I wrote a couple of weeks ago about the Conservatives’ indecision on a third runway at Heathrow.
Now the Environment Secretary Hilary Benn has revealed the rift within the Government on the issue.
In an interview with the Sunday Times, Benn “said that Britain’s biggest airport had a ‘problem’ with air quality even before the construction of the proposed third runway.”
Earlier this month Geoff Hoon, the transport secretary, reluctantly postponed the runway decision until the new year after some ministers expressed private doubts.
Critics say the plan to increase aircraft capacity by almost 50% would boost emissions of harmful nitrogen dioxide and “particulates” – soot and dust.
There are claims that the airport’s expansion would also lead to more noise for the millions of families who live under the flight paths.
The official consultation document produced by the Department for Transport has suggested that stringent European Union emissions targets could still be met if the third runway gets the go-ahead.
However, serious doubts have been raised about the document’s conclusions after the Environment Agency issued its own report saying the case had not been proven.
The article goes on to say,
Last night senior figures close to Gordon Brown dismissed Benn’s objections. “Air quality is an issue, but this project will get the go-ahead,” said a senior source.
Lord Mandelson, the business secretary, has recently begun campaigning behind the scenes to persuade ministers to support the project.
Norman Baker, Liberal Democrat transport spokesman said of the news, “These reports lay bare what we’ve long known. The Cabinet is split top to toe on this issue.”
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
A perpetual pirouette of prevarication?
Michael Meadowcroft: A Liberal of Intellectual Rigour and Uncommon Integrity
Debt-ridden graduates claim they are seen as cash cows
Why non-fiction books need their indexes
Changes in status: Local Elections wrap up
Daniel Walker
David Raw
Jenny Barnes
Tom Bailey
Gill Travers
7 Comments
They should put their feet down & say no. The overwhelming majority of Conservative voters, as well as LD & Labour voters, are against (especially those living nearby whose lives will be blighted).
Only the most fanatical Clarksonite libertarian will support this idiocy, which even Boris Johnson won’t stand for. How hard can it be?
Once again New Labour prove the alliance between large corporations & an overbearing state that defines them. Mandelson, the lowlife, incarnates this Faustian pact & I look forward to his demise alongside rats like Purnell & scum like Hutton.
This would be an apt time to remind everyone of this gem:
http://www.c-fit.org.uk/
A Conservative organisation that wants to see much more air travel globally. You think it’s a joke, but it’s not.
Theresa Villiers “announced that a Conservative Government would say no to a third runway at Heathrow, and concentrate instead on the advantages of our high speed rail plan”.
Sounds quite definite.
Muscular free-market capitalism holds that what big business wants is necessarily good for the community. Interference by the state in what big business does is necesarily bad for the community. This is an immuntable law of nature, and anyone who disagrees is a wimp. Market Darwinism, if you like.
Trouble is, airport expansion cannot take place without the active assistance of the state, and the use of one of the most draconian powers available to government – compulsory purchase.
Should we be at all surprised that Brown has chosen this moment to amend the TCPA so as to exempt “major infrastructure projects” from the right of local planning authorities to insist on a public inquiry?
What about the “freedom” of people in rural communities in the south-east not to be plagued by the problems Heathrow expansion would create?
F*** ’em, eh?
I think the problem is that the Tory shift on Heathrow is
1. Shermanesque: they have left themselves no wiggle room. Thats uncomfortable for some Lib Dem campaigners as it upsets a trabal lode star. If you chuck in Boris’s oppositon it is set in concrete.
2. Its a double pointer. By hypothecating the costs onto a high speed rail link for the Northern cities they have turned a NIMBY mve into a national initative. One that is counter intuitive and re inforces there new brand. Air to rail, South to North, Water into Wine.
Given that the decsion has been delayed and sitting cabinet membes are advertising splits there is a real chance that we could win this thing.
We should be concentrating fire on Labour and the issues rather than recycling ian dale Blog posts trying to invent tory splits to make us feel better.
Would be useful to balance the arguments. It is too easy to stand and snipe when your party have no real agency.