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"

Economic case for Heathrow third runway flawed, figures show PDF Print E-mail
Thursday, 17 September 2009 00:00

The economic benefits of a third runway at Heathrow will be almost wiped out by the increased costs to the environment, analysis by the Liberal Democrats shows. The government's own figures suggest that ministers have underestimated by several billion pounds the financial impact of the extra greenhouse gases produced by a third runway at the airport.

Critics say the new figures show the government's support for the new runway is a "sham" and have demanded that plans to expand the airport are scrapped.

Simon Hughes, energy and climate change spokesman for the Liberal Democrats, which carried out the analysis, said: "It is time for the government to come clean on Heathrow. Ministers know the economic rationale for a third runway is a sham because their own figures prove it. By giving the green light to a third runway, the government has allowed hundreds of thousands more flights, creating a climate change disaster."

Ministers announced the Heathrow expansion plan in January, which could add another 220,000 flights a year at the west London site. The government said the climate change costs associated with the project would be £4.8bn through to 2080, which it said would leave an overall benefit to the UK economy of £4.4bn to £5.2bn. But the Liberal Democrats say this calculation was based on out-of-date figures.

Read the full article in
The Guardian.


The government has used out-of-date figures at its convenience when arguing for the third runway; on noise levels, pollution and now the economic case.

Out of date + Out of touch = Out of office.
 
RocketTheme Joomla Templates