Airport News
Below are news items relating to specific airports
Councils that legally challenged Heathrow expansion say Supreme Court Heathrow ruling ‘changes nothing’
The group of Councils deeply opposed to Heathrow expansion said the Supreme Court ruling, that the ANPS is legal, changes nothing and called on the airport to abandon once and for all its bid for a 3rd runway. Residents in all these boroughs are badly affected by noise of Heathrow planes. Wandsworth Council urged Heathrow to concentrate on working with the aviation industry to achieve zero carbon emissions and an end to night flights. The Leader of Wandsworth Council, Cllr Ravi Govindia, said: “The ruling does not give Heathrow a green light for a third runway. It says nothing about how expansion could be delivered in the face of legally binding emissions targets. The world has changed since Chris Grayling’s decision in 2018. Heathrow will never be able to build a third runway. It’s time for the airport to admit defeat and put all its energy into working with the aviation industry to achieve the net zero goal. The Government must now as a matter of urgency produce a new aviation strategy for the UK which properly takes account of its legal commitment on emissions reductions. And Heathrow could put an end to the early morning arrivals, the noise of which causes so much upset, disturbing the sleep of thousands, putting their health at risk.
Click here to view full story...
Heathrow appeal upheld … but reprieve disguises impossibility of 3rd runway plan
Commenting on the judgement by the Supreme Court today, upholding Heathrow’s appeal that the Airports NPS is legal, the Richmond Heathrow Campaign said the world has changed a lot since 2018. This is not least because of Covid-19. Climate change is the greatest risk to demand and last week the Climate Change Committee’s advice on the 6th Carbon Budget emphasised no net increase in UK airport capacity and that an increase at one airport means a reduction elsewhere - in other words levelling down (not up) the regions. If Heathrow Airport Limited still wants a 3rd runway it will have to restart the already delayed planning process with diminishing chance of success. The pandemic has highlighted Heathrow’s lack of financial resilience and the improbability of raising finance for very expensive expansion in the face of demand constrained by climate risk. Heathrow should not waste billions of pounds on ill-judged expansion. Surely shareholders don’t want to replace a steady cash flow with the enormous project and financial risk from expansion under the evolving circumstances?
Click here to view full story...
“Heathrow expansion remains very far from certain”: Friends of the Earth reacts as Supreme Court rules on policy allowing third runway
Friends of the Earth UK (FoE) was one of the organisations that took their challenge of the High Court decision on Heathrow expansion, and the Airports NPS (ANPS), to the Court of Appeal. Heathrow took that judgement, that the ANPS was illegal (of no legal effect) to the Supreme Court, which has now ruled that the ANPS is valid and legal. Friends of the Earth say the judgement is "not a ‘green light’ for a 3rd Heathrow runway. It makes clear that full climate considerations remain to be addressed and resolved at the planning stage, where Friends of the Earth will continue the challenge against a 3rd runway. In addition, the Government has been recently warned by its own advisers (the CCC) against net airport expansion." FoE also say green jobs, low-carbon travel and the health and wellbeing of everyone must be government priority for 2021 and beyond. A 3rd runway is far from certain, with many chances to block it in the planning stages. The UK's obligations and targets have become much more challenging since the ANPS was designated and are only expected to get tougher, especially in light of the advice last week by the Committee on Climate Change that, in order to meet Net Zero Target, there should be no net increase in airport capacity.
Click here to view full story...
Supreme Court rules that the Airports NPS is legal; climate issues of a Heathrow runway would have to be decided at the DCO stage
The Supreme Court has ruled that the Airports NPS is lawful. In February 2020 the Appeal Court had ruled that it was not, on climate grounds. The ANPS is the national policy framework which governs the construction of a Heathrow 3rd runway. Any future application for development consent to build this runway will be considered against the policy framework in the ANPS. The ANPS does not grant development consent in its own right. The Supreme Court rejected the legal challenges by Friends of the Earth, and Plan B Earth, that the then Secretary of State, Chris Grayling, had not taken climate properly into account, nor the UK's commitments under the Paris Agreement. These are tricky points of law, and definition of the term "government policy" rather than the reality of climate policy. Heathrow is now able to continue with plans to apply for a Development Consent Order (DCO) which is the planning stage of the runway scheme.The Supreme Court said at the DCO stage, Heathrow would have to show "that the development would be compatible with the up-to-date requirements under the Paris Agreement and the CCA 2008 measures as revised to take account of those requirements" and "The Court further holds that future applications [for the runway] will be assessed against the emissions targets and environmental policies in force at that later date rather than those set out in the ANPS."
Click here to view full story...
Tim Crosland (Plan B Earth) broke Supreme Court judgement embargo as “an act of civil disobedience” that will be treated as a “contempt of court”
The Appeal Court ruled in February that the ANPS was illegal, as it had not taken proper account of the Paris Agreement and the climate targets for the UK. The case was partly on complicated legal points about to what extent Paris-related obligations were part of UK law. The two parties taking the challenge to the Supreme Court are Friends of the Earth UK and Plan B Earth. A day before the court date, Tim Crosland - representing Plan B Earth - decided (on being given a pre-copy of the judgement) in ‘an act of civil disobedience,' to publicise the decision, though not the details of the judgement. This will be held as contempt of court. Several papers published news of this, but then withdrew comments, for fear of also being held in contempt of court. Tim Crosland believes that the Secretary of State for Transport (Chris Grayling at the time in 2018) should have acted in line with trying to avoid a 1.5C rise in global temperature, not just a 2C rise, and this decision by the Supreme Court puts the well-being and lives of millions of people - especially young people - at risk, from climate related impacts.
Click here to view full story...
Heathrow claims huge financial losses due to government stoping tax-free shopping to international passengers (and those in transit)
The UK government’s decision not to offer tax-free shopping to international visitors is upsetting the airports, like Heathrow, that have benefited financially from it. In September the government announced the ability of overseas customers getting VAT-free shopping would end at the start of January 2021, as it has been a practice that is expensive to administer, and is “a costly relief, which does not benefit the whole of Britain equally”, and the current use is mostly centred in London. Also that that retailers who offer the service are putting other high street retailers at a competitive disadvantage. Heathrow's PR machine is trying to call this a "tourist tax" and is whingeing about it. Normally a tourist tax means a small amount that visitors pay to stay overnight in accommodation abroad - that sort of thing. The removal of the VAT perk for airport shops, and thus indirectly for Heathrow (paid by the shops) is not a tourist tax. But it is likely to reduce the amount of sales in airport shops. Heathrow claims 2,000 jobs could be lost? Various retailers affected (including Marks & Spencer, Mulberry, Paul Smith, Ted Baker) have written to the chancellor to express their opposition to the new tax rules.
Click here to view full story...
Heathrow hopes to charge cars £5 and increase passenger charge by £1.20 (then pay dividend again in 2022)
It seems Heathrow will lose around £1.5 billion this year, due to Covid and a drop of around 80% in passenger numbers. The airport is hoping to impose a £5 “drop off” charge on any car coming into the airport to deposit or collect passengers, from the end of 2021 (blue badges and emergency vehicles excluded). There is a consultation about this. Heathrow says it will “save jobs in the short term” while allowing the airport to hit its “long-term goals of providing safe, sustainable and affordable transport options”. (!) A much more effective way to boost its income is to increase its passenger charge, which is currently £21 per person. The intention is to increase it by £1.20, which could add £2.7bn to the airport’s regulated asset base (RAB), allowing it to increase charges (already, at £21 per head, among the highest in Europe). The airlines are vociferously opposed to this, understandably. Heathrow is leveraged, with its consolidated net debt at £15.2bn in September 2020. But a key reason for all the borrowing is it has paid out £4 billion of dividends to its investors since 2012. There was a £500 payment announced in February 2020, and a £100m payment in April. Heathrow has now said it will not pay dividends for the rest of 2020, or 2021 but hopes to pay out £400 million in 2022.
Click here to view full story...
Covid impact on airport-related jobs shown in new jobless figures – bad in areas too dependent on aviation
The devastating toll the coronavirus pandemic in causing unemployment in areas heavily dependent on airports is growing ever more clear. The number who have lost jobs around Heathrow, Gatwick, Manchester, Luton and Stansted has risen by around 35% since March compared with surrounding areas. The pandemic was rapidly spread around the world by airlines, and they have been heavily impacted by necessary travel bans, in attempt to control the spread of Covid. MPs in affected constituencies want the Government to help aviation businesses and their supply chains. According to the Commons Library figures, the unemployment claimant toll in Hayes and Harlington, next door to Heathrow, climbed from 2,725 in March to 7,750 in October – a 184% surge. In London as a whole, the rise was 156%. In Crawley, West Sussex, next to Gatwick, it went from 2,030 to 5,655 – a 179% increase. It rose by 140% in the wider South East region. And there are similar figures for areas near Manchester, Stansted and Luton airports. The industry says it will have difficulty recruiting staff again, if and when demand returns. Only time will tell if the industry will be considerably smaller in the years to come, and many staff will transfer into "greener" jobs that cause lower carbon emissions.
Click here to view full story...
London City Airport shelves plans to extend operating hours – has to focus on post-Covid recovery
London City Airport has published its long-term vision for the future today, after a consultation with residents, passengers and stakeholders. Local community campaign group HACAN East had been concerned by suggestions the airport might seek to increase flights at the weekend, as well as earlier and later each day. But due to a huge fall in passenger numbers, the airport's CEO Robert Sinclair says the focus “has to be on recovering” for the foreseeable future. But it still has the longer term ambition of 151,000 flights per year, up from around 82,000 before Covid, which campaigners fear will have a serious impact on residents and the environment - due to noise and air pollution (as well as carbon). Mr Sinclair said the airport will keep the expansion plans "under review" as the airport recovers from the impact the pandemic. Changes in future would need to go through the necessary consultation and planning processes. HACAN East chairman John Stewart said the news was a welcome development and the result of a “huge campaign” by both residents and local councils - and “Our concern remains that they would like to lift the annual cap on the number of flights to 151,000."
Click here to view full story...
Southampton City Council objects to latest plans by Southampton airport – Eastleigh BC to consider on 17th December
Southampton City Council has objected to revised plans to expand the runway at Southampton airport by 164 metres (538 ft), in order to increase the number of flights and size of planes. The council voted to oppose the scheme on the grounds of climate change and noise levels. The city council had previously voted to oppose the airport's original plans in January. The airport was asked to amend the proposals and Southampton council was asked to confirm its position before a final decision is taken by councillors in Eastleigh - where the airport is located. The latest plans have a few small noise modifications. Lyn Bryshaw, from the Airport Expansion Opposition group told the online council meeting the development would "cause huge harm to the environment and local people ...The economic benefits for Southampton and the region have been overstated and no evidence at all has been presented to suggest that the airport would go out of business without the extension." A decision on planning permission is due to be made on 17 December, by Eastleigh Borough Council.