Lib Dems say "Enough is enough at Heathrow" (Beaconsfield Liberal Democrats)

Beaconsfield Liberal Democrats <alan_oxley@hotmail.com>

Lib Dems say "Enough is enough at Heathrow"

January 26, 2008 10:28 PM

The government says that there are economic benefits associated with allowing Heathrow to continue to expand. Britain is the world's second largest exporter of services and the financial services industry uses 6 times more air travel than other businesses. The government says that 70% of foreign investment wants to, and does, locate within one hour of Heathrow. Allowing Heathrow to expand would create another 10000 jobs.

Local environmental campaigner Peter Chapman

Liberal Democrat environmental campaigner Peter Chapman said "These benefits are vague and unsubstantiated. We know that only 40% of travellers from Heathrow are flying for business reasons (others are for leisure and to visit friends and family) and that one third of travellers at Heathrow are simply changing planes"

He continued "If business people are being prevented from flying because Heathrow is too crowded, then it will be in the airlines' commercial interests to stop taking low fare leisure travellers and take premium fare business travellers instead."

The government says that Heathrow can be expanded without increasing today's noise levels and without worsening today's air quality levels because aircraft are getting cleaner and quieter, road vehicles are getting cleaner and there will be investment in more public transport to the airport.

The main Heathrow expansion project which affects South Bucks is the proposed, shorter, third runway between the M4 and the A4. It would mean more aircraft being routed northwards and because it would be a shorter runway and closer to South Bucks, the aircraft would fly over at lower altitude.

Levels of noise currently experienced in Slough and Windsor would then be experienced in Richings Park, Iver and Wexham. However this would still meet the government's criteria of acceptability because the total noise around Heathrow would not be greater than today (on its assumptions of quieter aircraft etc)

Peter Chapman commented "The government obviously thinks that current levels of noise, pollution and congestion are acceptable if its only ambition is to keep them the same. They are not acceptable and we do need cleaner, quieter aircraft, cleaner vehicles and more public transport but to make an intolerable situation better. Heathrow is big enough already, it will be bigger still when Terminal 5 opens in March and local people say enough is enough. Why should the views of business people who do not necessarily live here count more than those of the two million local residents whose daily lives are adversely affected?"