Morning:
8°c
Heathrow: MPs plot revolt against third runway
Nicholas Cecil, Chief Political Correspondent28 Oct 2008
PLANS for a third runway at Heathrow were threatened today by a Cabinet revolt.
Ministers were said to be secretly fuelling a Commons rebellion against expansion of the airport. Dozens of MPs were joining a campaign to scupper the proposed runway amid doubts over whether it would be needed if aviation traffic is reduced in a global economic slowdown.
By this afternoon, 50 Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrat MPs had signed a Commons motion urging the Government to rethink its policy. The number was expected to rise sharply.
Labour MP John Grogan said: "Some senior ministers have encouraged me to table this motion as there are increasing doubts in government about pressing on regardless with the third runway."
He refused to name any of the ministers. However, The Standard was told that Environment Secretary Hilary Benn has voiced concerns over air and noise pollution from a third runway. Campaigners claim it could not be given the go-ahead without breaching EU environmental laws. Mr Benn's aides did not deny suggestions that he was leading opposition in the Cabinet to allowing heathrow to grow.
A spokesman for his department said: "There has been a consultation on heathrow and the Government is considering the results. The Government aims to make an announcement before the end of the year."
Climate Change Secretary Ed Miliband, Foreign Secretary David Miliband, Universities Secretary John Denham and Commons Leader harriet harman were also said to have concerns over a third runway. Ed Miliband's spokesman rejected the claim that he was opposed to expansion at heathrow, as did Mr Denham's.
But aides of David Miliband, who has revolutionised the Government's environmental policy, stopped short of denying the suggestion that he was against a third runway and Ms Harman's officials could not be contacted.
The Government is widely seen to have all but taken the decision to back expansion of the airport. Health minister Ann Keen, the MP for Brentford and Isleworth, is the only minister to have publicly voiced opposition to such a move.
But other junior ministers are also understood to share Ms Keen's position. By midday, 19 Labour MPs, 22 Liberal Democrats and nine Conservative MPs, including shadow transport secretary Theresa Villiers, had signed the early Day Motion. She said: "There is a broad coalition of opinion against a third runway. The Government should see sense on this issue and cancel the third runway."
But many business chiefs are furious at the Conservatives' stance. A number of London MPs back expansion, mainly on employment grounds. The Government does not need new legislation but Opposition parties could trigger a vote.
Reader views (16)
Please reconsider. This is pure foolishness when we are 800 days away from the tipping point. Don't you think?
- Catherine Ames, United Kingdom, 30/10/2008 08:24
Report abuse
There is absolutely no need for third runway at Heathrow - an airport that should never have existed at its current location anyway given prevailing wind patterns which force aircrafts to fly over London to land most of the time. Instead the government should focus on improving links to other viable airports such as Gatwick and Standsted, or even building a new airport east of London: In these dire economic times, do I hear "publics works anyone"?
- Paul, London, 29/10/2008 08:17
Report abuse
When will people get it that Heathrow is an accident of history. The future is the Estuary. Can't we build a gigantic one that could replace all four London airports?? 24 hours, over the sea etc...
- Alex Balfour, Hong Kong, 29/10/2008 02:37
Report abuse
Peter M, Camberley is NOT near Heathrow airport. It is however within commuting distance and many people who live there clog the roads driving to jobs at the airport. Peter, why don't you live nearer to work? If you can't think of a reason why BAA's moneyspinner should not be expanded, I'll give you 100,000. That's the number of schoolchildren who will have their education affected because aircraft will be flying overhead every 45 seconds. 2,000 more reasons - the number of people in Sipson (including my mother and sister) who will see their village wiped off the map. I am one of the thousands more who don't appear in the figures of those affected, yet I will have the new M4 spur road literally in my back garden. Others also face dangerous levels of pollution. The government knows that EU air pollution targets cannot be met and even now, without a third runway, many monitors show levels way above those targets. Peter M, have you asked your employer about the NO2 levels you are inhaling at work? Examine the facts. You will find out why opposition to Heathrow expansion is growing.
- Christine Taylor, Harlington, UK, 29/10/2008 00:05
Report abuse
As someone who also lives close to Heathrow also, I feel that their can be no expansion of any kind be it mixed mode or via a third runway.
The economic case has not been made, it is clear that it will be extremely detrimental to those that live in West London, the consultation was shambolic, EU pollution limits will be breached, and those under the flight path live with the threat of 18 hours of noise a degredation in their current quality of life.
There comes a time for common sense and these plans need to be shelved, it would appear that a lot of the goverment deparments would agree.
Heathrow jobs are going knowehere, and such claims should be backed up, it is contrary to all statistics on aiviation growth, people arn't going to stop flying so seems a non argument.
- William Barrett, Chiswick, 28/10/2008 23:16
Report abuse
WELL DONE TO ALL M.P.s FOR SAYING NO TO 3rd RUNWAY
- Linda Gritt, West Drayton Middx, 28/10/2008 22:22
Report abuse
Yes but who can be sure that they won't use the turning down of the third runway as an excuse to do the next best option i.e ending runway alternation, which would mean no respite from aircraft noise for most of the day for all those currently affected by it
- Brenda, paddington, 28/10/2008 22:05
Report abuse
The most important thing we have is our health.
When is the government going to wake up to this, you don't put money before health. They would have a different opinion if they lived near the airport.
- Linda Gritt, West Drayton Middx, 28/10/2008 21:42
Report abuse
Whether it's because of pollution, noise, global warming, the dodgy economic case or just the fact that it's an awful airport in an awful position, Heathrow is a political liability. With a ray of hope for the government in the polls, many Labour MPs are now trying to off load this political stinker before the next election.
Heathrow workers shouldn't worry, the airport is not going anywhere, the reasons to do business in West London and the wider country do not hinge on the airport having a third runway as much as BAA and BA would have you believe.
But if you are still looking for someone to blame, you can blame government short-termism which did not have the forsight to move the hub out of town as they did in Paris, New York, Tokyo, Hong Kong and a whole string of other places.
- Rich, London, 28/10/2008 21:12
Report abuse
Good for them!
Quality of life should become a more important factor in economic decisions.
- Bill Caplin, Camden, 28/10/2008 17:10
Report abuse
Crash Brown revolt again. This government is a circus!
- Jacqueline, Hampstead, London, 28/10/2008 16:55
Report abuse
As someone who lives and works next to Heathrow I see no reason why it should not be expanded further. It is by far the largest employer in that area of London.
If expansion is not approved, I, and many like me, fear that Heathrow will lose its position as Europes gateway to other expanded airports this will in turn result in huge job loses for the area.
- Peter M, Camberley, UK, 28/10/2008 16:49
Report abuse
When will people realize that this Government is absolutely in the pockets of self-interested corporations who want to push through extra runways against all opposition and good sense? It is surely obvious from the world economy that cheap flying is on the way out, and when you remove cheap leisure flights-then the existing runway capacity is more than adequate for the high price business orientated flights which remain. It's a disgrace that a so called Labour Government is so intertwined with corrupt money.
- Jon Kent, Hertford. UK, 28/10/2008 15:13
Report abuse
If yet another runway has to be commissioned at Heathrow what reason is there not to use RAF Northolt as an extension to the airport? At present it is used by MPs and other politicians as well as our cherished celebrities. Perhaps they don't want to mix with the great unwashed but it would be nice to share a facility that has been there for years instead of demolishing an entire village near to Heathrow.
- Bethany, London W5, 28/10/2008 13:55
Report abuse
This (now not so) secret plot is one I'm happy to support.
- Austen, London, 28/10/2008 12:44
Report abuse
Hilarious that the only publicly popular and sensible decision out of this government for ages can't come directly from a minister! Revolt is what we need and not just in parliament on this subject.....
- Mark, London, 28/10/2008 12:20
Report abuse
