The Government & Aviation

Press aticles

A parliamentary inquiry into lobbying, launched on 21st June 2007, considered external regulation, government interaction and funding by lobby groups. Details of BAA's lobbying groups and its close links to government formed part of this inquiry.

Written evidence submitted shows that a level playing field does not exist when it comes to BAA and BA securing meetings with the Secretary of State or the Under-Secretary of State for Transport.

The public administration select committee report said: "There has been widespread public concern that some areas of government policy have effectively been captured at an early stage by interest groups, usually within industry, and that public consultations have been unbalanced in the favour of these interests." It named Heathrow as an example of this and concluded that lobbying needed to be open to public scrutiny.

A separate investigation also revealed that BAA and the government “fixed” environmental targets while researching the impact of the third runway.

Some articles on these and similar subjects are referenced here.

Early Day Motions

On 17th December, 2008, an Early Day Motion (EDM) demanding a vote on the third runway in the Commons was submitted. Gordon Brown has refused a vote.

To see which MPs have signed this EDM, please click on the title below.

"ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THIRD RUNWAY AT HEATHROW"

On 27th October, 2008, an EDM opposing the government's policy on the third runway was submitted for debate in the Commons. Although few EDMs make it to the floor of the House, a debate was held on 11th November, 2008, with the number of MPs speaking out against Heathrow expansion vastly outnumbering those in favour.

To see which MPs signed this EDM, please click the title below.

"GOVERNMENT POLICY ON THIRD RUNWAY AT HEATHROW AIRPORT"

MPs back third Heathrow runway to cope with demand for travel PDF Print E-mail
Monday, 07 December 2009 00:00

Support for the controversial third runway at Heathrow will come from the cross-party Commons Transport Select Committee today, when it publishes a key report into the future of aviation in the UK.

In the first part of a report that will argue for countrywide high-speed rail links to support an anticipated surge in demand for air travel, the committee of MPs will also recommend that any increase to air passenger duty (APD) must take into account the state of the aviation industry in the present economic recession.

The Future of Aviation report will state that British airports, particularly Heathrow, must be better connected to prevent them losing out to other European travel hubs that are more easily accessible.

It will argue that the environmental impact of an increase in air travel could be reduced through the introduction of new rail links and that a better high-speed network might “provide an alternative to some domestic flights”. However, the MPs will concede that the extent to which train travel can replace short-haul flights is uncertain. It remains the subject of diverging views among air and rail operators.

Read the full article in The Times.


World leaders are gathering in Copenhagen for the UN summit on climate change and what does the Transport Select Committee do? It recommends expansion of airport capacity in the south east.

Bring on the election.
 
Whitehall hid evidence on Heathrow expansion PDF Print E-mail
Sunday, 29 November 2009 00:00

The government colluded with the airports operator BAA to skew evidence in favour of expanding Heathrow and play down facts that could help opponents, secret documents indicate. It was so concerned about the content of internal emails and memos about Heathrow expansion that it spent 18 months trying to prevent them being revealed. They were obtained only after Justine Greening, Tory MP for Putney, complained to the freedom of information watchdog.

Email exchanges and memos between BAA and government officials show how they relied on research that they knew would not stand up to scrutiny. They also show that officials discussed taking out references to technical notes containing crucial evidence, so that opponents of expansion would not know they existed.

The memos show the government knew it was presenting flawed evidence to bolster its case for expanding Heathrow.

One memo written in November 2007 claimed that "90% of businesses in the southeast" rated it as either "vital" or "very important" to their business. Yet officials also noted that the "conclusion [is] based on a very low sample size" and that it should be "used with caution". Yet the data was presented by the government in public documents to show that failure to expand Heathrow could badly damage the economy. No mention was made of the fact that only 2.6% of the 6,000 businesses to which questionnaires had been sent had responded.

Read the full article in The Sunday Times.


BAA has been driving government policy on Heathrow for years. This evidence not only supports that view, but also confirms the spin and manipulation used by the DfT to support the case for expansion.

In the Commons debate on Heathrow on 2nd April 2008, Michael Meacher said "there must be accountability" for a government department using selective data and that "leading civil servants ... should be disciplined and, if necessary, removed". Nothing has happened.

How much more evidence is needed before something is done?
 
Plans for third runway at Heathrow hang in balance PDF Print E-mail
Friday, 30 October 2009 00:00

In 1998, the government began a review of its policy on airports. It took five years and 13 months of consultation to conclude what everyone knew already: that the UK's airports, and those in the south-east in particular, were bursting at the seams. The resulting white paper said that additional runways should be built at Heathrow and Stansted to ease the pressure.

Next February, a coalition of campaigners opposing airport expansion hope to drive the final nail in the coffin of the Heathrow expansion plan, more than a decade after it was first conceived. The High Court will stage what lawyers describe as a "rolled-up judicial review". The three-day hearing could force ministers to consult again on the most contentious aspects of building another runway, such as the impact of noise pollution on local residents or the resulting rise in carbon emissions.

By the time they're done, the country, in all likelihood, will have voted in a Conservative government that has promised to ban the construction of new runways, at Heathrow and everywhere else. No wonder a despairing BAA, the owner of Heathrow, has decided not to submit its planning application for the third runway until after the general election. Local campaigners are also hopeful of blocking similar moves to build new runways at Stansted and Gatwick, or at the very least of kicking the plans into the very long grass.

Read the full article in The Guardian.


The High Court won't "force ministers to consult again" on the runway. That would mean the government had already consulted, and the sham of 2008 was no consultation.

Better to save time, money and effort and scrap the plans now.
 
More Articles...
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>

Page 1 of 50
RocketTheme Joomla Templates