Conservatives at odds over Heathrow third runway

Do the Conservatives oppose a third runway at Heathrow, or not?

Iain Dale has this:

There is growing disquiet among Tory MPs, and the Shadow Cabinet, about Theresa Villiers witchhunt against BAA. The Shadow Transport Secretary issued a press release yesterday headlined PROMISES FROM BAA CAN’T BE TRUSTED. The release went on to accuse BAA of breaking all its promises on a third runway.

[Iain quotes from Villiers’ press release] “BAA are right to admit that they have lost the trust of Parliamentarians and local communities over the third runway. However today’s letter is just the next in a long line of promises which may have been sincere at the time, that were subsequently cast aside by the company. We have seen this all before. What BAA needs to realise is that people do not want a third runway, we do not need a third runway, and under a Conservative Government there will not be a third runway.”

All this was said in response to a BAA proposal that a completely independent body should be set up to ensure that it is impossible for promises to be broken. Surely that was something a Shadow Transport Secretary should welcome. One has to ask what kind of message this sends out to private companies who want to act responsibly? “Sorry, we don’t trust you so don’t bother trying”.

So BAA are proposing a watchdog: that’s a good thing, right? Not if you check the fine print. As the BBC reports:

Heathrow’s owner says it will accept an independent body with the power to limit flights for environmental reasons – if a third runway is approved.

BAA says that if it wins the battle for a third runway and more flights, it will welcome being held to strict noise and pollution controls.

Stable doors, horses bolting, etc, spring to mind. In response to BAA’s assurances, Liberal Democrat Shadow Transport Secretary Norman Baker has said, “This is a worthless promise, as BAA has to stick to EU emissions limits anyway.”

You can read here how Susan Kramer, Liberal Democrat MP for Richmond Park, is speaking up against Heathrow expansion plans, on behalf of her constituents.

Read more by or more about , , or .
This entry was posted in News.
Advert

One Comment

  • Surrey Tories are very confused. (FYI Surrey and Spelthorne run up to the southern perimeter road of the airport.)

    Spelthorne Tories are for the economic development but against on environmental grounds. The MP David Wilshire is for the 3rd runway but a prominent Surrey County Councillor in the area has been de-selected for opposing. Ironically under LD pressure Surrey CC changed from being pro to anti. Most of the other Tory groups in Surrey are for the 3rd runway.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert

Recent Comments

  • Tony Vickers
    @Tom Reeve you sort of get it but lets be specific how we'd pay for raising the income tax threshold. We would tax the annual rental value of land. Its been our...
  • cim
    Matt (Bristol): for single-member AV it's not terrible, but most ways of including it in multi-member STV break the proportional representation aspect very badl...
  • Rif Winfield
    Jack, you are absolutely right, as were Tom Ellis and the young David Lloyd George. The tragedy of the Newport meeting in January 1896 was that it set back the ...
  • Diana Simpson
    You would have a problem of public transport capacity to cope with kids going home in the rush hour(s) rather than before it. Our local buses are missed out whi...
  • Chloe
    "We did use RON in single-winner STV / AV elections at my Students Union. But I’m not sure I see it as constructive practical politics" That's where it sho...