• 
• 
• 

NoTRAG Archive - August 2009

The NoTRAG website has a new look...

...but you can still find your old favourites.

See the previous website

Out of the Pipeline

Remind yourself of the days you came along to protest.

If you have never attended a NoTRAG event perhaps this will inspire you to come along. They are serious fun.

Jog your memory about Events Past.

Watchdog upholds complaint about Future Heathrow's pro-runway advert

Date : Wednesday 26th August 2009

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has criticised BAA and Future Heathrow's ‘misleading’ Third Runway advertisement.

Before the government gave the go-ahead for the runway, pro-expansion pressure group Future Heathrow placed an advert in regional newspapers. It claimed a third runway at Heathrow would not make the airport dirtier or noisier. Who were they kidding?

The advert also said that the runway would not go ahead "unless local air quality meets stringent EU standards on concentrations of nitrogen dioxide (NO2)". The ASA didn't fall for that one either.

Local MP, John McDonnell, had challenged the advert's claims.

Responding to the complaint on behalf of Future Heathrow, BAA said the noise and dirt claim was a "statement of fact and that readers would be right to confidently understand that a third runway would definitely not create more noise or air pollution than Heathrow at present". BAA had also defended the NO2 claim.

However, the ASA commented: "We noted Future Heathrow and BAA firmly believed that the noise and air limits would not be breached, but considered that the evidence we had seen was not sufficient to justify an absolute claim that noise and pollution would not increase following the construction of a third runway. We concluded that the claim 'a third runway won't make Heathrow any noisier or dirtier' was likely to mislead."

Spot the difference: Porky Pie or Future Heathrow ad?

On the NO2 claim, the ASA said: "Although we appreciated the Government was committed to meeting EU standards for NO2 levels by 2020, including Heathrow's expansion, we considered that that was not equivalent to the claim that Heathrow would not 'get the green light unless local air quality meets stringent EU standards on concentrations of nitrogen dioxide'.

The ASA understood that the Government intended to allow the construction of a third runway at Heathrow now and to address meeting EU NO2 targets, including in the locality of Heathrow, in the future. We considered that the claim did not make that position clear and concluded that it was likely to mislead."

The ASA said the advert must not appear again in its current form.

Well done to the ASA and John McDonnell MP for making sure that BAA can't print this utter tosh again.

After the dodgy advert appeared in the local Gazette, NoTRAG took the unprecedented step of creating a full-page ad to counter the outrageous claims - on the offchance that someone out there still believes statements made by Future Heathrow or BAA.

Jim Fitzpatrick and the rights of two Sheilas

Date : Sunday 16th August 2009

Former Transport Minister has been making headlines recently for walking out of a muslim wedding because segregation of men and women meant his wife, Sheila, was not permitted to sit with him. So is Jim Fitzpatrick really interested in the rights of women or social cohesion?

Another woman called Sheila lives in the threatened village of Sipson. Despite having lived in her home for over 70 years, Jim Fitzpatrick believes she should have no right to stay there. Futhermore, Jim wants Sheila separated from family and friends and forcibly removed from her home - to make way for more concrete at Heathrow.

The MP doesn't even care that widow Sheila will have nowhere to go. There are no plans to help anyone made homeless by the runway to find an alternative place to live.

As for social cohesion, Fitzpatrick knows that the communities most affected by the third runway are home to a wide variety of ethnic groups.* These people live peacefully together and are sympathetic to each others different social customs.

You don't create social cohesion with bulldozers.

With Labour MPs starting to worry about their future after the next election, voters in Poplar and Canning Town should be suspicious of Fitzpatrick's motives in creating such a fuss over seating arrangements at a private event.

*Note: Fitzpatrick knows about the ethnic make-up of the area affected by the runway because the public CONsultation on the runway, run by his department, ignored the impact on ethnic groups and failed to make documents available in their languages - until NoTRAG pointed out this CONvenient error.

Campaigners' legal challenge application goes to court

Date : Thursday 6th August 2009

An application to challenge the Government's decision to approve a third runway at Heathrow will be considered in open court this autumn.

In ordering the hearing yesterday, the judge highlighted the "significant public interest" in the case."

On 7th April 2009 (see archive) a coalition representing millions of people launched a legal challenge against the Government over its decision in to give BAA permission to draw up detailed plans for a third runway following a public consultation.

The groups taking legal action, include NoTRAG, HACAN, Greenpeace, RSPB, World Wildlife Fund, Campaign for the Protection of Rural England, Transport for London and core members of the 2M group of local authorities.

Speaking on behalf of the 2M Group, Hillingdon Council Leader Cllr Ray Puddifoot said: “The number of organisations backing this challenge is unprecedented and we are pleased that the Judge has recognised the huge public interest in the case when ordering this hearing.

Wandsworth Council leader Edward Lister welcomed the High Court decision and said it would allow much greater scrutiny of the reasons behind the Government's decision.

He added: "This is great news for the many millions of Londoners who already suffer from aircraft noise and pollution at Heathrow, and who, thanks to ministers, can expect that situation to become even more intolerable if a third runway is ever built."

"We have always felt that the decision to green light the third runway flew in the face of logic and was deeply flawed and it is clear that a High Court Judge has recognised that there is a significant public interest in this case."

NOTE: All members of the 2M group, which now represents around 5 million people, oppose a third runway at Heathrow. The core authorites of Hillingdon, Hounslow, Wandsworth, Hammersmith and Fulham, Richmond upon Thames and Windsor and Maidenhead councils are financially supporting this challenge.