• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

A tower block in Hounslow showing the actual planes which went over during the course of one hour. (photo montage: Alisdair MacDonald)

The chronology of broken promises

The Government is making what look like cast-iron assurances. Beware! Both the Government and BAA have a dreadful history of broken promises:

1980:
When it gave the go-ahead to Terminal 4, the Government set a limit of 275,000 flights.
Aviation Minister Lord Trefgarne said, “The Government conclude that the idea of a Fifth Terminal at Heathrow and a second runway at Gatwick should not be pursued. This effectively limits expansion at these airports.”

1986:
When Terminal 4 opened there were over 300,000 flights

Early 1990s:
BAA put in an application for Terminal 5

1995:
BAA and Government ruled out a third runway.
Heathrow News, a BAA paper, reported in February 1995:
“For months now BAA has been accused by highly vocal, yet minority groups such as HACAN, of not telling the truth about a third runway. BAA has said repeatedly THERE WILL NOT BE A THIRD RUNWAY (their emphasis). And BAA has been proved right. The Secretary of State has accepted the BAA view. The issue has been settled; people’s concerns have been met.”

2001:
The Government gave the go-ahead to Terminal 5, but set a limit of 480,000 flights.
Nine months later, the Government came up with proposals for a third runway and 655,000 flights at the airport.

2007:
Aviation Minister Gillian Merron said in Parliament that flight numbers could reach 800,000.

Why oppose expansion?

It is not necessary
78% of businesses in London oppose it (London Chamber of Commerce Report 2006). There is no hard evidence to show that the UK economy will suffer if Heathrow doesn’t expand. Indeed, the evidence suggests that proximity to a major airport is not the critical factor when businesses are deciding where to locate. A low-tax economy and the availability of a well-trained work force are usually more important. The Government’s own report, Transport and the Economy, (1999) found that, in a mature economy, which already has a well-developed transport system (such as the UK), any increase in economic growth from improved transport is likely to be modest (The Plane Truth: Aviation and the Environment, published by the Ashden Trust).

It will contribute to climate change
Aviation already accounts for 13% of UK global warming emissions and is the fastest-growing contributor to climate change. The Government’s plans to expand Heathrow, and many other airports across the country, undermines its stated objective to reduce climate change emissions.

It will destroy communities
It is often assumed that it is only transient communities living in poor housing who live near airports. Nothing could be further from the truth as far as Harmondsworth, Sipson, Harlington and West Drayton are concerned – the places that will be directly affected by the proposed expansion. These are settled communities where many people have lived all their lives, a lot of them having worked at the airport. And, because they are parallel to the airport, they are not overflown. Thousands of people will be forced out of many of these communities, as expansion plans will require the demolition of schools, pubs, shops and at least 750 homes.

It will destroy people’s quality of life
Aircraft noise will become a problem for many more people. At least 150,000 people will be under the flight path to the new runway, most of them experiencing aircraft noise for the first time. And the prospect for people living under the existing flight paths is frightening: a plane every 90 seconds virtually throughout the day.

HACAN and NoTRAG (No Third Runway Action Group) are not alone in opposing further expansion at Heathrow. Never before has there been such powerful – and such united – opposition to expansion at the airport.

Who opposes expansion?

The Mayor, Ken Livingstone
“I have made it very clear that I oppose all airport expansion in London and the South East, not just at Heathrow.”

The London Assembly (Greater London Authority)
“This Assembly views with alarm the Government’s support of proposals to bring forward plans to create a third runway and sixth terminal at Heathrow and will give all possible support to councils, community groups and the Mayor in opposing them.”

Wandsworth leader Edward Lister on behalf of local authority grouping 2M
“2007 will be an unprecedented year of challenge for those of us concerned about the environmental impact of expansion at Heathrow. As local government leaders we have a duty to speak up for our residents and defend their quality of life. We will be leaving ministers in no doubt about the scale of opposition to their plans.”

John McDonnell MP, Labour Hayes and Harlington (whose constituency includes Heathrow)
“If Heathrow gets its third runway this will mean the forced relocation of 10,000 people. It will be the biggest clearance since the Highland clearances.”

Conservative MP for Uxbridge, John Randall
“I would never encourage anything that was against the law but I do understand that to get your point across these days you have to make a lot of noise. I wouldn’t preclude myself from becoming Swampy at some stage.”

Justine Greening, Conservative MP, Putney maiden speech
“We simply cannot continue to develop Heathrow until it bursts at the seams. At some point, we must draw a line in the sand and say, ‘Thus far and no further’. I believe we have reached that line and, in many respects, crossed it.”

Susan Kramer, Lib Dem MP, Richmond Park
“There is a broad alliance against the Government’s agenda, and thanks to HACAN and others the coordination of protest is very strong – stronger than it has ever been.”

Vincent Cable, Liberal Democrat MP, Twickenham
“There will be massive opposition in South West London even from those who supported Terminal 5. The new runway will generate more flights and more environmental pollution, both noise and poorer air quality.”

Darren Johnson, Green Party London Assembly member
“The Green Party campaigns to bring about an end to airport expansion and action to make rail cheaper than flying.”

Steve Norris, (Chair of David Cameron’s Quality of Life aviation working group)
“Environmental concerns must have a significant influence in any decision over airport expansion. That is why I am against plans for a third runway at Heathrow.”

AirportWatch
“No further expansion at Heathrow can be justified”.

Geraldine Nicholson, chair of NoTRAG (No Third Runway Action Group)
“People must start to believe that expansion at Heathrow is nowhere near a done deal. Do not give up, ever.”

Anne Redmond, North London resident
“I am opposed to expansion at Heathrow because as a Londoner, my quality of life is directly affected by the side effects of air travel. Although I live a long way from Heathrow, in North East London, I am often woken up very early in the morning. The peaks of noise for each aircraft are 90 seconds or less apart. This means that the noise is more or less constant for several hours.”

Cheryl Hounslow, West London resident
“My family and I suffer greatly from aircraft noise .The thought that things will get worse makes me feel those that make such decisions should be ashamed of their greed or ignorance.”

Stanley Marek, Angela Kwok and Family, Windsor
“I among many residents love where I live, Windsor. But Heathrow is like the elephant in the room. Fear means it is not discussed. Let the buyer beware is the maxim. No-one tells you that at 04.20am when the east wind blows, planes land every 90 seconds. When that evil east wind comes you don’t play music in the house because that’s more noise. We don’t crave more noise – all we crave is silence, sweet, sweet, sweet silence.”

Ruth Cadbury, Brentford
“Mixed mode would be the end of the period of peace that 100,000 people currently benefit from with alternation. People who already live in the noisiest environment in the UK will have no peace from 6am till 11pm.”

Virginia Godfrey, Kew
“I object that hundreds of thousands of people should not have a moment’s respite from the noise of aircraft overhead. This would be the inevitable consequence of the ending of alternation.”

Heather Howard & George Mathieson, South East London
“We strongly oppose the further expansion of Heathrow on the grounds of the increased pollution it will cause over London. Noise pollution affects our health, and Blackheath in particular is subjected to non-stop flights on occasion, which becomes intolerable.”

Richard Hendin, Bridge Quay, Calstock, Cornwall PL18 9RU
“One might wonder why someone living in Cornwall is opposed to the further expansion of Heathrow airport. The answer is that it was aircraft noise that drove me out of London, and discourages me from ever returning. May I also add that I began my professional career as a pilot.”

Mark Middleton-Smith, Isleworth
“I’ve lived in Bassett Gardens for over 11 years, directly under the northern runway approach, suffering from the increasingly noisier and more frequent planes which are now coming into Heathrow Airport – despite pledges to the contrary by Government and BAA. Like 94% of Hounslow residents I say no to Heathrow expansion.”

Christine Shilling, Harmondsworth
“Like Roy Vandermeer, the Terminal 5 Inspector, I am opposed to any further expansion of Heathrow because this ‘would have such severe and widespread impacts on the environment as to be totally unacceptable.’ The destruction of a community – the forced relocation of over 1000 people, bulldozing homes, listed buildings, schools and churches is unthinkable.”

Linda McCutcheon, Sipson
“I lived in London Borough of Hillingdon all my life. Lived in village of Sipson since married in 1966 – 41 years. Married in local church, first family house, children born at the then local cottage hospital, children christened at local church, children attended Heathrow Primary School – a school that Ofsted can’t fault. Memories and buildings of 41 years will all be under concrete.”

© Stop Heathrow Expansion 2007  |  copyright & privacy  |  web design by Taylor McKenzie