The land earmarked by the Government for
the construction of a third runway at Heathrow airport has been bought from
under the noses of ministers by a coalition of celebrities, scientists,
politicians and green campaigners.
Oscar-winning actress Emma Thompson has
been joined by Alistair McGowan, Greenpeace and others from across the political
spectrum, who now own the site. They exchanged contracts on the land - a field
north of the airport - last week, and now legally own the plot. They say they
will never sell it to BAA or allow the airport operator's bulldozers onto their
site.
Emma Thompson
said: "I don't understand how any government
remotely serious about committing to reversing climate change can even consider
these ridiculous plans. It's laughably hypocritical. That's why we've bought a
plot on the runway. We'll stop this from happening even if we have to move in
and plant vegetables."
The deeds to the site - right at the heart
of the Government's proposed plan for Heathrow expansion - were signed on Friday
by Thompson, McGowan, Conservative Party green advisor Zac Goldsmith and
Greenpeace director John Sauven (PDF
of deeds on request).
Beneficial owners who've also signed-up include local
Labour MP John McDonnell, Conservative front bench spokeswoman Justine Greening,
Lib Dem MP Susan Kramer and Royal Society Research Fellow Dr Simon Lewis - an
acclaimed climate scientist. Greenpeace is inviting members of the public to
also become beneficial owners and pledge to do what they can to defend the land
from the Government and BAA. The green group hopes to attract thousands of
people to take a stake in the land, under the campaign banner
AIRPLOT.
At full capacity, an expanded Heathrow
would become the biggest single source of C02 emissions in the country. It would
emit nearly 27 million tones of CO2 every year - equivalent to the emissions of
57 of the least polluting countries in the world combined (10).
TV impressionist Alistair McGowan
said: "BAA were so confident of getting the
Government's go ahead, but we have cunningly bought the land they need to build
their runway. Now that we own it, we'll never sell it to them and we're
confident that we'll be joined by people from all over the world who will help
us defend it. No government which is serious about tackling climate change
would ever think of expanding Heathrow, and because we care about our planet's
future and our children's future, we are not going to let them.
"The Government,
by deciding to build this runway, is sticking two fingers up to the environment
and the people of this world. By giving this runway the go-ahead Gordon Brown is
effectively holding a giant blow torch to the polar ice caps and saying ‘Melt!
Melt!' In the end aviation expansion will have a serious effect on sea levels
and will decimate the very countries people feel it is their right to fly to.
This isn't just about the destruction of Sipson but the destruction of the world
as we know it."
Greenpeace campaigners are today creating a
message in chalk on the land, visible from the air, which will say ‘OUR CLIMATE
- OUR LAND' (site visits on request, with elevated scaffold position for
filming). Alistair McGowan started digging yesterday, and the message will be
completed this week. Greenpeace director John
Sauven says that the legal owners of the site will block the
runway at every stage through the planning process and in the courts. They will
never sell the land to Spanish-owned airport operator BAA, and if it comes to it
many thousands of people will be prepared to peacefully defend their field in
person, standing in front of bulldozers and blocking
construction.
Sauven added: "We've thrown a massive spanner in the
engine driving Heathrow expansion. As the new owners of the land where the Government
wants to build the runway, we'll resist all attempts at compulsory purchase and
represent millions of people from across the world at any planning inquiry. And
if it comes to it, Greenpeace will be joined by huge numbers of people to block
BAA's bulldozers from getting onto our land. This site will become a focus for
climate campaigners across Britain and the wider world because
this new runway cannot and will not be built. People wanting to take a stake in
this project should go to the Greenpeace UK website and sign
up."
(Further quotes from beneficial owners in
notes below - a map of the position of the site is online and copies are available on
request.)
Geoff Hoon is expected to give the green
light to a third runway and sixth terminal at the airport this week, claiming
the development is important for the economy of the nation. But the
BAA/government economic case for a third runway has been comprehensively
discredited. On Sunday the Labour-leaning Institute for Public Policy Research
stated that the runway would become
a white elephant and called the economic case ‘greatly
overstated'.
Conservative
frontbench spokeswoman Justine Greening, who has signed-up to be a beneficial
owner of the site, said:
"At every stage
the Government has ignored public opinion and shamelessly ignored the grave
environmental risk of expanding Heathrow. At every stage, residents have made
their concerns and views against further expansion very clear. The battle to
stop Heathrow expansion will continue because preserving our quality of life is
so important. I have got involved in buying this land to very actively represent
the views of my own constituents. If the Government will not listen in
Parliament, then ministers will find they have to listen in the
courts."
Members of the
public interested in becoming members of AIRPLOT should go to greenpeace.org.uk.
Beneficial owners are included in a legal deed of trust and are represented in
any legal fight for the land by the four purchasers of the land. Greenpeace
lawyers are looking into all options for using the land and its owners to block
the third runway.
ENDS
For more
information contact Greenpeace on 0207 865 8255 / 07801
212967
The case against Heathrow
expansion:
-
Unrestrained airport
expansion will make it impossible for the UK to
play its part in tackling climate change. The Government has committed the
UK to an 80% cut in Co2 emissions by
2050 (1). Research from the respected Tyndall Centre shows that if the industry
is allowed to expand as predicted, aviation alone would destroy any hope of hitting
this target (2)
-
Aviation currently
receives £9bn per year in tax subsidies (3). This money could be spent to help
deliver cheap, reliable, and environmentally sound transport solutions.
- A recent report jointly
written by the Government's environment watchdog, the Sustainable Development
Commission, and the influential left wing think tank, IPPR, called on the
Government to completely rethink its aviation policy because of doubts over the
environmental and economic data underpinning the Government's pro-expansion
policy. It recommends that the Government launches a full, independent review of
its 2003 aviation white paper.
-
The economic benefits of
aviation expansion have been overstated. There is growing uncertainty over the
industry's projections of future demand given oil price instability
(4)
-
Meanwhile the costs of
climate change are growing all the time - the floods in summer 2007 were
estimated to have cost £3 billion. The Stern report on the economics of climate
change estimates that business as usual climate change will cost between 5 and
20% of global GDP (5).
-
Small increases in the
efficiency of planes will be overwhelmed by an unrestrained growth in flights.
The Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution found that the industry's
targets are ‘clearly aspirations rather than projections'(6)here are some basic
technological restraints that make major improvements impossible to imagine.
However, if the Government caps the total number of flights at current levels,
these efficiency gains could have a positive impact.
-
Aviation emissions do
more damage to the climate because they are released at altitude. Scientists
multiply aviation emissions (which include other harmful gases not just C02) by
between 2 and 3 to calculate their increased climate impact - a phenomenon known
as ‘radiative forcing'.
-
Including aviation in the
EU emissions trading scheme will not solve the problem. According to a report
from Ernst and Young, even in the toughest ETS scenario emissions from the
aviation sector would grow by 83% by 2020 (7). More recent research shows that
in order for the ETS to have any chance of working from 2012 onwards, the
Government must halt expansion now (8).
-
Per person, Britons emit more from flying
than any other people else on the planet (603kg per person per year, compared to
434kg for Irish and 275 kg for Americans) while in the UK aviation accounts for
13% of the country's entire climate impact (9) - a figure that is growing fast.
Quotes from
beneficial owners:
Dr Simon Lewis, Royal
Society Research Fellow at the University of Leeds said:
"Many scientists have urged Gordon Brown to
drop these proposals. We cannot continue business-as-usual and meet our climate
change commitments. It's as simple as that. Agreeing to massively increase
flights from Heathrow against the best scientific advice - to
drastically reduce our carbon dioxide emissions - is a reckless decision that
will come back to haunt us."
Susan Kramer, Liberal
Democrat MP, said:
"We will
never give up this battle. We will use every weapon from tactics like this land
purchase to taking the Government to court. The battles for quality of life in
our area and on climate change are simply too important for us to give up. The
Government brought this fight to us, but they will regret
it."
John McDonnell, the local
Labour MP at Heathrow, said:
"We've
bought the runway from under the Government's nose and we're going to stop them
expanding Heathrow. We'll defend this land in the courts and we'll never let the
bulldozers on. We can beat climate change, but not by almost doubling the size
of the world's biggest international airport."
Environmental writer
George Monbiot said:
"Heathrow was built on the orchards that
once supplied London. I'll be doing my bit to restore the
site to its proper function by planting an apple tree on the plot. Years hence,
when the threat of a third runway is a distant memory, I will send the first box
of fruit I harvest from it to Downing Street."
Sources:
1. Department of
Climate and Energy - 16th October 2008
http://nds.coi.gov.uk/environment/fullDetail.asp?ReleaseID=381477&NewsAreaID=2&NavigatedFromDepartment=False
2. K, Anderson, A
Bows, P, Upham (2006) Growth scenarios for EU & UK aviation: contradiction
with climate policy, Page 42.
3. Sewill. (2003)
The hidden cost of flying. AEF.
The figure of £9 billion was confirmed by BAA consultants Volterrra, in November
2003. Since then, inflation and the increased number of passengers raised the
figure to £10 billion but it was brought back to £9 billion by the rise in air
passenger duty on the 1st of February 2007.
4. Generated User
Benefits and the Heathrow Expansion: Understanding Consumer Surplus (July 2008)
http://www.foe.co.uk/resource/reports/consumer_surplus.pdf
5.
http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/4/3/Executive_Summary.pdfT&E
background briefing
6. Royal Commission
on Environmental Pollution, 29th November 2002. The Environmental Effects of
Civil Aircraft in Flight. Special Report
7. T&E
background briefing (2007) Including
Aviation in the EU's Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) page 2.
8. Bows, A. &
Anderson, K. "A bottom-up analysis of including aviation within the EU's
Emissions Trading Scheme", Tyndall Centre for climate Change Research, Working
Paper, November 2008 http://d.scribd.com/docs/emvlodk9ezdqje6fo5s.pdf
9. Green values:
consumers and branding - TGI consultants; 13% figure from Gillian Merron in
answer to parliamentary question 26th April 2007.
10. Department for Transport's ‘UK Air Passenger Demand and
CO2 Forecasts' November 2007 states that in 2005 Heathrow emitted 18.2 million
tonnes of CO2, with 476,000 flights. Using this as a base line, an extra 226,000
flights at Heathrow (bringing total numbers of flights to 702,000) would result
in an additional 8.64 million tonnes of C02. The Energy Information
Administration's website documents the emissions of countries across the world:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/international/iealf/tableh1co2.xls
11. In 2005, Drax emitted 20.8 million tonnes of CO2.
The Energy Information Administration's website documents the emissions of
countries across the world: http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/international/iealf/tableh1co2.xls
