Why the 3rd runway is "dead in the water"

Posted by John - 23 January 2009 at 6:45pm - Comments

John Stewart speaking at a 'Stop Heathrow' rally last year

Heathrow watchdog John Stewart is the chair of HACAN Clearskies, one of Europe's largest aviation groups. Here he gives his reaction to the government's decision to go ahead with the 3rd runway at Heathrow, and why he is still confident that it can be stopped.

In the few days since the runway was given the green light, there has been a massive reaction from all the groups who are opposing it. And the message to the government is very clear. People are very angry indeed. In my opinion there's no question that a lot of individuals will take direct action to try and stop this - local residents have been talking about linking up with Plane Stupid to take action. And I believe we can stop it, because all the other parties in the land are saying that they would scrap plans to build a third runway at Heathrow; there is so much opposition now that even if Labour wins the next election the third runway is likely to be dead in the water.

I think the scale and range of civil society which is opposing the expansion of Heathrow is absolutely unique and historic; last week I chaired a press conference of opposition groups which included the heads of WWF, RSPB, Greenpeace, FOE, National Trust, local residents group NOTRAG and the 2M Group of councils, who represent over 2 million people affected by noise pollution from planes flying in and out of the airport. I suspect the government has underestimated the strength and the capacity of this coalition. And for that reason I just don't think that this runway will ever be built, because this coalition will not go away.

Many people within the coalition see Heathrow as the iconic battle against climate change in the UK. One we cannot afford to lose. Set against that is the aviation industry's case that expansion of Heathrow is essential for the economy of London - which we don't accept. Heathrow has clearly been good for the economy of London, but independent reports consistently show that the expansion of Heathrow is not essential for the economy of London.

It’s quite clear that the strength of our opposition has delayed the decision to the point where detailed plans for the 3rd runway could not be got through before the next election. The government has come under increasing pressure to compromise, which is why we heard Geoff Hoon talking more about green planes and tougher emission controls than about the supposed economic benefits when he gave the go-ahead. That pressure also led to him effectively scrapping proposals to operate all Heathrow's runways in 'mixed mode' - where take-offs and landings are happening alternately every 90 seconds throughout the day. A small victory for us but one that's very welcome to people, especially in West London.

BAA had been pushing strongly for the right to operate in 'mixed mode', and I believe that if the government can overrule them and scrap mixed mode today, then in a couple of years time we may see the 3rd runway scrapped as well - provided we keep up the pressure!

What I find incredible is the hipocrasy flowing from central government. Gordon Brown claiming in one voice to be green, whilst still believing the misplaced idea that increased air travel will bring wealth and prosperity to the country.
Air travel has become the main method of travel for long distances, but as technolgy advances it is becoming less essential for the businessman. It is possible to hold video conferencing worldwide without the need to leave the office. Rail travel across europe is gaining in effeciency with new high speed links (except in the UK) which allows direct competion with air travel.
Mr Brown needs to completely rethink the need for more air travel. If he wants a way out of the reccesion, instead of spending billions on saving the rich bankers who have screwed up the economy why not invest the money in new rail links, new low carbon energy and increased funding for farmers allowing them to grow more food in the UK to reduce the need to ship food from around the world. Mr Brown needs to move to Hounslow if he that comitted to air travel.

What I find incredible is the hipocrasy flowing from central government. Gordon Brown claiming in one voice to be green, whilst still believing the misplaced idea that increased air travel will bring wealth and prosperity to the country. Air travel has become the main method of travel for long distances, but as technolgy advances it is becoming less essential for the businessman. It is possible to hold video conferencing worldwide without the need to leave the office. Rail travel across europe is gaining in effeciency with new high speed links (except in the UK) which allows direct competion with air travel. Mr Brown needs to completely rethink the need for more air travel. If he wants a way out of the reccesion, instead of spending billions on saving the rich bankers who have screwed up the economy why not invest the money in new rail links, new low carbon energy and increased funding for farmers allowing them to grow more food in the UK to reduce the need to ship food from around the world. Mr Brown needs to move to Hounslow if he that comitted to air travel.

Follow Greenpeace UK