Today sees the start of court proceedings challenging the government's controversial decision to give the go ahead to a third runway at Heathrow.

A coalition of thirteen organisations is backing the legal challenge. It is made up of local councils, leading green groups and residents' groups, representing millions of people.  The coalition's lawyers will be claiming in court that the consultation process was fundamentally flawed and that the decision to expand Heathrow is at odds with the UK's overall climate change targets. If they win, the government's decision to proceed with the runway will be overturned.

The organisations also argue, supported by Transport for London, that there is no evidence to support the government's claim that there will be enough public transport to serve the new runway.

The decision to proceed with a third runway was made by the then Transport Secretary Geoff Hoon in a statement to Parliament in January 2009.  He tried to win Parliament over by proposing a number of additional environmental measures.  The coalition is alleging that these measures mean the expansion is fundamentally different to the proposals on which the government consulted the public in 2007. Worse still, the government's lawyers are now backpedalling by claiming the new measures were not part of the decision to expand Heathrow.

One of the measures announced was a new target to bring carbon emissions from aviation back to 2005 levels by 2050. The government asked the Committee on Climate Change (CCC) how it could meet this target. The CCC responded by telling the government it would have to severely curtail its plans for airport expansion throughout the UK. The coalition argues that the expansion of Heathrow cannot now proceed, since the policy of which it is a part has been discredited.

Another of the measures would see the runway only being used at half its capacity until a review in 2020 could check to see if noise and air pollution as well as carbon targets could be met. But imposing this limit destroys the economic case for a third runway and will be no comfort to the residents of the Sipson, since their village would be destroyed either way.

Alistair McGowan, who is one of the owners of the 'Airplot' in Sipson, said:

"I'm here today because, like the residents of Sipson, I'm enraged about the government's seemingly unquenchable passion to tarmac over my land - land which I now own with over 65,000 people from around the world. I hope that the ministers who wouldn't listen to already suffering west Londoners, highly respected climate scientists or battling local councils will listen to the courts. I don't want to end up having to fend off BAA with a pitchfork and a large bull."

Speaking on behalf of the local councils Hillingdon leader Ray Puddifoot said:

"We've had no choice but to go to court to sort out the mess left behind by a decision that was little more than a quick fix. From the moment Geoff Hoon announced his decision to the House it has steadily unravelled. We now have the government's lawyers telling us that what the Secretary of State told MPs was not what he really meant.

"So while Hoon was saying that expansion would be limited to a half-used runway because of climate change concerns, the civil servants now say that it is not dependent on reductions in carbon emissions and or so-called greener planes. If it's only half a runway then that demolishes the economic case. But if the conditions which were meant to limit environmental damage are worthless and we are going to get a full capacity runway anyway, then we have all been duped.

"The history of Heathrow expansion is littered with broken promises, that's why it's so important we get the courts to sort out the deliberate ambiguity of the government's decisions."

Geraldine Nicholson, Chair of NoTRAG, said:

"A third runway would destroy our community.  Homes, schools, shops, pubs would all be demolished.  That is destruction on a massive scale.  What rubs even more salt into our wounds is our firm belief that the consultation process was seriously flawed."

Martin Harper, RSPB, Head of Sustainable Development said:

"We have said before that the government's decision to allow a third runway when we desperately need to reduce carbon emissions was fundamentally flawed.

Climate change threatens many species with extinction and we are already seeing its impacts with catastrophic declines in seabird numbers in parts of the North Sea. It is right that a bad decision such as this should be challenged"

HACAN Chair John Stewart said:

"Although it is clear that a third runway may well be scrapped after the General Election, we can't take anything for granted.  If we lose this legal challenge, it will not be the end of the world, but, if we win, it will make it ever more difficult for any government to build the third runway."

Shaun Spiers, Chief Executive, Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE), said:

"Proceeding with the third runway would destroy not just a village and a large swathe of Green Belt but also tranquillity over a much wider area. Countryside, parks and gardens in and beyond north and west London would fall under the shadow of new flight paths and the din of thousands of extra flights."

Pete Lockley, Head of Transport Policy for WWF-UK said:

"The government's decision to allow expansion at Heathrow flies in the face of common sense, which is why we are asking the High Court to consider the case. A third runway will make it much more difficult to achieve our carbon reduction targets and doesn't justify its cost, in economic or environmental terms. The Committee on Climate Change has just advised that aviation growth must be severely curtailed by 2050. This should prompt a complete rethink of government aviation policy."

John Sauven, Executive Director of Greenpeace said:

"It's been clear from the start, that there has been huge opposition to this runway. Nearly 90% of the people who responded to the consultation opposed the expansion of Heathrow. Yet mysteriously the government gave the go ahead.

This gives a clear demonstration of how little they value the views of the public. Now we've got the chance to submit this process to legal scrutiny. We don't expect the courts to be any more impressed with it than we were."

Notes to Editors:

1. Six local authorities in West London (Hammersmith and Fulham, Hounslow, Hillingdon, Richmond upon Thames, Wandsworth and Windsor & Maidenhead) are claimants to the challenge, alongside   the local residents group (NoTRAG) and the national campaigning group against airport expansion HACAN. WWF-UK, Campaign to Protect Rural England and Greenpeace are also claimants. Transport for London is an independent party supporting the claim. The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds is an expert witness. The challenge is also supported by Kensington and Chelsea and the Mayor of London. The local authorities are all members of the 2M Group which comprises 24 local councils opposed to Heathrow expansion with a combined population of 5 million.
2. In February 2007, Greenpeace won a Judicial Review against the government's energy review, which backed a new generation of nuclear power stations. As a result the government was forced to re-run the public consultation.
3. If a third runway at Heathrow airport were to be built, the airport would become the single largest emitter of carbon dioxide in the UK. Unrestrained airport expansion would make it impossible for the UK to play its part in tackling climate change. The government has committed the UK to cuts of at least 80% in CO2 emissions by 2050. Research from the respected Tyndall Centre shows that if the industry is allowed to expand as predicted, aviation emissions alone would make it impossible to meet this target.
4. Aviation emissions do more damage to the climate because they are released at altitude - known as global warming impact. Scientists multiply aviation emissions (which include other gases not just CO2) by 2 to 3 times to calculate their increased climate impact
5. Historically small increases in the efficiency of planes have been overwhelmed by an unrestrained growth in flights. There is no evidence to suggest that this will not be the case in the future if action is not taken to constrain expansion. The Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution found that the industry's targets are ‘clearly aspirations rather than projections'.
6. The decision on Heathrow is underpinned by the government's aviation policy, set out in the 2003 Future of Air Transport White Paper, which promotes a policy of airport expansion across the UK. The climate science has changed significantly since 2003, as has the law and the policy context - notably the Climate Change Act 2008 and the Committee on Climate Change's 2009 aviation report which says that aviation growth needs to be limited to around half of that planned in the White Paper.
7. All the claimants are represented by Harrison Grant (solicitors) instructing Nigel Pleming QC of 39 Essex Street, Nathalie Lieven QC and David Forsdick of Landmark Chambers.

Actors, political party leaders, local residents and the Poet Laureate are planting an apple orchard on the site of Heathrow's proposed third runway to show their opposition to expansion at the airport.

Gavin and Stacey actress Alison Steadman, Richard Briers from the Good Life, Nick Clegg and poet CarolAnn Duffy will be on the runway site today (Friday) at noon to dig the orchard, while Heathrow writer-in-residence Alain de Botton - who was famously recruited by BAA to spend a week at the airport and write about his experiences - is adopting a Cox apple tree in the orchard. Conservative leader David Cameron is also adopting a tree.

The planting of the orchard represents the re-introduction of the Cox apple breed into the area and is designed to act as a potent symbol of the determination by politicians and the local community to stop the runway, save Sipson's homes and school and fight climate change. The Cox apple was first bred in the borough in the 1850s by Richard Cox, who is buried on the site earmarked for a new runway and whose body might still be exhumed if the development goes ahead.

The high-profile orchard planters are being joined by the Woodland Trust, RSPB, WWF, the World Development Movement and other groups representing millions of members and supporters. The orchard is being planted on the third runway site on land purchased by Greenpeace from under the noses of BAA and the Government earlier this year. The plot was then offered to members of the public. 60,000 people from across the world now co-own the land targeted by BAA's bulldozers.

Commenting on the ‘orchard of resistance', Heathrow writer-in-residence Alain de Botton said:

"I'm sponsoring a tree in the orchard because I love airports and air travel, and recognise that if our society is to tolerate them, we are all going to have to learn to fly a lot less. Also, apple trees, through their slow gestation and their Biblical associations, subliminally carry fascinating associations of both paradise and danger."

A tree has been adopted by Labour MPs, by David Cameron and Conservative MPs and another by Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg and his MPs. A tree has been adopted by leading climate scientists, and by Government advisors - including the former head of the Sustainable Development Commission, Jonathan Porritt.

Liberal Democrat Leader Nick Clegg said:

"The Government is absolutely wrong to stubbornly push ahead with a third runway at Heathrow. How can Gordon Brown go to Copenhagen and credibly call for big reductions in carbon when he has such a dire environmental track record at home? A third runway at Heathrow would be a disaster for the local area as well as a disaster for the whole country."

Alison Steadman said:

"We're re-introducing Cox apple trees to this village and building a bridge between the past and the future, because this community will have a future. BAA and the Government now know that if they try to build this new runway they will have to dig up trees owned by and on behalf of millions of people from every area of British society. Some of those people will be there to stand in front of the bulldozers if they ever roll into the new orchard. The third runway cannot and will not be built. Richard Cox may face the prospect of his body being dug up to build the new runway, but his famous apple is now standing in the way of BAA and the Government."

An expanded Heathrow would become the single biggest source of CO2 in Britain and threaten what chance the UK has of slashing its emissions and playing its part in beating climate change.

Over the next few months Cox apple trees are going to be planted in communities across the country and twinned with the orchard in Sipson. MPs of all shades will be invited to join planting ceremonies.

Poet Laureate Carol Ann Duffy's poem Mrs Scrooge - which is published in book form on November 24th - predicts the demise of the third runway as the Ghost of Christmas Past visits the orchards of Sipson:

"Scrooge sends a message from the grave -
keep going! You shall overcome!"
"No Runway Three!" cried Mrs Scrooge

The orchard plot is behind the William IV pub in Sipson, on the junction of Harmondsworth Lane and Sipson Road. Greenpeace will be on hand to welcome the media from with coffee and pastries from 11.30am.

ENDS

Video and stills available

Greenpeace press office - 0207 865 8255 / 07801 212967

Nikki Williams, Head of Campaigning at the Woodland Trust:

"The Woodland Trust supports Greenpeace in choosing a more sensitive use of this land than the fate it will face if BAA expand. What with important and ancient trees at Heathrow, entire ancient woods at Stansted, plus acres of woodland at risk through other regional expansion plans, Government's support for unremitting aviation expansion not only threatens ancient woodland all across the UK overall, but also negates our climate change commitments - increasing the potential for more long-term risk to already vulnerable habitats."

Speaking on behalf of the 2M Group of London councils, Cllr Peter Thompson, leader of Hounslow Council, said:

"Gardeners know that pleasure comes not from the final results of sowing and planting, but from the joy of watching a seed or sapling grow into something in perfect harmony with its surroundings. Heathrow has become the intrusive shrub from a neighbour's garden - acceptable when properly maintained, but if left to its own devices a damaging nuisance that needs cutting back. This orchard shows that millions of people have had enough and think it's time to reach for the secateurs."