LATEST NEWS
Money Men not keen on Heathrow expansion? BAA's Investors Report ignores third runway.
NoTRAG Archive - December 2009
The NoTRAG website has a new look...
...but you can still find your old favourites.
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.
Airport security increased after Christmas Day bombing attempt
Date : Tuesday 29th December 2009
Airport security on both sides of the Atlantic has been stepped up after an aircraft on route to North America once again became the target for a terrorist bomber.
On Christmas Day a 23-year-old Nigerian, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, boarded a Detroit-bound Northwest Airlines flight at Amsterdam's Schiphol airport having passed through security with explosives sewn into his underwear.
It seems Abdulmutallab intended to cause a blast by injecting an acid into the pack of explosive powder but the mixture simply made a popping noise and caught alight, alerting passengers and crew who were able to overpower him.
Media reports of potential aircraft crashes like this draw attention to the number of passengers (279) and crew (11) on board yet ignore the potential devastation on the ground.
While passengers and crew make a decision to fly, people who find themselves living under flightpaths have little choice but to live with the risks.
However it has been reported that, to reduce the dangers, inflight animated maps showing the exact location of the aircraft will no longer be shown.
No surprises from Transport Committee report
Date : Monday 7th December 2009
NoTRAG held little hope that a Commons Transport Committee that included fervent third runway supporter David Wilshire and ex-Chairman of Manchester Airport Graham Stringer would speak out against a new Heathrow runway.
Virtually ignoring the detrimental impact of a third runway on the environment, the committee's report endorsed the government's decision to give BAA the go ahead.
It claimed this was due to the economic benefit to the UK of the runway. Seems they must have forgotten to factor in the cost of climate change.
Its only reservation appeared to be the poor national rail links but this committee expects the government to give assurances that Heathrow would be linked to other major airports by high-speed rail.
Get real. Politicians are already preparing the electorate for spending cuts. High-speed rail is needed but what government could afford it once it has dealt with the hidden costs of a third runway (including replacing destroyed public buildings and services, new roads, health impacts of noise and pollution etc)?
At least the committee noticed the "lack of clarity" on the timescale for completion of the third runway. The report states that the runway is expected to be finished by 2019. Frankly no one would put money on it being in operation by then.
BAA won't be putting in a planning application until late 2010 and admit that even the new, faster planning process could take four or five years. It will then have to destroy a vast area West of London, currently inhabited by thousands of people with nowhere to go. Campaigners with oppose the runway every step of the way. 2019 looks pathetically optimistic.
It also looks unlikely that a second runway at Stansted could be built by 2019 and, with the committee "not convinced" a national case for another runway at Stansted had been made, Gatwick has come back into the picture.
Gatwick's long-standing agreement that prevents a second runway being built at the airport expires in 2019.
As for the country raising money through taxes of aviation, the committee felt the government should give aviation an easy ride when setting Air Passenger Duty. So it's OK to raise taxes on fuel and VAT which hit jobs in other industries but the aviation industry should get special treatment.
What other suggestions did the committee make?
The Civil Aviation Authority's Air Travel Organisers' Licensing (Atol) system levy to be raised and extended to cover all international flights as well as package holidays. (A good idea when airlines face going bust.)
Higher environmental standards to reduce carbon emissions, air pollution and noise. (Best way is to stop building runways.)
Old and noisy planes to be taken out of use promptly. (Great idea. Tell cash-strapped airlines to buy new planes and see what happens.)
So no surprises and no consideration for the people living around Heathrow.
A Wave of Climate Change protesters floods Central London
Date : Saturday 5th December 2009
An estimated 50,000 people from all over the country encircled Parliament to call on the UK government to take more effective and more urgent action on climate change.
The protesters dressed in blue to form a human wave through London streets. They included a diverse range of groups from anti-airport expansion groups, environmental and animal welfare organisations to religious groups and the Women's Institute.
Unable to ignore the massive demonstration, Ed Miliband, Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, spoke to protesters and Prime Minister Gordon Brown invited 24 Wave supporters to 10 Downing Street after the event to hear their demands.
If Gordon Brown is really interested in tackling climate change he should call a halt to plans for more airport runways and coal power stations.
Possibility of more legal seminars in villages under threat
Date : Saturday 5th December 2009
When BAA started the process of buying up homes in the area earmarked for demolition for a third runway, John McDonnell MP hosted free legal seminars for the residents affected.
The seminars had been organised by Hillingdon Legal Resource Centre and funded by the charity Hillingdon Community Trust to give residents the chance to speak to solicitors about their individual circumstances.
The seminars were held throughout November and ended on 3rd December but they proved so popular that another series of seminars are a possibility in the new year.
Even residents who have no intention of moving have wanted information. Also, while there are inevitably people who will take the opportunity to sell their homes, there are many more who want to stay.
It should also be remembered that 300 households, out of the 700 in the expansion area, are not eligible for the BAA property bond and therefore not eligible to be bought out by BAA at this time.
A happy and prosperous New Year - unless BAA get their way
Date : Wednesday 30th December 2009
NoTRAG would like to wish everyone who has supported its campaign a happy and prosperous New Year.
It could be a tough year for many businesses in the third runway demolition area, which are battling a recession and BAA's attempts to slowly destroy the community they serve.
When BAA announced in October that it would start buying up homes in Sipson and Harmondsworth, local businesses began to fear the impact of an exodus of customers.
Many business owners have sought advice to discover if there is any support for them, such as reduced rates, and been disappointed that their likely difficulties have not been considered.
The village communities need thriving shops, pubs, restaurants, garages and hairdressers but the trade built up over decades could be wiped out in a couple of years.
So we hope local businesses won't have to rely on simple good wishes to keep in the black.
BAA looking for people with money to burn
Date : Friday 18th December 2009
Money to burn? If the cap fits...
People may feel generous at Christmas but would anyone be drunk enough to fritter hard-earned cash on BAA shares after reading the company's Investors Report?
BAA knows it is struggling with massive debts and falling passenger numbers. It has been forced to sell Gatwick while expansion at Heathrow and Stansted looks increasingly like some idiot fantasy.
Perhaps that is the reason the proposed third runway fails to get a mention in the report. Forecast capital spending at Heathrow over the next five years focuses on the new Terminal Two and improving baggage facilities.
Stansted campaigners point out that the £43 million mentioned for "potential development" of a second runway at that airport wouldn't cover much more than consultancy fees and property purchases.
BAA's website suggests that £11 billion would be needed for runways at Heathrow and Stansted - not counting the hidden costs to the poor old British taxpayer.
There is some good news for shareholders; BAA is apparently losing less bags than it used to (well 2008 was a very bad year) and shops are squeezing an extra 27p out of each passenger - up from £4.37 to £4.64.
Maybe passengers are stocking up on food before they fly now that British Airways has cut out meals on its short-haul flights and is only serving bar snacks - that's nuts to you.
Climate Change Committee gives aviation priority over other UK industries
Date : Tuesday 8th December 2009
The government-appointed Committee on Climate Change (CCC) has found that the government has no chance of meeting its targets to cut emissions unless it slashes future growth levels from 200% by 2050 to 60% - yet it did not rule out a third runway at Heathrow.
In September (see archive) Chief Executive of the Committee, David Kennedy, suggested to The Times that the committee might challenge the decision to give the go-ahead for the runway.
The committee had been asked to examine whether the government’s aviation policy was consistent with its target to cut all CO2 emissions in the UK by 80% by 2050.
John Stewart, Chair of HACAN, said, “The message of this report is not that it endorses new runways but that it has killed off the Government’s programme of aggressive expansion of aviation. The 2003 Aviation White Paper is now dead in the water. Unless the Government tears it up, all its fine-sounding words at Copenhagen to reduce emissions will be meaningless.”
No way should so many homes continue to be blighted just because the Government wants to live out its fantasy.
Geraldine Nicholson, NoTRAG
While the 2003 Aviation White Paper's expansion proposals aren't feasible, the report indicates that increasing capacity at Heathrow and a couple of other airports could be possible providing other industries make bigger cuts than the committee suggested in December 2008.
John Sauven Executive Director of Greenpeace UK, said: “We’ve got a small and rapidly decreasing quantity of carbon we can afford to safely emit.
He continued, "The government should not be allowed to fritter it away on giving London a seventh runway, when we already fly more than any other nation on Earth. If ministers continue to bow to the aviation industry’s demands for special treatment, other industries, and ultimately consumers, will have to pay the hefty price of making even deeper cuts than those already planned."
The CCC justifies favouring aviation by saying that it will be much easier to cut emissions elsewhere - with hopes pinned on road and rail to be the transport saviours.
It puts its faith in scientists to come up with solutions and is enthusiastic about biofuels.
Even so, it is aware that there are issues such as the impact on food production, water and land use so states it is prudent to base current policy on the assumption that biofuels cannot account for more than 10% of the total aviation fuel mix in 2050.
As for the global warming effects of the non-CO2 effects of aviation (eg water vapour), the committee considered these but prefered to wait and see what developments are made in scientific research.
For the planet's sake, let's hope they don't wait too long.
56 newspapers in 45 countries print the same editorial - tackle climate change NOW!
Date : Monday 7th December 2009
56 newspapers across the world share one common editorial on Copenhagen today. In an unprecedented step they speak with one voice to demonstrate "humanity faces a profound emergency".
The text, published in 20 languages including Chinese, Arabic and Russian, was drafted by a Guardian team during more than a month of consultations with editors from more than 20 of the papers involved.
The Guardian, like most of the newspapers, has taken the unusual step of featuring the editorial on their front page.
The impact of aviation on climate change is addressed in a paragraph telling people, particularly in the developing world, that they will have to change their lifestyles:
"The era of flights that cost less than the taxi ride to the airport is drawing to a close. We will have to shop, eat and travel more intelligently. We will have to pay more for our energy, and use less of it."
It declares that the fight against climate change should not be a fight between the rich and the poor world, or between east and west. "Climate change affects everyone, and must be solved by everyone."