General News
Below are links to stories of general interest in relation to aviation and airports.
Advertising Standards Agency rules Heathrow ads claiming “Those living around us are behind us” are misleading
Heathrow Airport has been told by the ASA that its adverts claiming that "Those living around us are behind us". Eight people had challenged whether the adverts were misleading and if they could be substantiated. The ASA concluded that the claim exaggerated the level of support for expansion, had not been substantiated and was misleading. They noted that the claims “Those living around us are behind us” and “Locals support it” were not qualified. The ASA considered that most readers would interpret the claims to mean that a clear majority of those living in close proximity to Heathrow Airport supported expansion. The evidence provided, however, showed that only 50% of those surveyed from ten constituencies close to the airport supported expansion. The ASA say the ads must not appear in their current form again. They told Heathrow Airport Ltd to ensure they held sufficient evidence to substantiate their objective marketing claims in future, and to ensure their claims were adequately qualified, without contradiction. John Stewart, chair of HACAN, said: “This judgement is not good news for Heathrow. It undermines a key plank of their campaign that they have strong local support for a third runway.” The ASA ruled against other Heathrow adverts in February 2014.
Click here to view full story...
Airports Commission figures show Heathrow runway to provide, at the most, just 12 more long haul destinations
The Airports Commission said that a very important reason for building a new runway, and Heathrow in particular, was to increase the connectivity with "long-haul destinations in new markets." And so it would be logical to believe their analysis would show that a new runway at Heathrow, (or Gatwick) would show a large increase in these routes. The Commission's own work [using their Assessment of Need scenario, carbon capped] forecasts that while Heathrow (2011) had 57 destinations with at least a daily flight, this would only rise to 63 without a new runway. It would only rise to 73 with a 3rd runway. That is just 10 more. For the UK as a whole, including all airports, the Commission forecasts that the number of long haul destinations in 2011 was 61, and this would rise to 82 even without a new runway. The total number would only rise to 87 with a new Heathrow runway. That is just 5 more. And their figures indicate that the number of long haul destinations from regional airports would fall from 23 to 21 by 2050 and be slightly lower than they would have been without a new runway. So much for boosting the "Northern Powerhouse." The Commission said a Heathrow runway could provide "up to 12 additional long-haul destinations."
Click here to view full story...
Meeting on aviation expansion and climate confirms “No new runways” is the only effective policy
Representatives from London's anti-airport expansion campaigns shared the stage with Green activists, with a unified message: No new runways for the south east's airports. The meeting was chaired by Sian Berry, the Green Party's candidate for the London mayoral election. A range of prominent environmental activists spoke about why the case for no new runways at London's airports is the most attractive option. Sian said nobody would believe David Cameron's climate change credentials if he heads to the UN Climate Change conference in Paris in November, intending to get a new runway at a London airport. We need to "convince the government to end this false choice debate, trying to pit [Heathrow and Gatwick] communities against each other over which airport to expand and who should suffer the increased pollution and noise that would result." Professor Alice Bows-Larkin, a climate expert, said in the conflict between aviation and climate policy in the UK said providing more airport capacity is at odds with managing demand for air travel, which is the only effective way to limit the rise in aviation CO2 emissions. The efficiency improvements the industry can make are far smaller than the expected growth of the industry. Not building another runway is the simplest, cheapest and most effective way to solve the aviation carbon problem.
Click here to view full story...
Some of the huge planning implications if the government opts for a new runway at Heathrow or Gatwick
The next steps, after the Airports Commission recommendation of a Heathrow runway, are still unclear. But a useful article in Planning Resource explains such of what might happen. The government is expected to make a statement by the end of the year on the Commission's recommendation. It will also need to announce the consenting route for a new runway. There are two options - a development consent order (DCO), made under the provisions of the Planning Act 2008, or a hybrid bill. Both routes have benefits and downsides. If the DCO route is chosen, a national policy statement (NPS) on aviation will almost certainly need to be prepared. Work on a draft NPS may already be taking place. It is not thought that an NPS could be done quickly, and with likely legal challenges, could take several years. Alternatively there could be a "hybrid bill" on which all MPs could vote, and as any runway would be hugely controversial and divisive, this might be "more robust in terms of legal challenges." As well as the runway planning, local authorities would have a great deal of work to do, and would need to work co-operatively to provide sufficient housing and infrastructure. Some would need to review their local plans, and some plans may need to be updated. This all amounts to a huge volume of work. And expense.
Click here to view full story...
London Assembly votes decisively that “there is no circumstance under which Heathrow expansion would be acceptable”
Sir Howard Davies and Phil Graham, from the (now closed) Airports Commission, attended a Question and Answer session at the London Assembly. It is fully recorded and can be seen here. Over the two hour session, they answered questions on a range of issues including economics, reasons for rejecting Gatwick, noise, night flights, conditions imposed on Heathrow, air pollution, adequacy of surface access, amount of money needed to be paid by the taxpayer for surface access improvements, carbon emissions, impact on regional airports etc. Assembly members did not appear particularly persuaded by the replies they received. After the Q&A session, a motion was voted on. It was passed unanimously (13:0). The full text of the amended Motion is: “That the Assembly notes the answers to the questions asked and reiterates its belief that there is no circumstance under which Heathrow expansion would be acceptable.” The motion was proposed by Richard Tracey, and seconded by Darren Johnson. The Assembly say this is an absolute NO to Heathrow.
Click here to view full story...
Boris writes to all MPs and Peers to say 3rd runway at Heathrow ‘will fail on every level’
London's mayor, Boris Johnson, a potential successor to PM David Cameron, said a 3rd Heathrow runway was doomed to fail, complicating an already fraught issue for the government. The Airports Commission said the runway would offer Britain the best way of adding long-haul routes to new markets that it said were "urgently required". But Boris said the report itself showed a Heathrow runway would not solve capacity issues, and its own figures indicate it would lead to fewer domestic routes and very little increase in new long haul routes. "Their report very clearly shows that a third runway will fail both London and the UK on every level." Boris and Justine Greening have sent a dossier to about 1,500 MPs and peers setting out the flaws in the Commission's report. They say the runway would harm attempts by George Osborne, Johnson’s leadership rival, to build a “northern powerhouse”. Boris still wants a new airport in the Thames estuary, that was rejected by the Commission. He said: “The Airports Commission has spent several years in the production of a gigantic ball of wool that they are now attempting to pull over the eyes of the nation.”
Click here to view full story...
Protesters set up camp in forest due to be cleared for Frankfurt airport 3rd terminal and access road
The operator of Frankfurt airport, Fraport, is planning a 3rd terminal, as it claims this is needed for it to remain competitive against other European hub airports. This new terminal would add enough capacity for 14 million more passengers a year when it opens in the first half of 2022. The airport can currently handle 64 million, but Fraport says there will be demand for 68 million to 73 million passengers by 2021. Over 4 days, airport protesters set up a camp in the nearby Treburger Oberwald forest, that is to be cleared in the course of the construction of a third terminal at Frankfurt airport. The peaceful event, "Forest instead of concrete," organised by the group, Robin Wood, made the point that not only would be increased number of flights increase the carbon emissions of German aviation, but the loss of some 60 hectares of forest for the terminal and access road would also increase CO2. The protesters also hang up a banner in protest outside the concrete and gravel supplier Sehring, which profits from the environmentally damaging construction projects. Before the construction of the new north-west runway, the activists had occupied trees in Kelsterbach Forest for 9 months until their camp was cleared in February 2009 by the police.
Click here to view full story...
Alex Salmond says 3rd Heathrow runway is for the benefit of London and SE, to the detriment of Scotland
Alex Salmond, the former First Minister of Scotland, speaking on the subject of Heathrow expansion, said that UK Governments have a long history of dressing up London investment as being of equal benefit to the whole nation. He is not persuaded that the Treasury is particularly interested in benefiting Scotland. There is evidence that public spending in previous decades, while supposedly UK-wide, is in reality aimed at helping London and the south of England. Some examples given are the redevelopment of docklands, the Jubilee line extension, and concentrating defence spending, procurement, and the civil service firmly in the south. Alex Salmond says that much of this type of spending was omitted from all official accounts of “identifiable public spending” and it still is. But public spending in Scotland was routinely described as a “subsidy.” He says the proposed Heathrow runway would be to the potential detriment of Scotland, which is facing all of the pain and none of the gain. He wants to boost direct Scottish flights to and from international destinations for the benefit of travellers, tourism and Scottish exporting industries. And he wants APD cut in Scotland, reducing the need to fly via London at all.
Click here to view full story...
Jeremy Corbyn’s opposition to a Heathrow runway likely to lead to internal Labour party disputes
Jeremy Corbyn - who might become leader of the Labour party - has come out against a 3rd runway at Heathrow. The Labour leadership favourite has indicated in an interview with the FT that under him, the party would not support expansion at Heathrow. He said: "I think the third runway is a problem for noise pollution and so on across west London…I also think there is an under-usage of the other airports around London. I’d vote against it in this parliament." If he does become leader (decision on 12th September) this would represent a U-turn from the party’s current stance of supporting the runway, if certain conditions are met. Corbyn’s opposition to a Heathrow runway will have an impact on the London mayoral race, as two Labour candidates are in favour of it, and two against. Tessa Jowell, the favourite to win the nomination, would find herself at odds with her party’s leadership on Heathrow. There are also plenty of moderates in the party who would also rebel against Corbyn. But airports are purely a lobbying issue for mayoral candidates — they have no actual power over the decision. It is not yet known if there will be a parliamentary vote on a runway, though it will require a lot of public funding (directly and indirectly for years). David Cameron will decide by November whether to accept the Airports Commission recommendation of Heathrow, and if Labour now votes against it, that could fatally undermine the project.
Click here to view full story...
Head of “nudge unit” considers Heathrow opponents could be bought off with free Caribbean flights
Since the UK's behavioural insights team, or "nudge unit" was set up by David Cameron in 2010 to try to improve public services and save money, it has had various successes in making small changes to people's behaviour. It still gets most of its work from government, though it has now expanded to take on a wider range of projects. It is now a part-privatised company. Recently David Halpern, the head of the unit, said that fresh thinking was needed to win over the local population affected by Heathrow, in order to stop their opposition holding back a major infrastructure project. He has told the Times that he believes Heathrow’s neighbours could be bought-off [not his words] by bribes [not his words] of free flights to the Caribbean to persuade them of the benefits of a third runway. Purely by self interest. That sort of thing could avoid costly planning battles, by defusing opposition. The idea is that by getting free travel vouchers, people being over-flown by planes think "There goes my holiday to Barbados." The problem of the carbon emissions has not occurred to Mr Halpern. It does not appear that other "nudges" have involved such blatant and expensive bribery. ... Unbelievable that this could be permitted.....