Reader views (13)

 Add your view

Paul from SW London - we are NOT just quibbling about one extra runway!!

We are talking about an airport equivalent to the size of Gatwick being added to Heathrow!

- Christine Shilling, Harmondsworth, 08/12/2008 22:37
Report abuse

Two options

A:Build runway between reservoirs near Heathrow

B:Build Marinair

- H.J.Jones, London UK, 08/12/2008 18:53
Report abuse

The plan for Hoon making the decision is probably that he can take the flak, and Brown and Co can point to him at the next election and say that it was Hoon, not Labour, making the nasty decision. If, as expected, Hoon ultimately pleases BA and BAA, I assume that the plan is for him not to run next time round -- with Labour hoping the issue disappears with him. Perhaps a Lordship sinecure for his sacrifice? Nothing that Labour does surprises me any more. As devious a crew one will never find.

- Phil Jones, London UK, 08/12/2008 15:41
Report abuse

Heathrow is unique in that it is a hub airport located closely to a major conurbation with flightpaths over the most populated parts of the country. To my knowledge there is nowhere else quite like it in the western world, most countries sensibly moved their 'main' airport out of town in the 60s and 70s to avoid the sort of mess that Heathrow is in now.

Airport expansion is about CO2 yes, but at Heathrow it is also about illegal levels of harmful pollution, unacceptable levels of noise, increased road traffic and a new west London congestion charge. It is also about the government colluding with private business to 'cook the books', years of lies, broken promises and an economic argument that stands to benefit only the profit margins of the airline industry.

I'm glad that at least some of the people who work at Westminster are still prepared to stand up for democracy and what's right.

- Rich, London, 08/12/2008 13:26
Report abuse

Please don't forget that Newham Council has agreed to let London City Airport have an additional 40,000 flights (up to 120,0000) a year in on of the most densely populated areas in London , with Royal Docks where the airport is situated having one of the highest asthma figures in the country.
The noise , pollution and community impact already is devastating without the need for additional flights.
The Taxpayer already pays £5.5 million to cover the airports costs with the airport contributing NOTHING. Newham is one of the poorest boroughs in the country

- Darren, east london, 08/12/2008 13:14
Report abuse

Regardless of the rights and wrongs of a 3rd runway, MPs should be allowed to debate and vote on the issue, taking into account their constituents' views, rather than letting Hoon have his mind made up for him by BA, BAA etc.

- Nobby Clark, Perth, Scotland, 08/12/2008 12:45
Report abuse

Paul,

the quibble is that the NOX emmissions from LHR expanded will mean 'increased morbidity' to elderly residents near the airport )(thats an area of approx 127KM sq). Rates of asthma in children across London will rocket - its already highest in Europe - the LHR is in the west and that means most of the pollution gets blown across London, not including the huge amounts dumped by overhead aircraft in central London. The use of outside space - already a bi weekly lottery due to alternation will become impossible as alternation will be withdrawn - even partial withdrawal will mean horrible top and tail to the day. SO yes lets be like china - introduce work practices like them if you like - i thought we were a democracy not a command and control dictatorship - silly me!

- Christian Ball, London, UK, 08/12/2008 12:42
Report abuse

Id imagine the deal was already done when BAA were forced to sell some of their airports (Gatwick etc) Don't you know we havent a say in anything by now. My thoughts go to the people that are going to lose their homes...Now lets ask the people who make the decision to live on the flight path and then see what happens.

- Dc, London, 08/12/2008 12:21
Report abuse

Of course the House of Commons should vote on something as importnat as the third runway otherwise there doesn't seem much point in having elections or MPs.They should definitely go for it!

- Dave Robins, West Drayton, 08/12/2008 11:29
Report abuse

You do wonder if protestors out there have a sense of proportion. If we don't go ahead with a third runway, the extra traffic will just go to the continent - there won't be reduced emissions at all. And other countries around the world (the ubiquitous China mainly) are opening new airports every week. So why on earth are we quibbling about one extra runway for goodness' sake?

- Paul, SW London, 08/12/2008 11:23
Report abuse

First sign that the Green/Speaker affair has nurtured a few shoots of independent thought in Parliament. Go to it, all MP's!

- Atropos, Hythe, Kent, 08/12/2008 11:18
Report abuse

Unless MPs have a free vote on a third runway in Parliament we would consider that we are not living in a democracy.

- Malcolm Whitlock, West Drayton, Middlesex. UK, 08/12/2008 10:21
Report abuse

Thank god for principle. the anti-democratic tendency of Hoon and Brown and Kelly will finally be shown for what it is - this airport expansion is not going to happeneither via volume or new airport runways. Incresaed morbidity higher asthma rates for kids, impossible to exist outside due to unrelenting noise and of course the poison of NOX blown over London from the West - it shall not pass.

- Christian Ball, London, UK, 08/12/2008 10:08
Report abuse

Add your comment