Forthcoming Public Meetings and Events
A growing number of campaign groups are organising events to show their opposition airport expansion, particularly at Heathrow. Here's your chance to join us and show the government what you think.
Remember to put the dates in your diary.
NoTRAG Archive - July 2009
The NoTRAG website has a new look...
...but you can still find your old favourites.
We now have a newspaper-style format to reflect the change in our campaign, which stepped up a gear when the government decided to push ahead with a third runway.
We've introduced new features on these pages but favourites like our community page are only a click away.
BAA accused of "playing with residents' lives" over property bond scheme
Date : Friday 31st July 2009
BAA sent a letter on 7th April telling residents in the third runway demolition area that it hoped to soon activate the company's scheme to buy up their homes. However it now appears that BAA was nowhere near ready to go ahead.
That month, NoTRAG reported (see archive) that curiously the BAA letter was sent out a week after activists launched their "Adopt a Resident" scheme showing the determination of local people to fight evictions.
Colin Matthews, the BAA Chief Executive who sent the letter, claimed the aim was "to give those residents who wish to end the uncertainty surrounding their homes, a chance to move on as soon as practically possible".
Colin Matthews
Many local residents feared that activating the scheme early would create panic. The scheme was originally intended to start when BAA applied for planning permission, not expected before summer 2010.
Those Sipson and Harmondsworth residents with no intention of moving, particularly the elderly, feared that residents fed up with living under threat would feel under pressure to sell up. This would leave them living in a ghost village or one populated by short-term tenants waiting for the bulldozers.
The letter generated so much concern that John McDonnell MP asked Hillingdon Law Centre to run several public group sessions specifically to advise residents in the bond scheme area.
Unfortunately, it has not been possible to arrange these meetings because BAA has not indicated how the new scheme will work. Rumours abound that at least one of BAA's "airline colleagues" is reluctant, or unable, to hand over the cash needed to pay residents to move out.
Christine Taylor, Vice Chair of NoTRAG commented: "BAA said it aimed to end the uncertainty surrounding people's homes but this letter just increased their worries. If the scheme was not ready to be introduced, BAA should not have jumped the gun. Senior executives at BAA are playing with residents' lives."
National debt hits record high - let's build some runways!
Date : Tuesday 21st July 2009
The total outstanding government debt in the UK has now risen to a record £799 billion, 56.6% of UK GDP, the highest since records began in 1974. So does it make sense to lumber the country with the burden of a programme of runway building?
Willie Walsh, Chief Executive at BA, claims that a third runway at Heathrow won't cost taxpayers a penny but the destruction will leave taxpayers with a hefty bill. This will be the case at other sites of proposed expansion.
Even when the recession eventually ends, there is no guarantee that the aviation industry will be in a fit state to support extra runways.
On the same day that the country's depressing financial state was revealed, Ryanair announced a 40% cut in the number of aircraft it will be using at Stansted Airport. The airline may blame higher airport charges but it forgets that flights are only one part of a travellers expenses. Even heavily discounted air fares are failing to lure people onto planes.
This week British Airways announced it is planning to raise £600 million to see it through the recession. It also plans "cost reduction and efficiency initiatives", like expecting staff to work for nothing or take a pay cut in order to save jobs.
While telling workers it can't afford pay rises, British Airways is having to earmark money so that BAA can bring forward its scheme to buy out residents in the third runway development area.
Despite the problems of a recession and threatened climate change, the government is supporting polluting airport development while seeming to ignore the potential of green jobs.
The 21st July also saw 25 workers start a sit-in protest at a wind turbine factory where 625 jobs are due to go. Workers at the Danish-owned Vesta Windsystems were furious that the company is laying off workers because of the British government's lack of initiatives to encourage green energy.
In a recession we all have to reassess our priorities. If this government continues to put the aviation industry above all else we will all pay the price.
Campaigners have a Big Lunch on site of third runway
Date : Sunday 19th July 2009
Airplot, the Greenpeace land in Sipson with over 50,000 "owners", was the venue for a NoTRAG picnic organised as part of The Big Lunch initiative.
Braving the summer showers
While the land has become a symbol of defiance, it is also being put to good use with part of it made into an allotment that actor Richard Briers helped to plant last May.
Wet weather in the preceeding week threatened to scupper plans for whole the event. Gardening on the plot had to be done in the rain and there seemed little chance of sunshine appearing by Sunday. (Thanks to Linda, Terry, Tracy and Dave for sticking with it.)
On the day, even blustery winds and a sprinkling of summer drizzle couldn't dampen the high spirits. As an added bonus, some people went home with a fresh organic cabbage!
Christine Taylor, Vice Chair of NoTRAG, said: "When we heard about The Big Lunch initiative to celebrate British communities, Airplot seemed the perfect spot for a NoTRAG picnic. Our communities are worth fighting for and Airplot has brought together thousands of people who agree that Heathrow expansion must not go ahead."
Response to Legal Challenge not expected until September
Date : Thursday 30th July 2009
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 at Heathrow - and is still waiting for a decision on whether this can proceed.
The groups taking legal action, including NoTRAG, HACAN, Greenpeace and members of the 2M group, had expected a response in July but this has now been put back until September.
British Airways make short-haul flights even less appetising
Date : Wednesday 29th July 2009
As if short-haul flights weren't grim enough, British Airways is cutting all meals after 10am on its short-haul flights in a desperate bid to save money.
After a journey to the airport and time spent in a series of security queues, BA fare payers could at least look forward to a sandwich and a drink as part of their ticket price before desembarking and facing yet more queues at another airport.
BA says "nuts" to hungry passengers
Soon, unless passengers pick flights that serve breakfast or last longer than two and a half hours, all they will get is a drink and a bag of nuts or similar snack.
There will be no opportunity to purchase more substantial food on the plane.
While it must be good news for BAA, which will gain from food sales at airports, stewards and stewardesses must be concerned about the long-term impact on jobs and pay.
High-speed rail travel is looking a more and more attractive alternative to the increasingly austere airline experience.
Squirrels compete with BA passengers for nut supplies
Pro-runway report discredited for figures that don't add up
Date : Wednesday 15th July 2009
A new report funded by the aviation industry and published by the British Chamber of Commerce makes the amazing claim that a third runway at Heathrow would add £30bn to the UK economy over 60 years.
The figures, produced by consultancy Colin Buchanan and Partners Ltd, are six times higher than even the government's disputed claim of £5bn over 70 years.
The report's forward says it was commissioned "specifically to highlight the economic benefits of hub airports to the UK economy", so it is hardly likely to give a balanced view.
This also explains why the compilers have totally ignored the economic impact of environmental issues and surface access. It means the costs of climate change, noise, pollution and roads are immediately out of any equation.
Costs ignored but BCC's Frost says study is "comprehensive".
So how is the £30bn arrived at? It appears to be guesswork, mostly based on the adage "time is money"; It ignores leisure/tourist travellers and focuses on the mega-bucks businessman who wastes time travelling from Heathrow Hell. It assumes that another runway will make journeys quicker and improve productivity. Claims about increasing jobs are not backed up with hard facts.
The quality of it's reasoning for supporting a third runway can be summed up by this quote from an anonymous businessman from an anonymous mobile telecommunications company, "The only reason for locating our main offices in Paddington was to be near Heathrow. We need long-haul flights to be available throughout the day so we can fly at the drop of a hat".
Is the report suggesting that without a third runway this mysterious company will move out of the UK to be near Paris or Frankfurt airports?
HACAN Chair John Stewart said, “To compare Heathrow with other cities is not to compare like with like. The true comparison is to compare the number of passengers using all of London’s airports with the number of passengers using all of the airports at these other cities. When that is done London remains the best-connected city in the world.”
Many environmentalists and politicians see high-speed rail as an alternative to short-haul flights but this report wants both high-speed rail AND a third runway. It argues that Heathrow expansion will be paid for by the private sector whereas the taxpayer will largely foot the bill for rail."
Heathrow: Taxpayers get the bill for unusable schools
On this point Christine Taylor, Vice Chair of NoTRAG, responded: "By using weasel words and choosing to ignore the devastating impact of a third runway on our local and global environment, this report conceals the true economic cost to the taxpayer. The writers know that few members of the public will read their report but outrageous predictions will grab headlines."
John Stewart added, “Overall, this report smacks of desperation. It comes to something when a body such as the British Chamber of Commerce resorts to sensationalist claims that each year the third runway is delayed costs the country £1 billion. It is a sign that they have lost the battle for a third runway."