2M Says The Time For Heathrow Regulator Is Now

---

After BAA call for expansion first and environmental check later....

The 2M Group says that an independent regulator should be set up to assess the environmental consequences of further growth before any more flights are allowed at the airport.

The 2M Group was responding to a plea by BAA today to be allowed to expand the airport first and have its environmental performance checked later.

The evidence being compiled by the Department for Transport in support of its expansion proposals has already been criticised by the Environment Agency and the Sustainable Development Commission which called for an independent review of aviation policy.

 

In addition to a third runway BAA also wants the go ahead to expand the two existing runways provided it meets punctuality targets.

 

Wandsworth Council leader Edward Lister, speaking on behalf of the 2M Group, said:

"The history of Heathrow is littered with broken promises. Once extra capacity has been agreed, it is used to the full. No one will believe claims by either BAA or the Government that flights will be cut in the future in the light of environmental concerns.

"The time for an independent review is now. Given criticisms by the Government's own environmental advisers of the case made by DfT on noise, air quality and surface access there should be an immediate halt to any expansion proposals while the science is thoroughly checked.  EU air quality limits are already being exceeded at Heathrow. If BAA and the DfT seriously want to be trusted on the environment they can start by reducing flights today."

2M claim that their research reveals a series of broken promises at Heathrow. These include:

* BAA mounts a PR campaign denying there will be a third runway.
Sir John Egan, BAA’s Chief Executive says “T5 does not call for a third runway”. (‘Dear Neighbour’ letter to residents in a wide area around Heathrow; 16th May 1995.)

* Inside the T5 Inquiry BAA said something different:
“We could not rule out the option of considering Heathrow when another runway is required...We could not give a guarantee about seeking further expansion.” (Michael Maine, BAA’s Technical Director).

* The T5 inspector says “I am not sure that we have received evidence of that nature [ruling out more runways]...it does not hit you forcibly that it (ruling out more runways) is said with total certainty.” (Roy Vandermeer, QC, November 1995, during the cross examination of Alison Munroe, Department of Transport witness).

* BAA continues to maintain that runway capacity is not an issue. In a public newsletter BAA suggests that the inquiry hearings had put to rest concerns that T5 was a Trojan horse for a 3rd runway:
"...some legitimate fears have been put to rest. We now know for example that there will be no third runway at Heathrow - a widespread concern before the inquiry started." (‘Heathrow News, Produced For Local Residents by BAA Heathrow’, May 1997)

* BAA makes further claims that runway capacity at Heathrow was not a problem: “The problem at Heathrow is not the lack of runway capacity but shortage of terminal space…The inevitable overcrowding until T5 is build is likely to cause…problems…” (BAA News Release - BAA warns of potential “national crisis …” 12th October 1997)

* BAA continues to say it does not want a third runway: “… Additional runway ruled out forever whether T5 is approved or not” (BAA press conference 12th March 1999).

* In another ‘Dear Neighbour’ letter to residents (April 1999) Sir John Egan writes:

“We have since repeated often that we do not want, nor shall we seek, an additional runway. I can now report that we went even further at the Inquiry and called on the Inspector to recommend that, subject to permission being given for T5, an additional Heathrow runway should be ruled out forever. We said: ‘it is the company’s view that the local communities around Heathrow should be given assurances… BAA would urge the Government to rule out any additional runway at Heathrow, and BAA would support a recommendation by the Inquiry Inspector in his report that the Government should rule it out. Indeed BAA invites the Inspector to make such a recommendation.’”

* BAA then goes a step further, not just saying that T5 does not “call” for another runway, but that it will not “lead” to another runway: “Our position could not be clearer, nor could it be more formally placed upon the record. T5 will not lead to a ‘third’ runway.”

* British Airways (BA) call for a third runway before the T5 decision is announced although Roy Vandermeer signed off his report in November 2000 The Government holds off making a decision until Nov 2001. “Mr Eddington (the then Chief Executive of British Airways) insisted that it was essential that Heathrow had a third runway as well as a fifth terminal…” (Daily Mail 5th Jan 2001, reporting on a speech to a business conference, 4th January).

* But Rod Eddington changes his line when speaking to local residents a few weeks later: “BA is not pushing for a third runway at Heathrow…” (Ealing Times, 1st February.2001).

* BAA echo BA’s denial and says it is not pushing for a third runway at Heathrow. “It is the company’s view that the local communities around Heathrow should be give (sic) assurances. BAA would urge the government to rule out any additional runway at Heathrow.”

November 27, 2008