Heathrow news. January to July 2016

New runway would push up air fares due to carbon emissions, and restrict regional airports – new report

A new report for the Campaign for Better Transport (CBT) has analysed the Airports Commission’s backing for new runway in relation to carbon emissions, and says the necessary carbon pricing would end low-cost flights by 2050. The Commission was aware that UK aviation is expected to far exceed the cap set for the sector’s CO2 emissions (37.5MtCO2) before 2050. Adding another runway only makes the situation far worse, by exacerbating the problem. The only way to keep aviation emissions down, with a new runway, is greatly increased cost of flights, trying to reduce the demand that has been increased by adding capacity. This means a carbon price massively higher than today – at several hundred £s. The report, by Leo Barasi and Leo Murray, say that as well as making flights expensive (perhaps pricing out those on low pay) the addition of a new SE runway means growth at regional airports would have to be restricted to allow expanded London capacity. Dame Julia King, who was on the Airports Commission and is on the Committee on Climate Change, admits that regional airports would need to be restricted in order to allow growth in the south east. There has been far too little assessment and acknowledgement of the CO2 implications of a runway. The government should not rush into approving a runway until this has been fully accepted.

Click here to view full story…

Interview with Nigel Milton – a classic of dangerous, disingenuous Heathrow spin

In an interview with Nigel Milton, Heathrow’s Director of External Affairs, by a Slough paper – he reiterates some of the typical spin. The PR is intended to convey the impression (to Theresa May in particular, and her Cabinet) that Heathrow is all set for its 3rd runway; its plans and promises fully cover all that has been asked of it by the Airports Commission and government; that it will henceforth be a really great and considerate neighbour; and that its runway will be the salvation of the nation. The mask slips a bit when Nigel has to admit that: “if our government introduce an act of parliament to rule out a 4th runway [Heathrow] will support that because ultimately that’s the only thing that can stop it.” ie. only if barred by law. And “if the government decided to build a third runway it needs to set up a framework, a governance regime … to hold us to account. … it needs to have teeth to be able to penalise us and require us to take action – at the moment that isn’t the case.” ie. Heathrow will not regulate itself, but only comply with law. He makes out, without any evidence, that Heathrow freight is “26% of UK exports and imports” (it is far less than that) makes the claim (quite untrue) that “…we are not asking people to choose between the economy and the environment” implying that noise, night flights, NO2, surface access and CO2 problems are solved. They are not.

Click here to view full story…

“Save us from a 3rd Heathrow runway” banner outside Theresa May’s 1st PMQs

When new Prime Minister Theresa May left Downing Street for her first Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday 20 July, she couldn’t miss the gathering of campaigners protesting against a 3rd Heathrow runway. This was just a reminder to the Maidenhead MP that residents currently living under the threat of a bigger Heathrow, want an announcement that a 3rd runway will never be built. A banner urged Theresa May to “Save us from a third runway.” People living in the villages of Harmondsworth and Sipson also want Theresa May to appreciate that they have spent decades under threat. Each new plan for expansion at Heathrow puts homes at real risk of demolition. The last proposal (2002-2010) would have flattened Sipson and part of Harmondsworth. This time round almost all of Harmondsworth would be under concrete with Sipson initially on the boundary but quickly engulfed by airport development. People in the Heathrow villages say though politicians decry the lack of human rights in other countries, they ignore the fact that the British government has repeatedly ill-treated people living near Heathrow. Robert Barnstone, Campaign Co-ordinator for Stop Heathrow Expansion, said: “We are sending Theresa May a reminder that she should not change her views on a third runway at Heathrow.” Residents around Heathrow want the threat of the 3rd runway ended for good.

Click here to view full story…

Government response to the Transport Committee report. Announcement on airport capacity in “October at the earliest”

11th July 2016.

“The Government had clear ambitions to announce a decision on airport capacity this summer, however given recent events and the parliamentary timetable it is not possible to make an announcement before the summer recess. Any announcement on airport capacity would need to be made when the House is in session and is likely to be in October at the earliest.”

Page 4.  http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmtrans/564/564.pdf


Determined opposition to 3rd runway from Ascot area residents badly affected by Heathrow noise

People in Ascot and surrounding areas are bitterly opposed to further expansion of Heathrow, and formed a local group Residents Against Aircraft Noise (RAAN). The area is around 15 miles from Heathrow, and residents are upset and annoyed about the new level of plane noise they are having to endure. Before early 2014 there were virtually no flights to or from Heathrow over the area. Then in August 2014, Heathrow started ‘trials’ without informing anyone and since then the area has been subjected to an enormous amount of noise pollution. People say they have not been able to get proper uninterrupted night’s sleep for almost two years, for most of the time, due to plane noise which only stops for a few hours each night – not enough to get 7 hours sleep, let alone 8 hours of peace. People feel they can no longer enjoy their gardens in summer any more, with planes thundering overhead as often as every 3 minutes. In hot weather, people have to choose between being hot with fresh air, and less plane noise – or being cooler with the windows open, but being woken up. There is anger, in Ascot as in so many areas, that Heathrow is able to “ride roughshod over our peace, homes, business, environment.” The prospect of another runway, making the noise situation even worse, is almost unimaginable. Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead (RBWM), wrote to David Cameron regarding the issues about noise and air pollution at Heathrow.

Click here to view full story…

Chris Grayling says runway decision announcement “within weeks” – so maybe early September?

A decision on a new runway in the southeast could be made “within weeks” after the new transport secretary, Chris Grayling, who replaces Patrick McLoughlin, said the government had to “move rapidly” on the issue. Given the strength of feeling on the issue, it is unlikely that a decision will be taken during the parliamentary summer recess. MPs start their summer break on Thursday and return on September 5th. So a decision could be made between 5th and 15th September. Mr Grayling, interviewed yesterday on BBC Radio 4’s The World This Weekend, said: “I am very clear that I want to move rapidly with a decision on what happens on airport capacity. It is a decision that will be taken collectively by the government. “We have a quasi-judicial role so I’m not going to say today whether I prefer Gatwick or Heathrow … I’m going to look at this very carefully in the coming weeks.” He added: “What I’ll be saying to the business community today is I think we need to take a rapid decision to provide certainty on what’s going to happen and that will be my objective.” Patrick McLoughlin had said last month that a final decision was unlikely to be taken before October, but that was in the expectation of there being no new Prime Minister until September. Logically, it would take the new Transport Secretary many weeks to fully understand the brief, and the highlycomplex issues involved.

Click here to view full story…

Archive material reveals the extent of new Prime Minister’s opposition to a 3rd runway at Heathrow over many years

Campaign group HACAN has unearthed archive material, from Theresa May’s website, which reveals that the new Prime Minister has been a fierce opponent of a third runway at Heathrow, for many years. Her comments on Heathrow since 2008 are copied here. For example, in January 2009 in response to the decision by the Labour Government to give the go-ahead to a 3rd runway, she said: “I know from all the letters and emails I get that many local people will be devastated by the Government’s decision. A third runway will result in thousands of additional flights, increased noise and more pollution for thousands of people. The Government’s promises on the environmental impact of this are not worth the paper they are written on – there are no planes currently on the market that would allow them to meet their noise and carbon dioxide targets. …. We need a better Heathrow, not a bigger Heathrow.” And “my constituents face the prospect of a reduction in their quality of life with more planes flying overhead, restriction in driving their cars locally and a far worse train service in Crossrail. I hope that the Secretary of State recognises that as a result of today’s announcement, nobody will take this Government seriously on the environment again.” In March 2008 she said: “The Government needs to show that expansion is consistent with national targets for tackling climate change and cutting CO2 emissions,” She has also consistently expressed concern about night flights.

Click here to view full story…

Hoping to scare post-Brexit Britain into building its 3rd runway, Heathrow lists Gatwick’s long-haul failures

With the arrival of Theresa May as the new Prime Minister, a new Cabinet, and a new Transport Secretary (Chris Grayling replacing Patrick McLoughlin) the battle of Heathrow and Gatwick is hotting up. Even further than before. There is a new flurry of announcements, and spurious polls, and surveys of various sorts – as well as just plain spin. Both airports are attempting to capitalise on uncertainty about Brexit and its (as yet unknown) consequences, and rather than suggest a sensible delay to consider how Brexit pans out, are trying to make out that their runway will be even more vital in a post-Brexit Britain. Especially threatened by Theresa May’s record of statements against a 3rd runway, Heathrow is pulling out all the stops. It has produced research proving how inferior Gatwick would be in terms of “connecting the UK to the world” and global growth and emerging markets etc etc. Heathrow says, as is quite true and well known, that Gatwick has few long-haul flights, those it has are largely for leisure purposes, and many of its long-haul flights are not frequent. Many airlines start long-haul routes at Gatwick, and transfer to Heathrow as soon as the chance arises. Heathrow says in the last 6 years, Gatwick lost 7 long haul routes to emerging markets, and gained 2, but in that time Heathrow lost 3 and gained 9 routes to emerging markets.

Click here to view full story…

Heathrow Airport expansion in doubt after Theresa May promotes critics to top cabinet posts

A 3rd Heathrow runway appears increasingly unlikely after Theresa May appointed to her Cabinet a series of opponents to it. Justine Greening, the new Education Secretary, has said building another runway at Heathrow is not a “smart decision” while Philip Hammond and Boris Johnson have also been opposed. Chris Grayling, who is now the Transport Secretary, replacing Patrick McLoughlin,has voiced few public opinions on airport expansion in recent years – though probably privately backed Heathrow in 2009. He will now help oversee the decision on whether Heathrow or Gatwick is chosen for expansion. Whether the option of not choosing either, which would be the sensible decision, is also being reconsidered is not known. Both David Cameron and George Osborne were keen on a Heathrow runway – indeed it was likely that a decision to approve it would have been taken days after a “Remain” vote in the EU Referendum – are now both just backbenchers. Boris Johnson, who has said he would “lie down in front of the bulldozers” if Heathrow built a runway, would face calls to resign if he remained in a Cabinet that backed the project. Philip Hammond, the new Chancellor, said last year: “London’s role as an international air transport hub can be maintained without additional runways at Heathrow. A second runway at Gatwick, plus enhanced transport links between the airports and better transport links to London will create a ‘virtual’ hub airport, maintaining Heathrow’s role in the local economy without expanding it.”

Click here to view full story…

Howard Davies makes more dodgy, unjustifiable, claims about necessity of building a 3rd Heathrow runway, regardless of Brexit

After the Brexit vote, there are very real uncertainties about the demand for air travel in future decades. Agreements need to be worked out between the UK and Europe, and this includes the Open Skies agreement between the UK and the US. These could take several years to work out. The Airports Commission gave absolutely no consideration to the possibility of Brexit. However, instead of sensibly deciding to delay a runway decision, Sir Howard Davies (as ever appearing oblivious of the many and serious deficiencies of his Commission’s report) is pushing hard, in the media, for a Heathrow runway. These claims are dangerous. Howard Davies says the economic case for a 3rd runway has been strengthened by the Brexit vote; “there are already signs of a slowdown in inward investment, which the project would help to offset.” .. The UK “needs some forward-looking decisions to create a sense of momentum, and the construction industry….will soon need the work.” Some businesses see not building the runway as “a symbol of a lack of interest in Britain’s links with the wider world.” He says a Brexit choice is “presented by our competitors as an insular move. An early runway decision would do a lot to offset that impression. I hope the cabinet can be brought to see that argument as soon as possible… ” … “If you say your strategy is to be a global trading nation reaching out to China and India, but actually you aren’t prepared to provide any airport capacity for people to land here, then that’s a joke.”

Click here to view full story…

Ground-breaking seminar on aircraft noise and mental health to be held in House of Commons

A ground-breaking seminar discussing the impact of aircraft noise on mental health was held in Parliament on 4th July. The seminar, by HACAN and the Aviation Environment Federation (AEF) explored the issue. Hosted by Dr Tania Mathias, MP for Twickenham, the seminar heard from Dirk Schreckenberg, one of the authors of the seminal NORAH study which looked at the link between noise and health at Frankfurt Airport. The study found negative effects on both mental well-being and on depression, from plane noise – especially in people experiencing increased levels of noise. A resident from West London, Chris Keady, spoke about his own history of mental problems, and the impact of high levels of aircraft noise on him. Not enough is known about the impact of exposure to aircraft noise, especially loud noise, often repeated, at different times of day and night, on mental health and stress levels. The evidence suggests that people who already have mental health issues can find aircraft noise particularly disturbing. There is a real problem if there is no escape from the noise, and people feel powerless and impotent against this imposition. We need a constructive dialogue involving noise experts, politicians, campaigners and the aviation industry to give proper consideration to this issue. Matt Gorman from Heathrow Airport also spoke at the event.

Click here to view full story…

Heathrow aircraft noise must be cut says Henley MP, John Howell

The MP for Henley, John Howell, has called for a “significant reduction” in noise from aircraft over the Henley area. With other MPs from Oxfordshire, Berkshire and Surrey he had a meeting with representatives from Heathrow and NATS about the increased noise problem they are experiencing. Mr Howell has had complaints from constituents about increased noise from aircraft coming into land at Heathrow, particularly when there was an easterly wind, when planes circled over Henley. Martin Rolfe, chief executive of NATS, “accepted that increased aircraft noise was a problem for some people” and agreed to investigate individual issues of serious disturbance if they were reported to him by the MPs. [Whatever that will achieve]. Mr Rolfe said there had been no changes to routes but that the flight patterns within controlled airspace changed almost daily. This is the standard thing the airspace management bodies say. People overflown know they experience a change. The CAA etc use semantics to say this is not technically a change, but just a difference in how a route is flown. One of the key improvements in how the airspace change is managed is to recognise and accept that changes to fleet mix, intensity of use of a route, height of planes and times of day are all changes. They have to in future be acknowledged as such, and taken into account fully in the process.

Click here to view full story…

Early decision on a new south-east runway thought unlikely, due to Brexit and Cameron resignation

There is much speculation and uncertainty about what will happen on the runway situation, and whether – or how much – it will be delayed. A leak was inadvertently made to PoliticsHome on 22nd (not intended to go out till after a Remain vote) indicating that the government would make a runway announcement on 7th or 8th July. That now seems very unlikely indeed. Heathrow put out a bland statement, realising that the rapid decision in their favour is not looking likely, and making out that their runway is of great national importance. Nobody knows what future role Boris may play, but he promised in May 2015 to “lie down in front of bulldozers” to stop a Heathrow runway. Gatwick is no more likely to succeed. There are also fears for infrastructure projects like HS2,and future investment in other rail services. In short, there is immense uncertainty about almost everything. Many of the UK’s rail franchises are controlled and operated by European state-owned companies from Germany, the Netherlands and France. What happens with them? Business likes to plan ahead, and does not like uncertainty or being in limbo. The extent to which air travel will grow in future is now in doubt, with a recession likely – and UK air passenger numbers fall in recessions. The weakness of the currency will make many foreign leisure trips more expensive for Brits.

Click here to view full story…

Unconfirmed leak that 7th or 8th July possible dates for government runway announcement – but that was before Brexit ….. so now highly unlikely ….

23.6.2016    PoliticsHome learned that “Ministers are planning to announce their decision on whether to build a third runway at Heathrow in two weeks’ time” (no mention of Gatwick by PoliticsHome.)

[The announcement] “has been pencilled in for 7th July – the day after the publication of the Chilcot Inquiry into the Iraq War – although it could be moved to 8th July. Sources close tothe process have told PoliticsHome the Prime Minister is eager to make the announcement before parliament rises for its summer recess on 21st July. However, publishing it the day after the 2.6 million-word Chilcot report comes out could be seen by some as trying to bury the controversy while the public’s attention is elsewhere.”    Link

24.6.2016    All now rather overtaken by events ….


Manchester Airport rubbishes claims Heathrow expansion is crucial for Northern Powerhouse to succeed

The boss of Manchester Airport, Ken O’Toole, has rubbished Heathrow’s claims that a new London runway is crucial to the Northern Powerhouse. He argues that Manchester is an international airport in its own right with many direct long-haul routes. He says Manchester airport could make up any long haul capacity gap over the next 15 years and beyond “if the country adopts a culture of healthy competition.” Manchester started a direct service to Beijing last week, giving the North its first ever non-stop flight to mainland China. But Heathrow continually tries to persuade that, without a third Heathrow runway, northern businesses would lose “up to £710m” per year. Manchester airport believes it can have a range of long haul flights, not only to tourist destinations – mentioning important markets like “Singapore, Hong Kong, Atlanta, Los Angeles, Boston and, from next March, San Francisco.” If people can get flights to these destinations direct from Manchester, they do not need to – inconveniently – travel via Heathrow. Ken O’Toole says some 22 million people live within two hours’ drive of Manchester Airport. They have a huge amount of spare capacity on their two runways. Heathrow is very nervous of losing the transfer traffic it cannot manage without, to either other hubs like Schiphol or Dubai – or the growth of airports like Manchester.

Click here to view full story…

Heathrow protesters found guilty of graffiti subvertising misleading pro-3rd runway billboards (later ruled against by ASA

Two protesters in March 2015 subvertised two Heathrow advertising hoardings, and removed one Heathrow poster from a bus stop. They changed one massive hoarding, on a road close to Heathrow, that said “Those living around us are behind us” to say “Those living around us are CHOKING.” Another billboard with the slogan “Expand Heathrow and you grow the economy by up to £211 billion” was changed to say “Expand Heathrow and you grow the economy by destroying homes.” The two men, Larry Rose and Joe McGahan, were tried at Isleworth Crown Court and found guilty. They were charged with criminal damage. They pleaded not guilty, and defended themselves using the defence of lawful excuse. They had attempted to alter Heathrow’s fraudulent billboards in order to portray a more accurate reality of the harm and misery Heathrow’s expansion would bring to local residents and the environment. They cited evidence of the health impact of air pollution around Heathrow, and the increased carbon emissions that an extra runway would cause. The two were given conditional discharges and fines totalling £2,640 – of which £1,200 was to Heathrow to pay for cleaning up. Both adverts were subsequently found to be misleading by the Advertising Standards Authority, and Heathrow was told to withdraw them.

Click here to view full story…

Another great piece by Simon Jenkins on why the UK does not need another runway, but better roads and rail instead

Simon Jenkins, writing in the Evening Standard, says David Cameron should focus on improving the country’s railways and roads, rather than adding a runway. He asks of Cameron: “Is 2016 to be megaproject Armageddon?” …”We need constantly to remember a crucial fact about London’s airports. They have next to nothing to do with “business and industry” and the much-vaunted UK plc. ” ….”But when the Airports Commission was set up, Heathrow hurled the kitchen sink of lobbying at it, and won the day.” … “Heathrow is full or, as the planners put it, “at capacity”. But then so is Waterloo, so is Victoria, so is the M25, so is every London hospital, school and prison. Big, booming cities are always at capacity. That is why resources must be planned sensibly. Roads, railways, hospitals and schools are more crucial to the prosperity and welfare of the capital than the convenience of tourists, important though they may be.” … [Cameron] clearly does not regard the pressure on Heathrow as being critical to the economy. He is right. There is no overriding reason for London to have a giant “hub” airport.” …”If Cameron really wants to help the British economy with mega-infrastructure, every survey shows that the best value for money is from improving commuter railways and building better roads.” Lots of great points in the full article ….

Click here to view full story…

Heathrow Express has to cut off-peak fares, to try to smooth demand. Future threat from Crossrail?

Britain’s most expensive train journey per mile, the Heathrow Express from Paddington, is raising the fare on its peak time tickets – to cut congestion. The peak fare standard rate will rise from £22 to £24. But return fares on off-peak tickets will fall from £36 to £25. Heathrow Express hope this will smooth out the flow, even if Heathrow is keen on maximum numbers of passengers at rush hour peaks. One wonders how the trains could possibly cope with the passengers generated by a 3rd runway. The Heathrow Connect service, which also runs services from Paddington, offers single fares of £10.20, and the Underground fare for the same distance during peak times is £5.10. Some of the Heathrow Express trains had to be taken out of service, for months, recently due to cracks. This meant borrowing trains from Heathrow Connect. Last year, Heathrow Express was forced to drop its ‘every 15 minutes’ slogan when a customer rightly pointed out that the frequency falls to once every half hour later in the day. Christian Wolmar has pointed out that the Heathrow Express will face serious challenges once Crossrail starts operating from 2018: “Crossrail will have the fantastic advantage of bringing people from all over London direct to Heathrow in journey times only a bit longer than Heathrow Express and far cheaper.”

Click here to view full story…

Anti-3rd runway campaigners hold their own alternative “celebration” of Heathrow’s 70th birthday

To “celebrate” Heathrow’s 70th Birthday, on 31st May, anti-3rd runway campaigners and local village residents gathered in Harmondsworth – to express their opposition to the airport’s plans for expansion. With festivities centred around the historic “Five Bells” pub, there were 70 “No 3rd Runway” balloons, tours of the historic buildings including the historic, Grade 1 listed, tithe barn, enthusiastic chants of “No ifs, no buts, no 3rd runway, and a walk of part of the course of the proposed runway. To represent each of the houses earmarked for demolition for the runway, 783 small black planes were planted on the green. The cake was cut by representatives of some of the protest groups, including Hacan, Stop Heathrow Expansion, CHATR, TAG, RAAN, and Grow Heathrow. People had thought up entertaining presents for Heathrow, including the cheque from ratepayers – a big fat zero for infrastructure, a Mr Noisy book, a toy demolition truck, a Thomas the Tank Engine, a D-lock, a Pinocchio, and an alarm clock with its hands stuck on 4.30am. The day was a fun event, with a very serious purpose. With 783 homes to be demolished for a runway, and many more made uninhabitable by the proximity to an expanded Heathrow, many hundreds face the total loss of their homes and their community.

Click here to view full story…   Plenty of photos 

Leaders of 3 main London councils set out why they know better about Heathrow impacts than MPs hundreds of miles away

Mark Menzies (MP for Fylde near Blackpool) is one of the MPs with constituencies a long way from London, who have been persuaded by Heathrow to back its 3rd runway. He has accepted, without much consideration of the local impacts, the alleged benefits of a larger Heathrow, from the airport’s publicity. Now the leaders of some of the London boroughs that are the worst affected by Heathrow have written in “Conservative Home” to express their exasperation with this sort of attitude, by MPs whose own constituencies will suffer no local adverse impacts. Ravi Govindia, Nicholas True and Ray Puddifoot – the Leaders of Wandsworth, Richmond and Hillingdon respectively – say the 3rd runway would result in an extra 320,000 people subject to noise impact, new flight paths affecting their communities for the first time, 750 homes destroyed, and all in an area that already exceeds air quality legal limits. Many of their residents voted Conservative because of David Cameron’s firm promise in 2009 – “no ifs, no buts, no third runway at Heathrow”. They note that Mr Menzies is well known for backing localism – giving local councils the power to act in the best interests of their residents – not having something imposed on them. “He will therefore understand our views.”

Click here to view full story…

Heathrow sets out vague, unenforceable, offers to boost links to regions with 3rd runway (with easyJet’s help?)

Heathrow is trying to put more heavy pressure on the government, to back its 3rd runway plans, if there is an announcement in the next few months (EU referendum permitting). Heathrow are aware that it is not considered likely that the regions will get much benefit from a 3rd runway, so it now says it will “improve connectivity, with better air, rail and bus connections from Heathrow to every major town and city – North, East, South and West.” No details, and not things done by Heathrow itself. It says its runway means the creation of “up to 180,000 new jobs and 10,000 apprenticeships across the UK” (no time scale given, so pretty useless statement). And that: “A third runway will boost the economy by up to £211 billion, with the benefits spread across the country.” The £211 billion claim is very suspect. Even the Airports Commission’s most optimistic (criticised by its own advisors) was a maximum of £147 – and that is up to 2080, so over 60 years. Heathrow says it will increase flights to airports like Liverpool, Humberside and Newquay, if it got a new runway. And it might create a “new £10 million Route Development Fund which will provide start-up support for any potential new domestic destinations.” The Airports Commission realised that unless government subsidises (taxpayers’ money) domestic routes from Heathrow, the number would end up being lower than the number now.

Click here to view full story…

Sunday Times obtains details of £10.4 million bonus scheme, in stages, for Heathrow execs if they get 3rd runway

It emerged on 16th May that Heathrow executives were in line for large bonuses, if they managed to get a 3rd runway. Now the Sunday Times has details. They say eight executives could share a £10 million bonus pool. It appears they have already achieved £414,000 of the bonus, by getting the Airports Commission to select Heathrow in July 2015. Details of the bonus scheme are that the sums increase, based on the success of the executives’ lobbying. The next bonus payout would be, between the eight, £622,000 if they “create a climate of political support that enables the government to give its backing to expansion”. ie. if there is a government announcement this summer or autumn. Then they would get £829,000 if Heathrow is judged to be “on course to win planning approval” for its runway. There would be another £829,000 of the bonus if Heathrow can get the CAA to allow Heathrow much higher landing charges in future, to pay for the runway (the CAA controls its charges). The whole £10.4 million bonus is the airport’s “share in success” incentive, and includes other measures not related to a 3rd runway. It is to be paid out in 2019. The existence of the bonus scheme was initially denied by the airport. But it creates strong personal gain motives for senior staff, in pushing through the runway, regardless of its adverse impacts.

Click here to view full story…

HACAN new briefing shows how a 3rd Heathrow runway will not deliver for the regions

Heathrow has made repeated claims that its 3rd runway would be essential for the UK economy, and indeed, that it would be a vital boost to the economies of the regions. HACAN has set out, in a short briefing and in a video, how the claims are not justified. In reality, another Heathrow runway would have negative impacts on regional airports – not to mention huge costs for taxpayers across the country. HACAN says of Heathrow’s various promises that they are not guaranteed: ✈ Better connections are not guaranteed. ✈Instead, ever more resources will be concentrated in London and the South East. ✈Heathrow expansion may preclude aviation growth elsewhere. ✈ A 3rd Runway may be undeliverable. The Airports Commission itself found that, rather than reversing the decline in domestic flights between Heathrow and the regions, these will fall (from 7 now to 4 with a 3rd runway) unless they are subsidised, which could breach EU regulations. Due the cap on UK aviation carbon emissions, if a Heathrow runway is built (and it has to be used extensively, largely for high carbon long-haul flights)it is likely to mean restriction of the growth of flights from regional airports. A totally dominant Heathrow, eclipsing other UK airports, would make it difficult for long haul routes from the regions to be profitable.

Click here to view full story…

Alan Andrews, lawyer at ClientEarth, finds Heathrow offers on air quality “underwhelming” and vague

In an excellent article in Environment Journal, ClientEarth lawyer Alan Andrews says John Holland-Kaye’s two offers by Heathrow to try to get NO2 levels down are, in his words, “underwhelming.” Alan says the first offer to “create an ultra-low emissions zone [ULEZ] for airport vehicles by 2025” is vague, as we are not told what conditions this zone will have. It is also only airport vehicles, which are a tiny proportion of the total. Alan says this is also five years behind the tardy ULEZ which is currently slated to come into force in the congestion charging zone in central London. On the second offer, to “develop plans for an emissions charging scheme for all vehicles accessing the airport….” Alan comments that there is no deadline given for delivery, and it is far from the radical action needed to get air pollution down to legal levels quickly. Heathrow has also talked of extending a low emissions zone to the airport, but there is no detail of when this would happen or what standards would apply. ClientEarth believes that as the area around the airport breaks legal limits, all these measures should be happening regardless of expansion, in order to satisfy the Supreme Court order and achieve legal limits as soon as possible.

Click here to view full story…

Heathrow senior executives would get large bonuses if they manage to get 3rd runway

The Guardian has revealed that Heathrow’s annual report (December 2015) show that its top executives would benefit personally if the airport gets a 3rd runway. This is despite past denials that there were any financial incentives, not least when senior executives at Gatwick were found in February to have huge financial incentives if they manage to get a 2nd runway. Heathrow Airport Holdings Ltd states: “During the year a new bonus scheme was launched based on EBITDA, passenger service (as measured by independent ASQ – Airport Service Quality – scores) and airport expansion over the Q6 period….” [Q6 is the 5 year regulatory period 2014 – 2019]. A Heathrow spokesman said the runway bonus would only be a small part of a payout for meeting the strategic requirements of the business, hitting the profit targets etc. CEO John Holland-Kaye earned £2.06m last year, more than doubling his basic salary of £885,000. However, he could add even more to that should a 3rd runway be approved. The annual report states that while a bonus scheme linked to expansion was launched in 2015, “as the performance in respect of this scheme is so uncertain at this stage, no value in relation to these awards is included” in his 2015 earnings package. The Guardian says John Holland-Kaye is believed to be the architect of the new bonus scheme. The airport cut its wider wage bill by cutting 300 jobs last year (6,714 compared to 7,047 in 2014), but directors’ pay rose.

Click here to view full story…

Heathrow hoping to woo air freight companies with plans to give air freight more priority

There was a small decline (0.2%) in 2015 in cargo volumes at Heathrow compared with 2014 levels. The tonnage of freight (1.496 million tonnes, more imports than exports) is barely changed from the amount in 2011. Heathrow has tried to sell its 3rd runway plans partly on the grounds that it is vital for UK companies that export things needing air freight. Many non-perishable, not especially high value items are air freighted (books and brochures, raincoats and overcoats). Almost all air freight at Heathrow is belly hold, in passenger planes. DHL is the only freight airline there. Heathrow has plans (nothing started) to try to develop itself as a European cargo hub through the investment of around £180m, including a specialist pharmaceutical storage area — to support airlines to move highly valuable and temperature sensitive medicines. There would be a huge impact on local roads of all the freight vehicles, which would be diesel powered, and the NO2 pollution. IAG has a large freight hub in Madrid, shipping air cargo into Heathrow and Gatwick. Heathrow says it has restricted air freight capacity on some routes, but overall load factors were only about 60-65%. ie. there is plenty of space for more. Air freight companies would like Heathrow to allocate slots for them.

Click here to view full story…

Lord True, Richmond Council leader and Conservative peer, describes Heathrow promises as ‘worthless’ and asks David Cameron to deny expansion immediately

The leader of Richmond Council, Lord True, has called Heathrow’s pledge to ban night flights a “feeble attempt to bribe London.” He described Heathrow’s promises as “worthless” and said on the ending of night flights: “This so-called pledge falls short of what the Davies Commission requests and the Heathrow PR men simply cannot be believed. If they can stop pre-5.30am flights, why don’t they do it now? Rather than spending billions of pounds doing it?” On Heathrow’s claims about air quality improvements, Lord True commented:: “They cannot comply with EU air quality limits and their ‘jam’ promises are worthless…..if people’s health comes first – big Heathrow is dead in the water.” He said Heathrow had just made some token alterations to their original proposals. Richmond Council, along with Wandsworth, Hillingdon and Windsor & Maidenhead councils, have already made it clear that should the Government give a 3rd Heathrow runway the go-ahead – they would together launch legal action opposing the plans. Lord True: “I say to Mr Cameron – hundreds of thousands of Londoners remember your promise – “no ifs, no buts,” ….We expect our Prime Minister to keep his promise….”

Click here to view full story…

Heathrow’s vague proposal on no night flights – what is Heathrow really saying?

Heathrow currently, under current night flight controls that are due to be re-considered in 2017, is allowed 5,800 night flights per year. That’s an average of 16 arriving each morning, typically between 4.30am and 6am. The latest flights should leave by 11.30pm but there are many that are later, almost up to midnight. Heathrow has been very reluctant to agree to a ban between 11.30pm and 6am, which was the condition imposed by the Airports Commission. Heathrow claims the early arrivals are vital for businessmen catching early flights – especially those from the UK regions. But now, desperate to be allowed a 3rd runway, Heathrow mentions [very careful, rather odd wording]: “The introduction of a legally binding ban on all scheduled night flights for six and a half hours (as recommended by the Airports Commission) from 11 pm to 5:30 am when the third runway opens.” and “We will support the earlier introduction of this extended ban on night flights by Government as soon as the necessary airspace has been modernised after planning consent for the third runway has been secured.” Heathrow only mentions scheduled flights. Not late ones. It is widely recognised that for health, people need 7 – 8 hours of sleep per night. Not 6.5 hours. Heathrow makes no mention of the inevitable concentrated landings and take offs at the shoulder periods, in order to keep 6.5 hours quiet. Apart from insomniacs and shift workers, who else regards the end of the night as 5.30am?

Click here to view full story…

Heathrow’s commitment on 4th runway – what is Heathrow really saying?

The Airports Commission said, in giving its recommendation that a 3rd Heathrow runway should be built, that a firm condition was that no 4th runway should ever be built there. The Commission’s wording in its Final Report (1.7.2015) was: “A fourth runway should be firmly ruled out. The government should make a commitment in Parliament not to expand the airport further. There is no sound operational or environmental case for a four runway Heathrow.” And “This may be as part of a National Policy Statement or through legislation.” What Heathrow has now said is that it will: “Accept a commitment from Government ruling out any fourth runway.” This does not say this ban on a 4th runway would be in legislation. It merely says there would be a commitment. But the coalition government made a commitment not to build a 3rd runway, in 2010. That commitment was then overturned in the next Parliament. It scarcely encourages trust. A commentator in the Huffington Post says (as well as the long history of Heathrow’s broken promises) that allowing the 3rd Heathrow runway would effectively say Heathrow is now and ever will be the UK’s hub airport. Hub airports actually “need at least four runways and preferably room to expand further.”

Click here to view full story…

Heathrow makes guarded, carefully worded, offers to meet Airports Commission conditions for 3rd runway

Heathrow knows it has a difficult task in persuading the government that it can actually meet the (unchallenging) conditions put on its runway plans by the Airports Commission. Now John Holland-Kaye has written to David Cameron, setting out how Heathrow hopes to meet some conditions. They make out they will even exceed the conditions, in some cases. On Night flights, they say they will introduce a “legally binding ban on all scheduled night flights for six and a half hours (as recommended by the Airports Commission) from 11 pm to 5:30 am when the third runway opens.” [Note, scheduled – not late arrivals etc]. And they will “support the earlier introduction of this extended ban on night flights by Government as soon as the necessary airspace has been modernised after planning consent for the third runway has been secured.” [ie. full of caveats]. They dodge the issue of agreeing not to build a 4th runway, saying it they government makes a commitment in Parliament not to expand Heathrow further, then Heathrow will “Accept a commitment from Government ruling out any fourth runway..” [Words carefully chosen]. On noise and respite, Heathrow say “We will ensure there will be some respite for everyone living under the final flight path by using advances in navigational technology. We will consult and provide options on our proposals to alternate use of the runways.” [ie carefully chosen words, avoiding giving much away].

Click here to view full story…

Emirates expects reducing demand for domestic flights to Heathrow, as regional airports increase long-haul routes

The Times reports comments by Laurie Berryman, of Emirates, predicting that the demand for domestic flights in the UK will drop markedly in future. He considers that flights between London and Manchester could end altogether within ten years, because of HS2. The demand for internal flights is reducing each year, except for trips that take too long by train, such as to Glasgow, Edinburgh or further north in Scotland. This combines with the increase in long-haul flights from regional airports. Passengers in the regions have no desire to transfer via Heathrow, but would rather go direct. Or they are happy to transfer in Dubai or another airport – not necessarily via Heathrow. The HS2 rail line may be able to connect Manchester to London in under an hour and a quarter, which is about the same time as flying. Virgin’s Little Red domestic airline closed in 2015, due to insufficient demand for its flights into Heathrow. Mr Berryman said: “People who live in Manchester who want to go to Mumbai go via Dubai, not via London.” If Heathrow got another runway, it would damage the profitability of long haul flights from the regional airports. If it does not have another runway, its slots are too valuable to use on domestic routes. Emirates is increasing its long haul routes from Manchester and Birmingham.

Click here to view full story…

Recent opponent of Heathrow runway, Sadiq Khan, appoints pro-Heathrow runway, Lord Adonis on transport

Until June 2015, Sadiq Khan (now London Mayor) backed a 3rd Heathrow runway. He was Transport Minister under Gordon Brown, pushing for it. He then appreciated that he could not be elected Mayor if he backed the runway as it is so unpopular with millions of Londoners, who are adversely affected by it. Ministers are saying his election, and his opposition to a 3rd runway, will not influence their runway decision. The Mayor’s opinion on a runway carries some weight, though they cannot make the decision. Worryingly, Sadiq will appoint former Transport Secretary Lord Adonis, who strongly backs a Heathrow runway, to run transport in London. The Labour peer also heads the government’s National Infrastructure Commission. Sadiq backs a 2nd runway at Gatwick to increase airport capacity, as people in areas adversely affected by Gatwick did not get to vote in the Mayoral election. He also backs improved rail links to Stansted. It would be easier for a Conservative government to resist the opposition of a Labour mayor, than a Tory one, to a Heathrow expansion. Transport Professor, David Metz, said: “There is a respectable case for deferring this difficult political decision, to see how a very competitive aviation sector copes with the growth of demand for air travel” … seeing how market forces displace leisure travellers from Heathrow to Stansted in future.

Click here to view full story…

Willie Walsh says lower cost Heathrow runway option “Heathrow Hub” should be considered again, as cheaper

Willie Walsh, chief executive of British Airways’ owner IAG, says ministers should not be bound to the Heathrow third north-west runway proposal. He wants the Heathrow Hub option (extending the northern runway to the west) given proper consideration, as it would be cheaper. BA operates the majority of flights (just over 50%) at Heathrow, but Walsh has repeatedly said he is not prepared to pay exorbitant costs – in order to pay for a “gold plated” runway scheme, with all the add-ons. The Heathrow Hub scheme is understood to still be considered by the DFT, as is the Gatwick runway. (All have very serious environmental and economic problems, which is why the government has not been able to come to a rapid decision – largely knowing it would face well informed legal challenges). Walsh believes the Heathrow Hub option would be cheaper, though the costs of surface transport etc to fall on the taxpayer, would be similar. Willie Walsh contrasted Heathrow’s costs with a similar scheme in Dublin, the base of one of BA’s sister airlines in IAG, Aer Lingus. “The airport is talking about building a second runway at a tiny fraction of the cost of the Heathrow third – £350m against £23bn.” He has considered moving more BA planes to Dublin, if and when its 2nd runway is built.

Click here to view full story…

Transport Select Committee wants rapid decision on runway location – then sort out the problems later …..

The Commons Transport Select Committee, chaired by Louise Ellman (for years a strong advocate of a larger Heathrow) has published a report that wants the government to make a rapid decision on the location of a new south east runway. Ms Ellman says Patrick Mcloughlin should set out a clear timetable of the decision making process. He should also set out what research the government has already done and what remains to be done. The Committee wants a decision in order to, in its view, remove uncertainty for business so companies can be planning and investing. The report is entirely of the view that a runway is needed for links to emerging markets. It ignores the reality that most journeys are for leisure, and it ignores the huge costs to the taxpayer, of either scheme. The Committee wants a location decision, and somehow believes that all other environmental and infrastructure problems will then (magically?) be sorted out. They say: “… we believe that the noise and environmental effects can be managed as part of the pre-construction phase after a decision has been made on location, as can the challenge of improving surface access.” So decide first – with what is likely to be a bad decision – and work out how to deal with the intractable, and inevitable, problems later. Is that a sensible course of action for a responsible government?

Click here to view full story…

Residents invite Transport Select Cttee Chair – Louise Ellman – to Heathrow Villages that she wants destroyed for runway

Local resident-led group Stop Heathrow Expansion (SHE) has issued an open invitation to Louise Ellman MP, Chair of the Commons Transport Select Committee, to visit Harmondsworth, Sipson, Longford and Harlington – the villages around Heathrow that would be destroyed or largely uninhabitable if a third runway were to be built. The invitation comes as the Committee published a report which repeats previous calls to the Government for a rapid decision on Heathrow expansion, which the committee strongly supports. The DfT agreed to respond to the report by the end of May. It said: “We are undertaking more work on environmental impacts, including air quality, noise and carbon so we can develop the best possible package of measures to mitigate the impacts on local people.”” But the Transport Committee, gung-ho for a runway regardless of the problems (and entirely omitting mention of the vast cost to the taxpayer for surface transport) said “we believe that the noise and environmental effects can be managed as part of the pre-construction phase after a decision has been made on location, as can the challenge of improving surface access and devising suitable schemes for compensation for residents in affected communities.”

Click here to view full story…

Heathrow anti-3rd runway campaigners play aircraft noise in Central London to mark International Noise Awareness Day

Marking International Noise Awareness Day, Heathrow anti-third runway campaigners brought aircraft noise to the streets of Central London to illustrate the fact that London is the most overflown city in Europe. Campaigners from a range of organisations accompanied a lorry – blaring out loud aircraft noise through loudspeakers – at around the level people experience under the approach flight path – outside Europe House in Smith Square. This was to highlight the fact that already 28% of the people who are affected by aircraft noise right across Europe live under the Heathrow flight paths. After Smith Square, the lorry headed off back towards Heathrow, blaring its noise, approximately along the course of the arrivals flight path for a the new northern runway that Heathrow wants. European Commission’s figures show that over 725,000 people (see source and fact check below) are impacted by noise from Heathrow flights and another 25,000 by flights using London City airport. That is nearly a third of all people affected by aircraft noise right across Europe. John Stewart, the chair of HACAN, said that on noise grounds alone a new runway at Heathrow should be ruled out. Adding an extra 250,000 Heathrow flights per year is not a reasonable proposition.

Click here to view full story…

While Heathrow try to claim cost of surface access needed for 3rd runway is just £2.2 billion, TfL estimates cost of £18.4 billion

Heathrow’s management have claimed that only £1.2bn of public funds would be needed to upgrade local road and rail links, for its 3rd runway, while Heathrow itself would spend a further £1bn, making £2.2bn. The Airports Commission estimated the cost to be around 5.7bn, to include widening the M4 and tunnelling the M25 under the runway. But now TfL has come up with figures showing the total cost would be about £18.4bn, which is hugely more. TfL believes Heathrow and the Commission have substantially underestimated the amount of increased congestion the runway would cause on the roads, and on trains due to 30 million more annual passengers. They also did not take freight into account. The government has said whichever airport might be allowed a runway would have to meet all the costs which arise due to a new runway, and from which the airport would directly benefit. TfL has added the cost of other vital transport infrastructure, such as improving bus services, traffic management measures and alterations to the South West and Great Western Main Lines. TfL says none of the schemes in its £18.4bn figure are already committed, funded or planned. The Campaign for Better Transport said the money would be better spent elsewhere eg. on the Northern Powerhouse.

Click here to view full story…

Heathrow, sounding a bit desperate, might make a comment on night flights “in a few months’ time”

One of the conditions the Airports Commission put on a new Heathrow runway was a ban on night flights, between 11.30pm and 6am. Heathrow has been very unwilling to agree to this, with John Holland-Kaye saying in February that he was yet to “engage” with the government and airlines on the subject. He has also tried to claim there would be fewer night flights with a 3rd runway. Now, as the government is preoccupied with the EU referendum (23rd June) and not considering the runway question, and there has been a lot of negative publicity about Heathrow, John Holland-Kaye (bit of desperation?) is saying the airport may agree to the ban. He said: “We’re consulting with airlines and local communities about how we can deliver what the Airports Commission is asking for. … We’ll be able to make a solid comment on that in a few months’ time.” But that statement gives no indication of actually getting rid of night flights. It is unclear how consulting local communities is going to get airlines to alter the way they schedule flights, to avoid the night period. Or whether it would mean more flights between 11 – 11.30pm, and more from 6 – 7am, reducing the benefit of the short period without planes. People need more than 6½ hours sleep, so worse noise at the shoulder periods would be little improvement.

Click here to view full story…

Three SHE public meetings in the Heathrow villages for residents threatened by 3rd runway – serious concern on air pollution

Residents from the Heathrow villages joined local MP John McDonnell (Hayes & Harlington) and Chair of Stop Heathrow Expansion (SHE), Jackie Clark to discuss the impacts of a third runway on the local area. The meeting was the second of three planned around the area. John McDonnell outlined the latest developments with the campaign, and some of his activities on the issue in recent months. They also outlined the plan of action for later this year, if the Government announces its support for the runway.  John said:  “In Hayes we face being subject to more aircraft noise, more air pollution and a poorer quality of life. Even if the government opts to support a third runway in July or September, we will fight this in the courts, as we did last time. And we will win again.” The subject of most concern was air pollution, and in particular the impact on children.  Parts of Hayes and West Drayton are the most polluted areas near Heathrow, with air quality monitors register damaging level of NO2 above the EU limit of 40 micrograms per cubic metre. Other topics discussed throughout the evening included aircraft noise, traffic congestion and the political situation. Some residents remain unaware of the terrible impacts of a 3rd runway with a further 260,000 flights and associated road traffic including many more heavy goods vehicles

Click here to view full story…

Residents in Heathrow villages say airport failing to tackle nightmare of parking by private hire vehicles

People in the Heathrow villages have the continuing anxiety of having to move out of their homes, if the government decides to approve a Heathrow runway. Now, in addition to the many trials and tribulations they face, from their airport neighbour, there is an increasing problem of parking by Uber drivers, waiting to get lucrative trips from Heathrow. Stop Heathrow Expansion (SHE) report that for years they have had to endure the anti-social behaviour of private hire vehicles in their streets. SHE have found bottles of urine, excrement and litter left by the legions of private hire drivers who park in every available space. This nightmare takes place in Harlington, Colnbrook, Stanwell Moor and many other locations that enable these drivers to have speedy access to Heathrow. Clearly none of these drivers live close to Heathrow otherwise they could park in their own streets, so the taxi work is not going to local people. SHE says complaints have been made to Heathrow and TfL for years but residents have just been fobbed off with excuses. No action has been taken and residents have seen no improvement. Residents have experienced intimidation and threats from drivers if they photograph them and their cars. The number of Uber drivers licensed grows by several hundred every week. Better control seems to be needed.

Click here to view full story…

Advertising Standards Authority rules against misleading “Back Heathrow” ad claiming 60% support for runway

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has banned an advert from “Back Heathrow” claiming that most local people back Heathrow expansion. “Back Heathrow” is a lobby group, funded through Heathrow with the aim of pushing for the 3rd runway. Back Heathrow ran a regional press ad headlined “Rallying for the runway” with the line “Don’t believe the hype. Most people living in communities near Heathrow Airport support its expansion.” They claimed from polls there was 60% support. The ASA says the claim was misleading, and the 60% figure had only been massaged up from 50% to that level by omitting the 15% who did not express an opinion. The ASA considered most consumers were likely to understand it to mean that a clear majority of those surveyed in the poll (the original sample) were in support of expansion. They ruled that removing the 15% was “not a suitable methodology by which to draw such a conclusion, and was misleading. The ad must not appear again in its current form, and “Back Heathrow” must not repeat these claims ” unless it held robust substantiation for them.” This is a blow to “Back Heathrow,” the strategy of which has been to try to convince decision-makers that a majority of local people back a 3rd runway. That claim looks flimsy.

Click here to view full story…

Three Plane Stupid activists – the Tunnel Trio – sentenced to £305 fines each for blocking Heathrow tunnel in November

On 26th November 2015, on the day Parliament discussed airport expansion, three activists from Plane Stupid parked a vehicle across both lanes of the entrance tunnel and locked themselves to it, unfurling a banner quoting David Cameron’s election promise in 2010: “No Ifs, No Buts: No Third Runway”. The tunnel was finally cleared after 3 – 4 hours. The activists pleaded guilty, and have now been sentenced – by Judge Deborah Wright – to fines of £200 each, increased to £305 each with the addition of court and CPS costs. The three protestors are: Esme Waldron, 23, a student from Brighton; Alistair Cannell, 26, a bar worker, from Brighton; and William Pettifer, 27, a worker on an organic farm in Somerset. The Judge reduced the sentence from the original level of £300 each, as they pleaded guilty and had been careful to avoid any danger to the public. She acknowledged the good record of each defendant, and their sincerity in their belief of the harm that would be done by a 3rd Heathrow runway. However, she felt they had been inconsiderate of the travelling public in causing around 75 to miss flights, and more to have problems with reaching the airport or parking. The fines were low, as the incomes of all three are low. A lively crowd, including some of the Heathrow 13, assembled before the hearing, to support the activists.

Click here to view full story…

‘Drone’ hits British Airways plane approaching Heathrow, with no damage caused

The British Airways flight from Geneva was hit by a drone as it approached Heathrow at about 12:50pm on Sunday 17th. The plane was an Airbus A320, with 132 passengers and five crew on board. After landing safely, the pilot reported an object – believed to be a drone – had struck the front of the plane. It did not do serious damage, and a BA spokesman said the plane “was fully examined by our engineers and it was cleared to operate its next flight.” This is thought to be the first time a drone has actually hit a plane, with many previous incidents of near misses. Aviation police based at Heathrow have launched an investigation. No arrests have been made. BA is giving the police “every assistance with their investigation.” The CAA said it is illegal to fly drones near airports, and the penalties include imprisonment. In March, BALPA called for research by the DfT and the CAA into what would happen if a drone hit an airliner, after 23 near-misses around UK airports between 11th April and 4th October 2015. The effect could be serious if a drone smashed into the cockpit windscreen, or if it crashed into an engine. Unlike with bird strikes, the drones carry lithium batteries – there is concern these could cause a serious engine fire.

Click here to view full story…

2nd runway at Dublin airport threatens Heathrow’s position as main IAG hub

Heathrow may face more competition for hub traffic from Dublin, if there is a 2nd runway in 2020 – and airlines prefer using Dublin rather than Heathrow. This might mean Heathrow being partly sidelined. In May 2015 Aer Lingus, the Irish flag carrier, was bought by IAG (International Airlines Group) – which owns British Airways. As part of IAG’s takeover there was the benefit of new routes and more long-haul flights from Dublin, where Aer Lingus is one of the two main airline customers, along with Ryanair. Willie Walsh, IAG’s CEO, said in 2015 that owning Aer Lingus would allow IAG “to develop our network using Dublin as a hub between the UK, continental Europe and North America, generating additional financial value for our shareholders”. Willie Walsh believed that buying Aer Lingus was a wise move, as it was “inevitable” that Dublin would get a 2nd runway in the next few years. IAG believes that it can expand the group’s flights via Dublin or Madrid – especially if there is no new runway at Heathrow. It could have the impact of removing business from Heathrow – British Airways is the largest airline there with around 50% of the slots.

Click here to view full story…

Government decision expected soon, to allow Heathrow planning consent on ending Cranford agreement

Heathrow submitted a planning application in May 2013 for various additions to taxiways and other runway-associated infrastructure, to enable flights to take off towards the east, from the northern runway – after the ending of the Cranford Agreement in 2009. This was rejected in March 2014, and since then Heathrow appealed, and a planning enquiry took place in June 2015. The outcome should be announced imminently, maybe within weeks, with the Planning Inspector making his recommendation to the Government. Full runway alternation could halve the number of flights over Colnbrook during easterly operations, so this is welcomed by some. Those under the final approaches to the northern runway in areas such as Windsor, Datchet, Colnbrook and Poyle would see overflights reduce in total by 302, from 630 to 328 movements per day. However, there would be roughly 35,000 extra flights a year over Cranford, rather than from the southern runway. The Inspector recommended that, if the planning application is approved, there should be an insulation scheme for households that would otherwise only be entitled to relocation assistance.

Click here to view full story…

Teddington Action Group TAG gets response from Department of Health re. its input on health effects of aviation

The Teddington Action Group (TAG) is very active in opposing the recently intensified level of noise they experience from Heathrow flights. They recently asked the Department of Health what role they have in assessing the impact of aviation noise on public health and whether they have any influence over the Government’s aviation policy, which is developed by the DfT. The Dept of Health (in its not very reassuring response) said it is Public Health England (PHE) that provides advice and input into noise related health matters for the Department of Health, including aviation policy. PHE worked with the DfT on the Survey of Noise Attitudes 2014 (a field study investigating noise attitudes of people living close to airports) – PHE is represented on the project board that oversees the methodology and overall progress. PHE is steering the Health Impact Assessment process for the Airport Capacity Appraisal of Sustainability. On the Night Flight Restrictions consultation – PHE is providing ad-hoc advice to DfT on the evidence base. PHE has not yet had any involvement with the design of the Government’s Future Airspace Strategy. TAG asked about proper assessment of health impacts, and PHE said it plans to continue its engagement with the DfT by providing evidence-based advice and promote research especially on “interventions to protect and improve health.”

Click here to view full story…

Network Rail does feasibility studies on Heathrow to Waterloo rail link

A new rail link between Heathrow and London Waterloo has moved a step closer after a Network Rail study suggested there was a strong case for the project. The Southern Rail Access proposals would connect Heathrow to Waterloo, Guildford and Basingstoke, possibly via Feltham and Hounslow. This is part of the long-awaited Southern Rail Access proposals. A Network Rail feasibility study suggests the work would cost between £700m and £1.8bn, depending on which route is chosen. There are three route options, and all are considered to be good or very good value irrespective of whether a third runway is built at Heathrow. Of the three, a semi-fast Heathrow to Waterloo service, via Richmond, was the best value London link. However further appraisal is needed. Heathrow airport is enthusiastic about the rail link, as it would connect more passengers and “treble our rail capacity by 2040.” Heathrow also hopes it would help reduce local rail traffic, if passengers get to and from the airport using the rail link. Hounslow Council earlier this year recommended a new southern link to Heathrow via Feltham, with trains running on an elevated track via a new station in Bedfont. The separate consultation on the proposed Western Rail Link to Heathrow, from Reading, ends on 4th April.

Click here to view full story…

HACAN welcomes plan to build Adobe huts on playing fields of Eton

1st April. This story is, sadly, not true. But it is a lovely thought ….. Campaign group HACAN has welcomed today’s announcement from the Government that it will fund deluxe Adobe huts for Eton College if it gives the green light to a third runway at Heathrow. Eton will be directly under the flight path of a new runway. There have been concerns expressed of the noise impact on Eton’s famous playing fields. HACAN chair John Stewart said, “Parents will undoubtedly welcome this announcement that Adobe huts will be built on the playing fields of Eton”. The huts will be an upmarket version of those already seen the playgrounds of a number of schools in Hounslow in west London. The Government had said that it will fund three in the first year after the opening of any new runway. They will be named after two of the school’s most famous old boys: Dave and Boris. And George (who went to St Paul’s). It was reported in April 2013 that four adobe domes had been put up in the grounds of Hounslow Primary school, which is under the southern runway flight path at Heathrow, in order to enable the children to use the playground despite the plane noise. In April 2013 Heathrow said it would spend £1.8 million to extend the scheme to 21 schools that are badly affected by aircraft noise. Heathrow is desperate to try and persuade London residents that aircraft noise is being dealt with. Including at Eton.

Click here to view full story…

Heathrow produces some unconvincing attempts to persuade that its air pollution from freight will be reduced

Heathrow knows it has real problems worsening local air quality, with vehicles associated with the airport adding a great deal of pollution. The Airports Commission report was particularly weak on NO2 air pollution, and ignored the emissions from Heathrow’s air cargo. Heathrow has now put out a short document attempting to convince that it is making serious improvements to local air quality. On air freight, it says it will be getting shippers to share lorry journeys. Heathrow says in 2016 it will: “• Keep pushing for greater consolidation of vehicle loads at Heathrow and aim to provide an online venue for freight operators to buy and sell empty space on their trucks by July. • Establish a sustainable freight partnership with operators by September with the objective of reducing emissions [No clue what that actually means ?] • Develop and publish our plans for building a call-forward cargo facility to reduce congestion, idling, and emissions of vehicles coming to Heathrow by the end of the year.” So that does not look like much. But Heathrow is trying to persuade the government soon. The reality is that Heathrow hopes to double its volume of air freight, with a new runway – and that freight is carried in diesel vehicles, and lorries are not producing less air pollution.

Click here to view full story…

Heathrow expansion would exacerbate London’s housing challenge, with up to 70,000 more homes needed by 2030

A 3rd Heathrow runway would exacerbate London’s housing challenge. The Airports Commission considered between about 30,000 and 70,000 extra homes needed in the area, for the extra employees attracted to the area, by 2030. In the recent report by the Mayor of London, he considers that there might demand for around 80,000 extra new homes by 2050, due to Heathrow with new direct, indirect and induced jobs Most will need to be accommodated in the region. The Airports Commission said: “…an average of some 500 homes per year in each of 14 local authorities – may be challenging to deliver, …” The Mayor says: “By 2030 the number of people living in the city will grow by 1.4 million to 10 million. By 2050 this number is forecast to be about 11.3 million … .West London and the areas surrounding the airport are, however, already struggling to keep up with background growth, in the face of overheated property markets and increasingly limited land supply. …The Airports Commission believes that expansion can be accommodated without placing additional pressure on housing. Primarily, it claims this by drawing on local unemployment to fill the new jobs; however, this is not borne out by experience of similar schemes; expansion will require a variety of skills levels and will attract employees from across the London area.”

Click here to view full story…

Report by Mayor of London on runway issue: Boris pushes strongly for 4-runway hub in Thames estuary (or Stansted)

Boris Johnson, due to leave office as Mayor of London in early May, has delivered a blistering attack on a 3rd Heathrow runway – and put forward, again, his vision of a huge 4-runway hub airport in the inner Thames Estuary (“Boris Island”). The Airports Commission’s imperfect report came down definitively backing a Heathrow runway, and ruled out the estuary option for a range of geographical, cost and environmental reasons. Boris says, in a report entitled “Landing The Right Airport”, that a four-runway airport east of London is the only way to secure enough capacity. His other option is Stansted. He believes these sites “away from populated areas” were the “only credible solution”. Daniel Moylan, Boris’s aviation adviser, said the inner Thames estuary airport would cost £20bn to £25bn – with an extra £25bn required to building road and rail connections. He said the 3rd Heathrow runway is estimated to cost £18.6bn, not taking into account the cost of surface access and measures to stop congestion, which the new report claims could be as high as £20bn. The report concludes: “As part of its next phase of work, it is incumbent on Government to revisit the entire Airports Commission process and consider a full range of credible options – including alternative hub locations. A failure to do so will undermine any attempt to bring forward a National Policy Statement and leave a decision vulnerable to legal challenge.

Click here to view full story…

Mayor reveals cost to public health from noise due to Heathrow 3rd runway would be £20 – 25 bn over 60 years

A new report published by the Mayor of London and TfL has revealed that the long term health effects of exposure to the extra noise – due to a 3rd Heathrow runway – would be valued at a staggering £20 to 25 billion over 60 years. The figure is derived using methodology from the WHO, which values each lost year of healthy life at £60,000. That reflects the increased risk of heart attack, stroke, dementia and other disorders shown to be linked to prolonged exposure to aircraft noise. TfL calculate that while there are now about 766,000 people affected by an “annoying” level of noise from Heathrow, if the speculative improvements in noise exposure proposed by the Airports Commission do not actually happen, there could be as many as 986,600 affected. There could also be between 98,900 and 277,100 people newly affected by plane noise for the first time. The runway would also expose 124 more schools and 43,000 school children to a level of aircraft noise proven to be damaging to learning. TfL also says the number of daily journeys to Heathrow by passengers and staff is expected to rise from 200,000 to 430,000 by 2050. “At some locations, non-airport passengers will be unable to join rail services because of crowding exacerbated by passengers travelling with luggage towards central London.”

Click here to view full story…

Heathrow hopes prematurely announcing “client partners” to build its hoped-for runway will boost its chances

Heathrow does not have any sort of (public) consent from the Government to build a third runway. It had hoped to be given the “nod” for its runway in December 2015. But the government realised there were too many environmental and economic problems that the Airports Commission had not dealt with adequately, and no decision could be made. The government is how hoping to make some sort of statement – probably in mid July. There is a likely major legal challenge from 4 local councils to the airport’s plans. Nevertheless, in an act of bravado (desperation?) Heathrow has announced that following “a competitive process Arup, CH2M, MACE and Turner & Townsend have been chosen to work alongside Heathrow Airport Limited to deliver Heathrow’s expansion as partners in the Programme Client….With the programme’s client partners now on board Heathrow is ready to begin the process of expansion as soon as Government gives the green light.” … “The client partners have been tasked with ensuring the programme is delivered to the highest industry standards in planning, innovation and quality.” Quite what the contract is between Heathrow and these firms is not specified. Critics say Heathrow is jumping the gun, and “counting some very expensive chickens before they are hatched”. Gatwick is also trying the same sort of thing.

Click here to view full story…

HACAN estimate true cost of noise insulation for 3rd Heathrow runway at around £1.8 bn – not £700 m

Heathrow has set aside £700 million to insulate homes affected by noise from a 3rd runway. That would be for 160,000 homes, which is the number regarded as being within the 55 decibel Lden noise contour, with the worst affected getting the full cost paid and others getting up to £3,000 to pay for the work. But the community anti-expansion group HACAN calculates that insulating all these homes would cost at least double the £700 million figure. HACAN estimates the real cost at nearer £1.8 billion, based on data they obtained from two companies that provide sound insulation. UK Soundproofing Ltd of West Sussex and Tudor Windows of London considered the average semi-detached house would cost around £11,800 to fully insulate against noise. It does not appear that Heathrow’s offer would be enough to do a proper job, even though they could probably get insulation cheaper by placing a huge contract. Heathrow is not intending to spend any more money on noise insulation, if it is not allowed a 3rd runway – and its insulation scheme is very poor in comparison with other large European airports. It is understood that Heathrow  currently pays for soundproofing, including double glazing and loft insulation, at approximately 40,000 homes. The insulation is, of course, of no use if windows are open – or outdoor, in street, park or garden.

Click here to view full story..

£500m rail tunnel from Langley (Slough) to Heathrow T5 – consultation ends 4th April

The public consultation about the plan to build a 3.4 mile (5.5 km) tunnel from Langley (just east of Slough) ends on 4th April. The plans by Network Rail are to for a tunnel to take train passengers directly to Heathrow Terminal 5, avoiding having to go via Paddington. This will mean Thames Valley and Welsh commuters can travel more directly to Heathrow. Plans for the £500m rail tunnel have been on public display since 9th February. The scheme could take 5 years to build, with the tunnelling taking 15 months. There are the usual claims of huge economic benefits to the area. Network Rail first proposed building the tunnel in 2012, and they hope it would mean journeys from Slough to the airport would be reduced to 7 minutes and journeys from Reading to 26 minutes. Currently, bus services are the most direct route to Heathrow. The tunnel would be part a range of upgrade measures on the Great Western Main Line – currently including the redevelopment of Reading Station – which links London, Bristol and South Wales. The building phase of the tunnel project would mean extensive site access – and presumably disruption – at a number of sites around Richings Park, Colnbrook and Poyle. Slough Council is openly backing a Heathrow runway, hoping to get considerable benefits from it.

Click here to view full story…

Justine Greening believes Cameron and Cabinet will abandon Heathrow 3rd runway plans

Justine Greening, MP for Putney, long standing opponent of a 3rd Heathrow runway, and International Development Secretary, has said that David Cameron will abandon plans to build a 3rd Heathrow runway. She predicted that the Cabinet would conclude that Heathrow should not be expanded. Instead a new “long term” strategy should be drawn up to decide on a “sensible” future airport policy for the UK. The Telegraph says this risks a backlash and potential legal challenge from pro airport campaigners. Those wanting a new runway claim that it is needed to prevent flights and businesses going to other countries in Europe in the decades ahead. Last autumn Sir Jeremy Heywood, the Cabinet Secretary and Britain’s most senior civil servant, warned ministers not to comment on the runway issue before an announcement due to concerns that the final decision could be vulnerable to legal challenge by the losing side or its backers. Justine Greening said she did not think the Cabinet would back Heathrow as it was not a smart decision. “Trying to expand Heathrow is like trying to build an eight bedroom mansion on the site of a terraced house. It is a hub airport that is just simply in the wrong place.” She had said earlier that she might resign if Heathrow was granted a runway, but she my have changed her mind.

Click here to view full story…

More psychological torture from Heathrow – with its leaflet for local people on compulsory purchase

Heathrow has posted, First Class, a leaflet (Heathrow Community Matters Bulletin, March 2016) to all the homes in the area threatened with compulsory purchase for a runway – and to an unknown number of other homes where the runway would make life virtually unliveable. This has not caused reassurance to many, but increased anger and resentment. Heathrow will keep people, who have already lived with blight and uncertainty for years, in a state of anxiety and uncertainty for yet longer. Heathrow’s Nigel Milton wrote the leaflet, and uses the most evasive and emollient language he can for the unpleasant reality of people being evicted from their homes, against their will. He says Heathrow has been holding sessions for local residents to discuss “issues associated with Heathrow expansion.” ..” the first point at which you will be able to ask Heathrow to buy your house will be after the Government designate their National Policy Statement for expansion at Heathrow… We would expect this to be somewhere between summer 2017 and summer 2018.”….”If people wait until a third runway planning consent is received to sell us their home, they will be eligible for the terms of our offer i.e. unblighted market price plus 25%, stamp duty, legal and moving costs. We currently expect to receive planning consent in 2020.” More stressful waiting …. more anxiety …. more years unable to make any future plans. It is cruel.

Click here to view full story…

AEF analysis of the ITC report: its “conclusion that environmental impacts should be no barrier to expansion is unfounded”

A new report published by the Independent Transport Commission (ITC), a think tank supported by Heathrow and Gatwick, has argued that environmental concerns should not prevent a new runway being built. Now the Aviation Environment Federation (AEF)has come out with a damning assessment. The report argues that “it is foreseeable that a range of solutions will enable forecasts of future growth to be delivered within acceptable environmental boundaries even without a “step-change” in technology”. AEF points out that what “acceptable environmental boundaries” are not clearly defined. On CO2 emissions AEF says the ITC has put too much faith in future market based measures to trade emissions, and used unjustifiably optimistic forecasts of fuel efficiency improvements (1.6% per year, when others expect 0.8% at best). On noise AEF says the ITC does not even consider health impacts, uses implausibly optimistic assumptions and some unclear use of noise measurements. On air pollution, the ITC argues this is largely not the airports’ responsibility and hopes levels will improve soon. AEF concludes: “Without clearer definitions of what constitutes “acceptable environmental boundaries”, and evidence that these can be achieved, the report’s conclusion that environmental impacts should be no barrier to expansion is unfounded.”

Click here to view full story…

“Independent” transport think tank, pro-runway, finds the environmental challenges can all (honestly…) be overcome …

Heathrow is well aware that it has an almost insurmountable set of environmental obstacles that, in any logical system, would make a 3rd runway out of the question. However, it keeps hoping that it can persuade enough key people that all is well, and all environmental problems will just melt away. Now, in a slightly desperate attempt to get politicians etc to ignore the evidence, a report has been done by an organisation called the “Independent Transport Commission.” This is a body partly funded by Heathrow, by Gatwick, by NATS and many others. The report “The sustainability of UK Aviation: Trends in the mitigation of noise and emissions”, written by RDC Aviation Ltd, sets out to show that the aviation industry can soon overcome problems of noise, air pollution and carbon emissions – and adding a new runway will be problem-free. The report is thin on good detail to back up these claims. It is high on hopes, aspirations and what could be termed “mindless optimism” that new technologies will work out well, and everything that could help the aviation industry will do so. None of the real problems of an expanding industry, with additional problems from the sheer increase in plane numbers are dealt with. A report, which is hard to describe as “independent” in any meaningful sense of the word, advocates sacrificing the environment if holds the industry’s growth back.

Click here to view full story…

Heathrow Villagers welcome legal warning to Cameron, by 4 councils, of legal threat if 3rd runway is approved

Four Conservative-run local authorities have appointed a legal team, (Harrison Grant Solicitors) warning that if the Government did not rule out a 3rd Heathrow runway, then legal action will be launched. The four are the London Boroughs of Hillingdon, Richmond-upon-Thames, Wandsworth and the Royal Borough of Windsor & Maidenhead. All are long-standing opponents of a 3rd runway. The solicitors have written to the Prime Minister on their behalf explaining how “insurmountable environmental problems” would make government backing for a new runway “irrational or otherwise unlawful”. Local campaign group in the Heathrow Villages, “Stop Heathrow Expansion” representing residents in the south of Hillingdon whose lives would be directly impacted by the runway, welcomed the letter. Christine Taylor, Harlington resident and Stop Heathrow Expansion supporter, said: “Residents of the Heathrow Villages have had enough – we’ve been fighting this for over 30 years. We want to draw an end to the repeated threat of Heathrow expansion on our communities.” Rob Gray, the voice of the “Back Heathrow” group, complains residents will be furious that councils are spending money. He ignores the fact that residents could be equally furious that Heathrow has, yet again, put the councils in the position where they have little choice other than to defend themselves from the airport’s plans.

Click here to view full story…

Heathrow holding “Business Summits” in Leeds and Manchester, attracting SMEs with hopes of lucrative runway supply deals

Heathrow is hoping to get backing from small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) in the regions, by tempting them with the prospect of lucrative contracts to supply the construction of the 3rd runway (which it presumes it will be getting). It also hopes it can persuade companies that another Heathrow runway will boost their businesses. Heathrow says it will “need more SMEs from the Northern Powerhouse in Heathrow’s supply chain to deliver an expanded Heathrow.” To help get more SMEs on board, there will be “Business Summits in Manchester  (7th June) and Leeds (29th September). The days “will consist of speed-dating style sessions of interviews with procurement managers representing businesses based at the airport. By forging connections and winning new business, SMEs have the opportunity to enter Heathrow’s supply chain before development work kicks off as well as using the airport’s international presence to project their brand globally.” There is also an annual Heathrow’s flagship Summit which takes place at the airport each November. Heathrow is hoping to lure them, saying: “with the airport spending over £1.5 billion annually with over 1,200 suppliers from around the UK….[the role of SMEs] will grow with the airport’s expansion.”

Click here to view full story…

Local people in Chiswick get more crowd-funded air pollution monitors

Air pollution in London is a growing problem, and people are justifiably very concerned about its health impacts. The local campaign group in Chiswick, CHATR, has been involved with moves to get more air pollution monitors installed. With the help of Chiswick Brentford and Isleworth neighbours, the Hounslow Green Party has installed the 3rd round of air pollution monitors targeting the A4/M4 corridor. This follows from monitoring results in summer 2015 that showed pollutants over EU limits. The proposed development schemes presented for the “Golden Mile” – that extends from Chiswick to Osterley- and also a 3rd runway, are expected to have significant adverse effects on already bad quality air. Scientific studies are showing increasing ill health, particularly caused by NO2 and particulates. This ill health is expensive not only in human terms, but in the costs to the NHS and to society. Chiswick would be directly below the arrivals flight path for a 3rd Heathrow runway, so it could suffer from far higher pollution from so many aircraft – emitting NO2 – only perhaps 2,000 feet overhead. The Green Party stresses how changes to transport are urgently needed. The air pollution monitors has been sourced from Mapping for Change, a citizen’s science project.

Click here to view full story…

Four councils affected by Heathrow threaten to take legal action against Government if it backs Heathrow runway

Four Conservative controlled councils – Hillingdon, Richmond upon Thames, Wandsworth and Windsor & Maidenhead councils – are preparing to sue the government over a proposed 3rd Heathrow runway. The four councils are near Heathrow, and affected adversely by it. The warning to David Cameron, from their lawyers, says an escalation in the number of flights would be “irrational and unlawful”. The legal letter to No 10 says court proceedings will be launched unless the Prime Minister categorically rules out expansion of Heathrow. It says “insurmountable environmental problems” around the airport mean it can never be expanded without subjecting residents to excessive pollution and noise. The councils have believed, since the launch of the (government appointed) Airports Commission’s final report, that it made a “flawed assessment” of Heathrow’s ability to deal with environmental issues (noise, NO2, and carbon emissions among them). The councils also say David Cameron’s previous promise – “No ifs, No buts, no 3rd runway” – had created a “legitimate expectation” among residents that there would be no runway. The authorities have appointed Harrison Grant, the solicitors that led a successful High Court challenge in 2010 against the former Labour government’s attempt to expand Heathrow.

Click here to view full story…

Union fears up to 900 IT jobs at British Airways to be out-sourced to India

British Airways plans to off-shore many of its IT jobs to India, in a move to cut costs. Sites affected by the offshore outsourcing plan include BA Heathrow (700 redundancies projected at Waterside), BA Newcastle (100 redundancies projected) and other sites run by the airline. BA is transferring its “end-user” UK IT jobs to Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) in India. The GMB union says BA is also flouting visa rules,on rolling Tier 2 visas, which are meant to be for when employers want to internally move a member of staff from one post to another. John McDonnell attended a protest against the off-shoring plans, as many of the people to lose their jobs live in his constituency, in Hayes. BA staff are angry – GMB’s Mick Rix said: “BA’s reward for their colleagues’ loyalty is redundancy and to replace them with another company’s cheap labour brought in from abroad on dubious visas.” Despite the job cull, BA is enjoying huge profits by charging a “high price for a premium service” but wants to have the “cost base of a low cost carrier.” BA claims only about 200 UK jobs would be lost, and it employs around 35,000 people in the UK. This is yet another warning that the aviation is not a secure provider of jobs – and claims of job gains with airport expansion needed to be viewed with caution.

Click here to view full story…

“Why we must thank the Heathrow 13” – Teddington Action Group blog

An excellent blog by TAG (the Teddington Action Group) says we all owe a debt of gratitude to the Heathrow 13. They say: No-one chains themselves to railings for want of something better to do. No-one risks prison for the hell of it …. That this small group of people were willing to do so is testament both to their courage and to their fear … They had to take action, as this government simply does not have the political will to take unpopular decisions to face [the climate threat] head on …. What is left when the democratic process fails? ….Species are dying out; people are dying prematurely…. Yet the profiteers and the nay-sayers carry on their merry way. Heathrow is effectively saying [even with] another quarter of a million planes in the sky. “We’ll manage to stay within global warming limits. Maybe. Sort of. It’ll be fine. Trust us, dearie!” …. The Paris Agreement signatories agree to restrict global warming levels to ‘well below’ two degrees C…. This requires extensive CO2 mitigation measures which the UK Government seems to be sublimely unaware …. to even countenance more runways in any shape or form …. The Heathrow 13 (climate suffragists?) …. have our gratitude …. We cannot leave it to a few brave people to shoulder this burden for us. It is everyone’s fight.

Click here to view full story…    also George Monbiot blog from January 20th

Report for Heathrow shows the Compton route is indeed being flown differently and more noisily than before

People complaining about Heathrow flights on the Compton route have been adamant there have been changes, planes are over different areas and they are lower. Heathrow has said, month after month, that these people are mistaken. Now research carried out by consultants have shown there are indeed changes. The report says there has been an increase in traffic from 2007 to 2015 – from 65 flights per day to 89 per day. There has been an increase in the proportion of flights using the northern edge of the departure route rather than across the 3km swathe. There has been an increase in the number of heavy aircraft (e.g. 747s and A340s) using the Compton route, and many are now going to ultra-long-haul destinations, so are very heavy with fuel; these planes are now lower over areas near the airport – and therefore noisier. The consultants say the Compton route was designed before huge planes like the A380, which has difficulty flying it. Though Heathrow is meant to fine aircraft that do not stick to the NPR, this has not been happening. The planes cannot stick to the route – but are still using it as if they could. A very unsatisfactory situation. Heathrow says it will be working with NATS and members of the Heathrow Community Noise Forum this year to “revisit the procedures used on the Compton route.”

Click here to view full story…

London City airport sold to Canadian Pension funds, for £2 billion (bought by GIP in 2006 for £760 million)

A Canadian-led consortium of pension funds has beaten rivals to buy London City airport, from GIP, which paid £760 million for it. So that is a hefty profit. The valuation has proved controversial because the largest airline at City airport, BA, threatened to pull most of its aircraft out of the airport if the new owner raised airline charges to cover the high sale price. Willie Walsh, CEO of BA’s owner IAG, considers £2 billion a foolish price. GIP owns 75% of the airport, and Oaktree Capital own 25%. The consortium that has bought the airport is led by the Ontario Teachers’ pension fund. It includes Borealis Infrastructure, which manages funds for one of Canada’s largest pension funds, and also Japanese pension funds. The consortium also includes AimCo and Kuwait’s Wren House Infrastructure Management, which is an investment vehicle owned by the Kuwait Investment Authority. The Canadian Teachers’ pension fund has $160bn in assets, and already owns 4 airports (share of Birmingham, Bristol, Brussels and Copenhagen). HS1 Ltd is jointly owned by Borealis Infrastructure and Ontario Teachers Pension Plan, both Canadian pension funds. GIP bought the airport for an estimated £750m in 2006 from Dermot Desmond, the Irish financier, who paid just £23.5m for it in 1995 from Mowlem.

Click here to view full story…

Heathrow 13 get suspended, 6 week, prison sentences with community service and fines

The Heathrow 13 sentencing took place at Willesden Magistrates court, with the defendants fully expecting that all, or most, of them would be given custodial sentences. A crowd of about 300 cheered the Heathrow 13 as they arrived, and remained outside – with speeches and music – all day. By lunch time, mitigations had been discussed for all the defendants, and they emerged for lunch. Finally at about 4pm, the news filtered out to the crowd that all 13 had 6 weeks prison sentences, suspended for one year. The term could have been 13 weeks, but was reduced to 6 weeks as they had properly considered safety and were all of good character. In addition, ten have to do 120 hours of community service, and 3 (those with previous convictions) have to do 180 hours. There will also be fines, ranging from £500 to £1,000. It was learned that an email had been sent to the court, that morning, from Sir David King – past chief scientist to the UK government – saying that the defendants should not be imprisoned, as their concerns about carbon emissions are justified. Delighted have their freedom, the activists say the campaign against any new runway will continue. One commented that what was intended as a deterrent to climate direct action seems to had the opposite effect.

Afterwards with banner

Click here to view full story…

“Hurdles” campaign shows the seven insurmountable hurdles faced by a Heathrow 3rd runway

he combined groups opposed to a 3rd Heathrow runway have started a “Seven Hurdles” campaign, setting out some of the key problem posed by a new runway. The hurdles that would have be overcome would be: security, homes, noise, air pollution, costs, carbon emissions, and opposition. An Advan is touring parts of London that would be affected by a new runway, and will be in action for three days, stopping off at various key places. It began its trip on Monday 22nd at Chiswick Town Hall, to a lively reception from the local group, CHATR (Chiswick Against the Third Runway), before heading west. On 23rd it will be in central and east London, and then outside the court in Willesden on 24th, for the sentencing of the Heathrow 13. The details of the seven hurdles are explained in short briefings. They include the 725,000 people already affected by Heathrow plane noise; the increased risk of accident if there are another 50% more flights; the impossibility of the UK meeting its carbon targets if aviation is allowed further expansion; and the cost of at least £5 billion from the UK taxpayer to pay for surface access infrastructure. Not to mention huge and passionate opposition by thousands.

Click here to view full story…

Istanbul with its massive 3rd airport expected to soon take hub business away from Heathrow

The massive new 3rd airport for Istanbul – Istanbul Grand Airport (IGA) – big enough to take 150 million passengers per year in due course, is due to open on October 29th 2017. With 3 runways built in the first phase, it will have six runways and four terminals when completed. It would mean Istanbul having an airport larger than any in Europe. It will replace Atatürk Airport and provide the capacity that Turkish Airlines wants for huge expansion. Turkey is not doing well in cutting its carbon emissions overall, with more coal power stations planned and inadequate targets. A total of 25 new airports have opened in Turkey in the last 10 years. It is thought that by 2028, the new Istanbul airport may have enough capacity to shift passengers away from Paris Charles de Gaulle airport, Heathrow, Schiphol, and Dubai. Even with the existing airports, Istanbul has been taking share from competitors for transfer traffic between Europe and Asia. Istanbul is one of the top-five largest feeders for Europe. It is likely that even if a 3rd runway was built at Heathrow, Istanbul would overtake Heathrow. It is better located to be a major hub airport, and would take its business. That is expected to start even before 2020. The President of Turkish Airlines says: “The world used to be focused on Northern Europe and America. In this century, it’s our turn.”

Click here to view full story…

Witness statement by Prof Alice Bows-Larkin for Heathrow 13 trial clearly shows CO2 problem of a new runway

Alice Bows-Larkin, a Professor in Climate Science and Energy Policy at MACE at Manchester University, gave written evidence at the trial of the Heathrow 13, for their action at Heathrow in July 2015. Her witness statement (11 pages + references) is a closely argued and highly expert assessment of the need for the emissions from aviation to be restricted. It is well worth reading. Just a few of the points she raises are that the UK has signed up to the ambition of the Paris Agreement to keep global temperature rise to below 2 degrees C. This is not consistent with an increase in the CO2 emissions from UK aviation above their capped level. There is no justification for international aviation to be excluded for global ambitions to limit CO2. Even if there is some carbon trading scheme, aviation needs to be fully included. If ‘negative emission sources’ that can remove CO2 from the air (unlikely) “do not materialise in time, ‘well below 2°C’ will only be achieved by a wholesale shift away from fossil fuel combustion. This would mean that CO2 produced by the aviation sector would also need to be reduced to near zero. This … would be largely uncontested.” Prof Larkin says in ther view the Government’s intention to build a new runway, raising UK aviation CO2 emissions, “implies a misunderstanding by UK Government of the scale of CO2 mitigation that a 2°C goal relies upon – let alone a ‘well below’ 2°C target.”                                                      Her witness statement: Heathrow13-evidence-from-Prof-Alice-Bows-Larkin Jan 2016

Click here to view full story…

Heathrow Hub extended runway proposal granted patent approval

16 FEB 2016

Patent approval has been granted for the extended runway option at Heathrow Airport proposed by the Heathrow Hub.  The independent proposal involves extending the northern runway to 6,800m. The independent proposal, put forward by former Concorde pilot Jock Lowe, boosted its campaign for urgently needed airport expansion in the south-east as the Intellectual Property Office (IPO), part of the UK Patent Office, granted patent approval on the runway arrangement application. The proposal, one of the three options shortlisted by the Airports Commission, involves extending the northern runway to 6,800m and dividing it into two with a 650m safe zone. The patent was granted on January 26, 2016, and if chosen by the Department for Transport as the winning option for airport expansion in the UK, can be implemented quickly. Heathrow Hub said it would license or sell the concept to Heathrow to deliver. The extended runway option could be constructed in phases, matching expansion with demand, and ensuring noise and emissions targets are met.

Full article at http://www.getwestlondon.co.uk/news/west-london-news/heathrow-hub-extended-runway-proposal-10894154


 

Emirates adds 6th daily A380 flight to Heathrow, and Oman Air breaks slot price record

Heathrow slots are very much in demand, from airlines across the world, especially those at key times of day – such as early morning. Now Oman Air has set a record by paying $75 million for a pair of take-off and landing slots. It has one pair already. The small airline is understood to have bought the pair — which includes a highly prized early morning arrival — from Air France-KLM. The price beats the $60 million paid by American Airlines a year ago, for a slot bought from the Scandinavian carrier SAS. It is understood that Air France also sold another slot for a lower price to Emirates. That means Emirates will have six daily flights to Dubai from Heathrow, and it will use the slot for another A380, starting summer 2016. The slot bought by Oman Air is for a [popular with those over flown in London] a 5.30am arrival from Muscat. Heathrow slots have been changing hands for ever larger amounts of money recently. They are best value for lucrative flights to the USA and for fast-growing Gulf airlines wanting to get passengers through their Middle East hub airports. Last year Virgin Atlantic mortgaged its portfolio of Heathrow slots to raise £200m in a bond issue. The Sunday Times comments that “The high prices commanded by Heathrow may also reflect doubts among airlines over whether the airport will ever get a third runway.”

Click here to view full story…

Heathrow 13: Jailing peaceful protestors could “lead to more disruption” in future, experts say

The protesters who disrupted flights last summer have been told to expect jail when they are sentenced next week (24th) – the maximum jail term for their offence would be 3 months. However, it is possible that jailing the “Heathrow 13” could encourage environmental activists to cause more damage in future protests. The reason is that academics believe a custodial sentence would inspire demonstrators to cause more damage in future – because it would remove the incentive to seek a trial by magistrate rather than trial by jury. Environmental protestors involved in peaceful direct action generally make sure they cause less than £5,000 damage. Beneath this threshold, they are likely to be tried by a magistrate – and receive a lighter sentence (not prison) than if they had been tried by a jury. But if Judge Deborah Wright does jail the Heathrow 13, activists in the future may be inclined to do what it takes to secure a jury trial. Juries are considered less likely to convict than magistrates. Dr Graeme Hayes of Aston University believes the precedent is that non-violent protestors are dealt with leniently by magistrates. If that is no longer the case, there is the risk that “some activists may decide to cause more property damage.” Professor Brian Doherty, professor of political sociology at Keele University, agreed.

Click here to view full story…

Virgin flight to New York had to return to Heathrow due to laser attack (6-7 miles west of airport)

A Virgin flight (VS025) heading to New York turned back to Heathrow after a laser beam was shone into the cockpit, Virgin Atlantic has said. The crew told air traffic control there was a “medical issue” with one of the pilots after the laser hit flight VS025 after take-off at 20:13 GMT on Sunday 14th. The flight turned back some way west of Ireland, after burning off and dumping excess fuel, in order to land safely. The radio clip of the conversation between air traffic control and the pilot indicated the laser attack may have happened some 6 – 7 miles west of Heathrow (the plane took off towards the east and turned west). The plane was landed safely, as the other pilot was not affected. [What happens if both pilots are affected ….] Shining lasers at planes is illegal. A new law introduced in 2010 means someone can be charged with “shining a light at an aircraft in flight so as to dazzle the pilot”. Balpa general secretary Jim McAuslan said lasers were “incredibly dangerous”, and called for the government to classify them as “offensive weapons”. Aircraft are attacked with lasers at an alarming rate and with lasers with ever-increasing strength. Between January 2009 and June 2015 more than 8,998 laser incidents across the country were reported to the UK CAA. In 2014, there were 1,440 incidents, with 168 at Heathrow, which has the highest number.

Click here to view full story…

Residents ‘adopt’ the 13 Plane Stupid activists facing jail over Heathrow runway occupation

There was a great atmosphere on Valentines Day in the Five Bells pub in Harmondsworth, as 13 residents,most of whom face losing their homes if a 3rd runway is built, each ‘adopted’ one of the 13 Plane Stupid activists who face jail after occupying a runway at Heathrow. There was a specially-made Valentines Day cake, with the words; “Heathrow – you’re breaking our hearts.” The ‘adopters’ each drew the name of the activist they would ‘adopt’. They have promised to write to the activists and support them in any way they can, if they go to jail. A second remarkable cake, with the face and name of each of the Heathrow 13, was made by the mum of one of the activists, Cameron Kaye. John Stewart, chair of HACAN, the residents’ group which opposes a new runway, said, “The event was good fun. There was a warm mood of mutual support in the room. It was made 100% clear that the activists won’t be alone when they are sentenced in 10 days time. Residents and direct action protesters are united as one in their determination to stop a third runway.” The serious purpose of the event was to show “the bond of unity there is between the people who put their bodies on the line at Heathrow and the residents who face losing their homes.”

cake

Click here to view full story…

Letter: “Prison sentences for Heathrow 13 activists would threaten our right to protest”

A range of high-profile signatories have sent an open letter to the Guardian, in support of the Heathrow 13, who occupied part of Heathrow’s northern runway on 13th July 2015. They say that giving the activists prison sentences would be unjust and disproportionate, for what they did – and would represent a “massive threat” to the right to peaceful protest in the UK. Those signing the letter include MPs John McDonnell and Caroline Lucas, as well as key people in Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, NEF, NUS, and a range of environmental and social campaigning organisations. The letter says “prison is an utterly disproportionate punishment, and would mark yet another example of heavy-handed treatment leading to the suppression of political dissent in the UK today.” The 13 members of “Plane Stupid” were found guilty in January of aggravated trespass and entering a security-restricted area of an aerodrome. District judge Deborah Wright said the “astronomical costs” of their action to Heathrow, with 22 flights cancelled, meant likely jail sentences on 24th February. This would be very unusual, for first offences. One of the lawyers for the Heathrow 13 said civil disobedience had a “constitutional role” to play in a democracy, and that conditional discharge was usually the starting point for this offence.

Click here to view full story…

Figures reveal that passenger journeys to and from Heathrow are increasingly been made by road

New statistics from the DfT reveal that passenger journeys to and from Heathrow airport are increasingly been made by road. The figures, issued in response to a FoI request made by the Teddington Action Group (TAG), show that passenger journeys by car and taxis rose by 2,000,000 in 2014 (the last year for which figures are available). In 2013, the aggregate number of private car and taxi/minicab journeys was 25 million. In 2014 they had risen to 27 million (an increase of nearly 10%). TAG says this trend would appear to call into question the assertion made by John Holland Kaye (CEO of Heathrow) on 4th November 2015 to Parliament’s EAC, that there has been no increase in polluting vehicular journeys in the vicinity of the airport. He had been asked how Heathrow could meet Air Quality targets with a 3rd runway (when an increase of up to 54% in passenger journeys to and from the airport might be anticipated). Heathrow has a show-stopper problem for its runway plans, from air pollution. It needs to get its passengers and its staff to get to (and from) the airport by rail. In 2014, 59% of passengers arrived by car, taxi or minicab. Another 13% arrived by bus or coach. 28% arrived by rail or by Tube. Getting passengers out of their cars will be hard. The air pollution from Heathrow’s air freight is already a problem, let alone if volume was doubled.

Click here to view full story…

Holland-Kaye still not prepared to accept ban on night flights before 6am, even to get 3rd runway

Heathrow’s CEO, John Holland-Kaye, says the airport has yet to “engage” with the government and airlines about the possibility of ending night flights, before making any commitment. A ban on flights before 6am was one of the conditions the Airports Commission stipulated – in July – must be met for a 3rd runway to be built at Heathrow. But 7 months after the publication of the commission’s report, Heathrow is still avoiding giving any confirmation it is prepared to accept that requirement. In December the government announced there would be a further delay in making a runway location decision, which cam as an unpleasant surprise to Heathrow – which had presumed it would be given the nod, but with a range of conditions. Holland-Kaye has tried to avoid any condition on his hoped-for runway, that might be irksome or costly. He continues to make bullish statements about how likely he feels the runway will be approved. He tries to make out that there would be fewer night flights with a 3rd runway…. and he is yet to “engage” with the government on the subject. Heathrow, in its PR, mistakes local support for a 3rd runway by people employed by the airport, or hoping to work there – for (quite different) support more widely among those not depending on Heathrow for their income.

Click here to view full story…

Patrick McLoughlin evidence to Transport Cttee – he “very much hoped” to give runway location decision by July

The Commons Transport Committee held an oral evidence session on 8th February, inviting Transport Secretary of State, Patrick McLoughlin, to comment on the decision by the government to delay a statement on the location of a possible new runway. The tone of the session was that the Committee was eager for a decision to be made rapidly, with concern that undue time was being taken. Mr McLoughlin explained that even an EU referendum in June would not rule out a decision before Parliament’s summer recess. He said though there has been a delay, partly due to air pollution problems and the VW “defeat” scandal, he hoped the government was ensuring all necessary research had been done, to minimise the chance of legal challenges causing yet further delays. The timetable the government is working to is a runway by 2030, though Heathrow and Gatwick would prefer it to be by 2025. Mr McLoughlin said he “very much hoped” there would be a statement to Parliament at least several days before summer recess on the London hubs being made before summer recess (mid-July, date not yet published) to allow time for MPs to comment etc. He stressed how the 2008 Planning Act would make pushing a runway through fast, and gave the various timings, with only 6 months for a planning inquiry and examination in public.

Click here to view full story…

Construction firms – wanting the lucrative work – urge George Osborne to support third Heathrow runway

Thirteen of Britain’s largest construction and development firms (including the bosses of Balfour Beatty, Morgan Sindall, Laing O’Rourke, Mace,Atkins UK, and BAM Nuttall), have written to George Osborne, urging him to live up to his declaration that “we are the builders” by supporting the building of a third runway at Heathrow. As one comment under the article puts it: “Construction companies advocating a big construction project. Whatever next?…..” The letter to the Chancellor says Heathrow has provided a “steady base of work” during the economic downturn and expansion would bring “a £15.6 billion order book to the UK supply chain”. They also try to encourage the Chancellor by saying the OECD considers the UK has historically underspent on infrastructure, partially due to “long decision-making processes”. The construction companies, which of course stand to gain massively from the building project, say: “We are writing to encourage your support for Heathrow expansion.” It has been pointed out that you only have permanent jobs in construction if there is a new project to move on to, once one is complete.. Hence the construction firms are lobbying hard; they have expected work out of Heathrow, and may not have contingency should Heathrow not get the go head. The firms appear – conveniently – unaware of the very considerable economic and environmental problems that building a runway would create.

Click here to view full story…

Disappointing first results of Slough’s Strategic Partnership with Heathrow

In February 2015 Slough Borough Council formed a new “Strategic Partnership” with Heathrow, which the council hope would give it a privileged position and economic benefits, if a 3rd runway was approved. A new status report about the Partnership appears to have disappointed some councillors on the Overview & Scrutiny Committee. The deal was said to be overall, at “amber” status. The ‘Heads of Terms working group’ has so far secured (unspecified) funding for business start-up, air quality monitoring, and employment training, but little else. Last quarter the Partnership saw joint traffic surveys paid for by Heathrow, saving the Council a claimed £50,000, and funding for an extension of the 7 series bus service, the main link for many of the 7,000 Slough residents working at Heathrow. Developing a more “mutually beneficial relationship” with Heathrow is now one of the key outcomes from Slough’s 5 Year Plan. But the Partnership has so far done nothing to deliver a programme of mitigation to offset the effects of the airport for the communities most impacted as set out in the agreement last February. It appears to just be a new funding stream for the Council. Strategic Partnership meetings are not advertised, not open to the public, and minutes are not published. There is meant to be better dialogue with residents.

Click here to view full story…

“No New Runways” banner draped off HQ of the union, UNITE – which backs Heathrow runway.

Unite union banner drop 6.2.2016

6.12.2015 Article.

Unite backs Heathrow third runway calling it ‘fundamental’ to economic success

The UK’s largest trade union<UNITE, has backed the building a third Heathrow runway, saying it is key to the success of the economy. Unite has said it is strongly in favour of proposals from the Airports Commission that Heathrow should be expanded and this week will be calling on MPs to support them. Unite General secretary Len McCluskey said that a third runway was “crucial to securing our country’s long-term economic prosperity…. A further ‘condition’ that our union has placed on our support for expansion is the maintenance and creation of high quality and sustainable jobs.” One of the key opposing arguments to the expansion is concern over noise pollution for local residents, but the union leader argued the effects would be limited. Mr McCluskey said: “With expansion, the overall number of flights would grow, but new approach and departure paths could enable the noise impacts to be dispersed more widely, limiting the impacts on any individual community.” [Well, that’s great, isn’t it? Sorted that easily. Amazing how self interest provides a rose-tinted perspective].  Link

Andrew Tyrie, Chair of Treasury Select Committee, says economic case for a new runway unclear and based on “opaque” information

Proper research may show  the UK does not need a runway at all.                           Andrew Tyrie, is the chairman of the influential Commons Treasury select committee. He has now said parliament and the public had been left partly in the dark on the case for a new runway, because the Airports Commission’s analysis is not good enough. He said the decision on airport expansion is being taken on the basis of information that was “opaque in a number of important respects.” Mr Tyrie said the robustness of the Airports commission’s conclusions could not be determined from the information in its report. “Parliament has demanded more transparency over the environmental case. At least as important is the economic case.” Mr Tyrie said it was impossible to tell if the potential economic benefits for the UK of the proposals by Heathrow or Gatwick differed significantly from one another, or even if the benefits of building either are significantly different from not building any new runways. “A decision as controversial as this — one that has bedevilled past governments for decades — requires as much transparency as reasonably possible.” Andrew Tyrie has written to George Osborne calling for more details of the calculations that led to the Commission recommending a Heathrow runway. He also also called for the process to be moved from the DfT to the Treasury.

Click here to view full story…

Campaigners plaster Osborne’s constituency with “No 3rd runway” signs, to remind him of the cost to the taxpayer

Campaigners against Heathrow expansion have plastered Knutsford, in George Osborne’s constituency – Tatton in Cheshire – with No Third Runway signs. They put up the signs in Knutsford’s main street in the heart of the constituency, and one outside Conservative Party headquarters in the town. A new runway would cost the taxpayer billions of pounds. The date was chosen to coincide with the date on which tax returns must be submitted. The cost to the taxpayer of the infrastructure needed for a 3rd Heathrow runway are expected to be up to £20 billion. Only considering the cost of tunnelling the M25, and associated costs, was considered by the Airports Commission to be £5 billion. Working out how much £5 billion is, divided among the whole UK population, comes to over £77 per person. HACAN has also worked out that £5 billion would buy 83,000 new social homes or thousands of hip replacements, primary or secondary school teachers – or many huge new hospitals. (Figures below) HACAN Chair John Stewart, said, “The billions of pounds of Government money that would be needed for 3rd runway road and rail schemes might even make the Chancellor, George Osborne, think twice about backing it.”

Click here to view full story…

Compensation debate delays government decision on taxiway works to allow end to Cranford agreement

The Government is still considering Heathrow’s appeal over taxiway works needed to enable more departures over Cranford. The taxiway works are needed to enable scheduled easterly take-offs from the northern runway, which were previously banned under the Cranford Agreement. This verbal agreement was made 60 years ago, that planes would not take off towards the east, from the northern runway. On easterly operations, planes all therefore take off on the southern runway, and all planes land on the northern runway. The Cranford Agreement was ended by the government in 2009. But though Heathrow can have a small number of take offs from the northern runway, it needs to do taxiway work, in order to use it fully. Hillingdon Council has refused permission for this work, partly due to air pollution fears, and hence the Heathrow appeal. It Heathrow wins the appeal, and the work is done, there could be roughly 35,000 extra flights a year over Cranford (but no increase in the overall 480,000 flights per year at Heathrow). The ending of the Cranford agreement would mean less noise for some areas, but more for others. The delay is due to debate over compensation, help with relocation, or insulation for affected householders.

Click here to view full story…

Doubtful logic of imprisoning the Heathrow 13: “The Flight of Reason in the Face of Airport Expansion”

The Heathrow 13, who occupied the far eastern end of Heathrow’s northern runway in July, were found guilty by Judge Deborah Wright, at Willesden Magistrates court on 25th January. They will be sentenced on 24th February,and may receive up to the maximum of 3 months in prison. Many believe that the dangers we, and our descendants, face from climate change are so severe that effective action to cut CO2 emissions needs to be taken, fast. A blog in support of the Heathrow 13, and the necessity for rapid action on emissions, says though they caused some expense to the airport – the costs of not acting to curb global CO2 will be massively larger. “This raises an interesting point regarding cost and consequences that doesn’t take into account the great looming elephant in the room that is climate change….. In reality there is no bigger crime against our planet than climate change, and no greater injustice than the death and suffering it continues to bring…. The British legal system has it wrong here …. We need to ensure that our governments enforce emissions limits, and that they prioritise health and planetary welfare over perceived profit. Climate change should form a significant part of the dialogue when costs and consequences are assessed.” As the “Heathrow 13 said after the verdict, they’re ‘in it for the long haul.’ In terms of the planet, so are we all.”

Click here to view full story…

Uber scrap flat rate fares to London airports, but residents report problems with residential parking by drivers

Uber has announced it will stop offering flat rate fares to customers travelling to Heathrow and Gatwick Airport.  Uber used to offer a series of set fares for trips to the London airports, so customers know what to expect when going on their holidays and leisure trips. Uber fares to Heathrow from west London would start at £30, while passengers from south east London could get to Gatwick for £50.  Now the fares will be calculated on the time and distance, as they are for other Uber journeys. Customers can see from the phone app how much their trip will cost. Uber also announced that airport pick-ups will incur an additional surcharge, to cover minimum parking costs. However, there are a number of reports indicating that Uber cars are upsetting residents in areas near Heathrow, as large numbers park (for free) in residential roads, for hours, waiting for calls to pick up passengers. Waiting in streets with no facilities mean drivers have been reported urinating in gardens, or defecating near their cars. There have been complaints of groups of drivers appearing to be a threatening presence, being rude to residents, sleeping in their cars, and playing music into the night, while they wait.  Uber and Heathrow are meant to be trying to sort out the problems. Problems are also reported in the Stansted area.

Click here to view full story…


 

“Heathrow13” climate protesters found guilty of aggravated trespass – sentencing 24th February, for possibly prison

Thirteen members of the Plane Stupid campaign group who occupied the eastern end of Heathrow’s northern runway on 13th July 2015 have been found guilty of aggravated trespass and entering a security-restricted area of an aerodrome. They have been told it is almost inevitable they will face a prison term. Their defence had been that their actions were intended to prevent death or serous illness to people. However, district judge Deborah Wright (who sat alone) said the cost of the disruption at Heathrow was “absolutely astronomical”. Those convicted were clapped and cheered as they left the court. They have been bailed to appear for sentencing on 24 February. A statement released by the #Heathrow13 following their convictions read: “Today’s judgement demonstrates that the legal system does not yet recognise that climate defence is not an offence. We took action because we saw that it was sorely needed. When the democratic, legislative and processes have failed, it takes the actions of ordinary people to change them.” They say instead of the government taking action to cut carbon emissions, it is intending to spend millions making the problem bigger, if another runway is allowed. Though the judge recognised “They are all principled people” she considered what the protesters did was “symbolic and designed to make a point, not to save lives”.

Click here to view full story…

“Heathrow13” climate protesters found guilty of aggravated trespass – sentencing 24th February, for possibly prison

Thirteen members of the Plane Stupid campaign group who occupied the eastern end of Heathrow’s northern runway on 13th July 2015 have been found guilty of aggravated trespass and entering a security-restricted area of an aerodrome. They have been told it is almost inevitable they will face a prison term. Their defence had been that their actions were intended to prevent death or serous illness to people. However, district judge Deborah Wright (who sat alone) said the cost of the disruption at Heathrow was “absolutely astronomical”. Those convicted were clapped and cheered as they left the court. They have been bailed to appear for sentencing on 24 February. A statement released by the #Heathrow13 following their convictions read: “Today’s judgement demonstrates that the legal system does not yet recognise that climate defence is not an offence. We took action because we saw that it was sorely needed. When the democratic, legislative and processes have failed, it takes the actions of ordinary people to change them.” They say instead of the government taking action to cut carbon emissions, it is intending to spend millions making the problem bigger, if another runway is allowed. Though the judge recognised “They are all principled people” she considered what the protesters did was “symbolic and designed to make a point, not to save lives”.

Click here to view full story…

First 2 days of the trial of Plane Stupid’s #Heathrow13 for their runway incursion in July

The trial of the #Heathrow13 is taking place at Willesden Magistrates Court, in front of Judge Wright. The 13 activists are charged with Aggravated Trespass and entering a security restricted area, with the prosecution by the CPS (Crown Prosecution Service). On the first day, evidence was given by two witnesses from Heathrow airport, on the extent to which the airport was disrupted by the protest, and the 20 flights that were cancelled. Two of the protesters gave evidence in the afternoon. On the second day, seven further witnesses gave evidence. The Judge has said she does not need other expert witnesses to appear – Sian Berry and John McDonnell had offered to give evidence. On the 3rd day, proceedings finished early, after lunch. It is likely that closing statements will be heard at 10am Monday 25th January, and the Judge’s verdict will not be before 2pm on Monday at Willesden Magistrates court. Plane Stupid have produced summaries of what the defendants said, while being questioned, and some of the arguments they made. All were very certain of the necessity for carbon emissions to be reduced, in order to prevent increasing risk of death and serious illness for people across the world, especially those in the Global South. All were very certain that actions, such as theirs, were reasonable and proportionate in order to cut CO2 emissions.

Click here to view full story…

Supportive protest outside start of Plane Stupid’s #Heathrow13 trial for Heathrow incursion in July

The trial of the 13 members of Plane Stupid, who broke into Heathrow airport on 13th July, started at Willesden Magistrates Court on 18th. They are charged with Aggravated Trespass and entering a security restricted area. Their protest caused the cancellation of some 25 flights, which saved an estimated 250 tonnes of CO2. In doing so, they argue that helped to save lives in the Global South, by making a small cut in the emissions that fuel climate chaos. All 13 are pleading not guilty, and say their action was reasonable and justified in the climate context. They say “Climate defence is not an offence!” The judge hearing the case, by herself, is Judge Wright. The prosecution has been brought by the CPS. There was a large gathering outside the court, for the start of the trial, with many groups expressing their solidarity. This started with a short statement by the #Heathrow13 on their defence, before they entered the court to repeated chants of “No ifs, No Buts, No new runways!” Judge Wright declared that the fact that aviation fuel is linked to climate change is indisputable. The judge is looking at two issues: 1. Did the 13 genuinely believe their actions were necessary to prevent death or serious illness? And 2. Whether objectively their actions were reasonable and proportionate in order to prevent death or serious illness.

Click here to view full story…

AEF report finds UK’s out-of-date aircraft noise policies putting the health of over one million people at risk

A new report by the AEF has identified that the Government’s aircraft noise policies are risking the health of over one million people and an urgent policy rethink is needed ahead of runway decisions in 2016. Aircraft noise is associated with increased risk of increased blood pressure, and higher risk of heart attack, heart disease and stroke. Health is also detrimentally affected through sleep disturbance and annoyance. Aircraft noise impedes the memory and learning ability of school children. The UK’s aircraft noise policy has not been updated in line with this mounting evidence base, with some noise policies based on studies dating back to the early 1980s. The Government’s lack of response to emerging evidence on noise may be costing the UK £540 million each year.The noise problem is particularly acute at Heathrow, including many affected schools, but there are serious problems at many other airports too. The health burden is not just experienced close to airports, with high levels of noise miles from the runway. The current policy on flight paths does not consider the impact of sudden changes, or the health impacts of newly affected communities. The report calls for the Government to act now to reduce the health burden from aircraft noise. Long-term noise targets are needed to protect health, and all noise policies should be reviewed in the light of these targets. A new runway should only be permitted if the noise burdens are reduced.

The report: “Aircraft Noise and Public Health: the evidence is loud and clear”

Click here to view full story…

Heathrow passengers up 2.2% last year compared to 2014; ATMs up 0.3%; air cargo down 0.2%

Nearly 75 million passengers travelled through Heathrow in 2015, an increase of 2.2% on 2014 and the airport’s highest ever number of annual passengers.The number of flights (air transport movements) was up 0.3% on 2014. The number of seats per aircraft increased by 2.1% to 209, and passengers per aircraft rose to 1.9% to 160. But the average load factor remained constant at 76.5%. (For 2013, Heathrow said its average load factor was 76.4%, and average number of passengers per aircraft was 154.8). At the end of 2015, over 20 daily A380 departures and arrivals were operated by eight airlines “Heathrow continued to play a leading role in helping Britain’s exports reach global markets, with the UK’s largest port by value recording cargo volumes of 1.5 million metric tonnes for the year.” That is Heathrow’s way of saying the cargo tonnage fell by 0.2% in 2015 compared with 2014. Heathrow says “emerging markets continued to be a driver of traffic growth at Heathrow”, with passenger volumes up 8% to Latin America and 6% to the Middle East. They also say passenger volumes during 2015 were up 14% to China. That’s confusing, as the increase in passengers to the “Asia/Pacific” area, which includes China, only rose by 0.3% for the year. Heathrow itself admits it has terminal capacity for 90 million passengers, so at 75 million, it is not “full”. The Airports Commission said that would not happen till 2030.

Click here to view full story…

Sunday Times reports how Heathrow has paid its owners dividends of £2.1 billion since 2012 – but just £24 million in Corporation Tax

The Sunday Times reports that Heathrow has paid its owners back £2.1 billion in dividends, starting in 2012. But it has only paid a total of £24 million in corporation tax since 2006, with that payment being last year. Heathrow’s owners are rewarded whenever the value of the airport increases. If new airport infrastructure is built, the passengers pay for it through the £20 cost on their ticket (and other spending), and the owners benefit.. The CAA calculates how much is spent on investment, and allows Heathrow’s investors to earn a return on the total. The more Heathrow spends, the more its backers can earn. If Heathrow was to spend £17.6 billion on its expansion, the value of the airport would be considered to have increased that much. Due to the huge debts Heathrow has (£12.5 billion out of the £16 billion Ferrovial paid in 2006) the airport’s banks prevented dividends to owners, until 2012. They got £240 million in 2012, which has risen to £2.1 billion. Some of the proceeds of the sale of Gatwick, Edinburgh etc has been used for dividends. The Sunday Times says: …”with a debt-to-assets ratio of about 85% is one of the most heavily indebted airports in the world.” Heathrow will have to recoup the money by high passenger charges, years before the runway is built and open, as otherwise Heathrow’s massive investors are not prepared to take the financial risk. Heathrow is no longer a company quoted on the stock exchange, but that could happen in future.

Click here to view full story…

Heathrow again promoting its “sticking plaster” solution of adobe huts for school noise problem

Last April, keen to persuade politicians that a 3rd Heathrow runway should be allowed, the airport said it was installing noise insulation at the 42 schools and other community buildings (31 in Hounslow) where it promised in 2005 to carry out the work. It has taken 10 years so far. Heathrow said in April 2015 that a total of 10 schools would have adobe structures in their playgrounds by the end of the year. They now say 7 are done with 7 more in the pipeline. The domes are meant to provide a quieter place in the playground, where the aircraft noise of about 87 decibels outside (Hounslow Heath infant school) is cut to 70 decibels. Bearing in mind that average speech is around 60 decibels, and a teacher needs to be able to project their voice at least 10 decibels over background noise, that is still not good. There are concerns that the adobe structures don’t solve the noise problems for schools under Heathrow flight paths. The issue for young children is that they need to play together, and hear each other while playing. That is not easy with a plane nearly over head every minute. The educational disadvantages of schools affected by aircraft noise are now sufficiently well researched; considerable evidence exists to show that it can mean young children suffer impaired performance.

Click here to view full story…

Sadiq Khan’s environmental concerns mean rightly opposing Heathrow runway – but vanish in relation to Gatwick (or London City airport)

Labour Mayoral candidate, Sadiq Khan, backed a runway at Heathrow until June 2015, when he came out against it, partly realising the air quality problems had an unacceptably bad impact on Londoners. Due to the extent of Heathrow opposition, he realised he would not be elected if he backed a Heathrow runway. Sadiq has made various statements about how he is concerned the environment and wants to be” the greenest mayor London’s ever had.” He also has plans to “put radical environment improvements ‘front and centre’” in his campaign, plant 2 million tree, and implement a major extension of the “ultra-low emissions zone” – which bans the most polluting vehicles. All that is great. But his care for the environment runs out when it comes to Gatwick. He backs a 2nd runway there, and is trying to persuade the Labour party to do so too. Appreciating just how unpopular airport expansion is at Heathrow, largely due to the extensive negative impacts over a wide area, Sadiq appears keen to dump that sort of misery on those who are not able to vote against him – living outside London. He appears to have been taken in by Gatwick’s PR and charm offensive, believing there would be thousands of jobs for people in Croydon and his constituency, Tooting. A combination of nimbyism and self-interest.

Click here to view full story…

John Redwood losing patience with inadequate responses on aircraft noise from John Holland-Kaye

John Redwood, the MP for Wokingham, has been in correspondence with Heathrow’s CEO John Holland-Kaye, about the considerable increase in aircraft noise that his constituents have been subjected to since mid 2014. Mr Holland-Kaye has replied, setting out a long list of possible improvements to how much noise Heathrow flights might produce. John Redwood replied: “The changes that NATS made, without consultation, in June 2014 to the Compton Gate have resulted in incessant noise over the Wokingham area due to the concentration of flights over one area, rather than their dispersal. The various mitigating effects that you have described to me over the past months appear good in theory but they are having no effect on reducing the noise level above our houses. I have no wish to engage in a continuous dialogue or await some new consultation. What I and my constituents wish to see is a return to the pre-June 2014 dispersal and Gate policies. It is difficult to see why Wokingham would wish to support an expansion of the airport if this matter cannot be put right promptly.” So, roll on the consultation by the CAA this year, and then the other by the DfT, on aircraft noise and airspace change.

Click here to view full story…

Sunday Times reports that Heathrow wants to recoup its Crossrail costs by extra charges for passengers

The Crossrail link to Heathrow is due to open by the end of 2019, and it is expected that this will cut the travel time from Liverpool Street station to Heathrow from 55 minutes to 34 minutes. Heathrow built and paid for a 5.3 mile long stretch of line linking its terminals with the main line to Paddington station. But the Sunday Times reports that now Heathrow wants to recoup the cost of building this stretch of line, which was completed almost 20 years ago, from users of Crossrail. The DfT estimates that meeting Heathrow’s claim could add over £40m on to the annual cost of running Crossrail. The DfT believes Heathrow should not get this money back. If Heathrow gets its way, rail passengers would have to pay inflated prices to travel to Heathrow. Transport for London (TfL), which will oversee Crossrail, will have to decide whether to claw back the cost through ticket prices on the line, or spread it across the whole of London’s transport network. Heathrow says it paid over £1 billion for the tracks, trains and depots, and to get this back, it wants a fee of £597, plus a maintenance charge of £138, to be paid by Crossrail every time one of its trains uses the line. Heathrow also owns Heathrow Express, Britain’s most expensive train service (£26.50 from Paddington to Heathrow). The decision on any financial deal will be in the hands of the Office of Rail and Road (ORR).

Click here to view full story…

Activists who blocked Heathrow tunnel plead not guilty – further hearing some time in 2016

On 23rd December, there was a brief court hearing for the 3 activists who blocked a main Heathrow entrance tunnel on 26th November. The hearing was at Uxbridge Magistrates Court, and they pleaded not guilty. Another hearing will therefore be arranged in 2016. Many supporters of the activists attended the hearing and gathered outside the court beforehand. After the court hearing, a large group Heathrow-3rd-Runway-opponents including many local residents who face destruction of their homes and communities if a runway is built, met outside the Magistrates court. Wearing Santa hats, they sang a few Christmas carols and jingles (with two or three accompanying policemen) before dispersing. The next court date for Plane Stupid airport activists will be Monday 18 January 2016 at 9am at Willesden Magistrates’ Court, when the 13 activists who occupied Heathrow Airport in July 2015 have their trial -due to last 6 days. All 13 activists are asserting their right to defend the climate and the communities negatively impacted by Heathrow, and are pleading not guilty. Plane Stupid invites people who sympathise with the actions taken by the activists, and want to support them in court, to come along. They say: “Bring cake and banners, or just yourselves!”

Click here to view full story…


For earlier news about Heathrow, see