured every detail of the financial model presented by Vinci and we show that, keeping to the old airport, and modifying it, everybody wins: the state, Vinci, communities, and therefore citizens,” explains Jean-Marie Ravier, an entrepreneur committedly against the Notre-Dame-des-Landes airport plan.
Recourse to Law on water and protected species: opponents appeal the decisions of the Administrative Tribunal
It is with disappointment that the ACIPA and CEDPA are aware of the decisions of the Administrative Tribunal to dismiss all legal remedies in the water, protected species and DUP viaire program.
It is paradoxical that these decisions are opposite to those made yesterday by the Grenoble Administrative Court for Roybon, while water law issues are similar and that the compensation is not defined in Notre-Dame-des-Landes.
In decisions of the Administrative Tribunal of Nantes, expert opinions are removed, alternatives are not seriously investigated, and the effectiveness of compensatory measures are ignored.
These elements justify that we appeal in the coming weeks.
In any case, the work cannot start. Many permits are still required (clearing, water vole, building permits …) we recall Francois Hollande commitments not to expel the inhabitants and the farmers and not to start the work (whether on the road or the bar on the platform): ” As long as the remedies are not exhausted, the project can be launched é “.
For the record, the planned extension of the Nantes-Saint-Nazaire port, east of Donges, was abandoned in 2009 following the cancellation of the judgement Appeal Administrative Court.
After the massive citizen mobilization of 11 and 12 July, the citizen fight, political and legal continue.
We call on the committees of support [there are committees in numerous places across France, opposing the airport plans] and all opponents of the project to the utmost vigilance.
We will not allow the destruction of Notre Dame des Landes, or the expulsion of its inhabitants!
French Prime Minister Manuel Valls has announced that construction will resume at the highly controversial airport Notre-Dame-des-Landes near the northwestern city of Nantes.
The €580-million project has divided government officials, citizens and activists in a series of clashes, triggering a halt to construction at the end of 2012.
A French tribunal rejected appeals against the environmental components of the project on Friday, ruling that it does not pose environmental concerns.
Moreover, the government highlights the construction of the airport would benefit the public by improving road access in the area.
Though Jean-Marc Ayrault, ex-prime minister and ex-mayor of Nantes, is on the frontline of defence alongside the government and local officials, it has posed issues for the Socialist-Green alliance.
The project has divided government officials such as The Ecology Party EELV’s national secretary, Emmanuellle Cosse, and Ecology Minister Ségolène Royal, who have voiced their opposition to the project.
Cosse tweeted on Friday that the rush to relaunch the works straight away once again reveals the government’s motivation to force the project forward.
Activist groups, notably the ACIPA, and the loose-knit anarchist collective known as the Zadistes, claim it is an unjustified cause as it will be detrimental to the environment and wasteful use of government funds.
The crux of the issue arose during violent clashes between protestors and the police in February 2014.
The black-clad zadiste rioters smashed shop windows with stones, bottles and flares as police responded with tear gas and rubber bullets.
The project was approved in 2008, with an initial budget of 580 million euros and the end of construction is pushed back to 2019 at the earliest.
Many thousands of determined opponents of new Nantes airport gather before final court decision
July 14, 2015
Over the weekend of 11th and 12th July there was a massive gathering at Notre Dame des Landes, in western France, to show the strong opposition to the building of a new runway there, to replace the current Nantes airport. This “mobilisation” is the 15th that the organisers, ACIPA, have put on over the years. It was estimated that perhaps 15,000 people attended over the two days. People at Nantes are very aware of the carbon and climate implications of a new airport, as well as serious local environmental destruction. They also link the Nantes campaign with other huge infrastructure projects across Europe, that would be damaging in terms of carbon emissions – such as a new runway in the UK. There is a desire to link up campaigns against such developments. The gathering combined a lot of workshops and education sessions with fun, with music, dancing and food -but with a very serious message. On Friday 17th July the Nantes Administrative Court will rule on the last 17 appeals by opponents of the airport project, on several environmental issues in contention with EU law, such as on water law and destruction of protected species. It is thought the court will rule against the opponents,but they will appeal. These legal issues are all that is holding up building of the airport.