Government gives green light to Stanstead Airport expansion plans » Communities » 24dash.com

The Government today backed plans to allow the expansion of Stansted Airport to handle an extra 10 million passengers a year.

In a move likely to anger environmentalists, Transport Secretary Geoff Hoon granted permission for the airport to increase the number of flights from 241,000 to 264,000 and raise the number of passengers from 25 million to 35 million.

He made the announcement, changing Stansted's planning conditions, in a written statement to Parliament.

Planning permission for the expansion was originally refused on grounds of noise and environmental concerns by Uttlesford District Council in November 2006.

But the Government today overruled the council following an appeal by airport operator BAA.

Stansted's managing director, Stewart Wingate, said the decision, taken by Mr Hoon and Communities and Local Government Secretary Hazel Blears, was "great news" for passengers.

He said: "We are naturally delighted that the Secretaries of State have granted permission for the next phase of growth at Stansted.

"This secures our future up to 35 million passengers a year.

"We will now be studying the full detail of the decision, including the independent planning inspector's report before commenting further.

"What we can say today though is that this is clearly great news for passengers and for businesses, located in the local community or across the wider region."

A letter from the Department for Communities and Local Government to BAA's lawyers, setting out the reasons for the change in the planning conditions, said ministers found the impact on health caused by air pollution was "likely to be very small".

It added: "They agree that there is evidence that the proposal would deliver large direct economic benefits, although they accept that the evidence does not reliably quantify this."

But the letter said that nothing in their conclusions should be taken as "an expression of a view on the need for, or acceptability of" a future second runway at Stansted which is part of BAA's long-term plan for the airport.

Matthew Knowles, from the Society of British Aerospace Companies, said: "This is a welcome recognition of the progress that the aviation industry has made in further reducing its impact on the environment.

"We have listened to the concerns of the public on these issues and the industry is delivering for the benefit of passengers and local residents alike.

"Noise from aircraft is down 75% over the last 30 years and an aircraft's fuel burn, and therefore carbon dioxide emissions, has been cut by 70% over the last 50 years.

"The industry has also set itself the target for a further 50% cut in both noise and CO2 emissions from 2000 levels by 2020."

Liberal Democrat transport spokesman Norman Baker said: "This is further evidence that the Government is in the pocket of the aviation industry.

"It shows the gaping void between its environmental rhetoric and reality.

"Ministers like to talk green, but their actions show they are only too willing to increase carbon emissions.

"This is particularly bad news for people living near Stansted, who seemingly do not count in the Government's reckoning.

"This is the first major decision by Geoff Hoon as Transport Secretary and it clearly shows that he is no friend of the environment."

Graham Thompson, an activist with campaign group Plane Stupid, and one of those who has occupied the roof of Parliament to protest against airport expansion, said: "Whether it's Ruth Kelly or Geoff Hoon, it's quite clear that the minister for BAA is not working in the interests of Britain. Our democratic checks and balances are failing and escalating direct action is now inevitable."

The Whitehall decision was strongly condemned by Uttlesford District councillors who said ministers were ignoring the concerns of residents near the Essex airport.

Council leader Jim Ketteridge said: "This decision on the existing runway is a blow for the community.

"It demonstrates that the Government has failed to listen to the clear message from the people of Uttlesford.

"Residents already find the level of aircraft noise extremely disturbing and allowing BAA to increase the amount of air traffic marks a further erosion of our quality of life, particularly for all those living near Stansted Airport.

"We are very disappointed that the appeal has been allowed but are redoubling our efforts to fight the second runway proposals.

"We may not have won this battle, but with the help of our local authority partners, we will do everything we can to win the war."

Cllr Peter Wilcock, leader of the Liberal Democrat group on the council, said: "It is disappointing that the Minister has not listened to the issues surrounding the full use of the airport.

"The losers in this case will be the people of Uttlesford who will have to endure more air and noise pollution in the area."

Cllr Elizabeth Godwin, leader of the independent group, said: "It is a great sadness that the attractive area around the airport will in time inevitably disappear.

"It will mean the further eventual destruction of the communities around the airport and the loss of a way of life for everyone who remains.

"The communities will bear the brunt of all the noise, pollution and increased traffic without proper remedial measures.

"The government has clearly decided to ignore all its own messages on climate change and global warming as well as the economic situation."

The Green Party said the decision was "disappointing but not surprising".

"It's a bad decision but it's not a surprise. This is a Government that doesn't have a green bone in its body," said a party spokesman.

"It beggars belief really. All the time we get more and more warnings about the damage we're doing to the environment and the planet and yet here we have the Government making decisions which will do more unnecessary damage.

"For local people it will mean more traffic on the roads, more air pollution, more noise pollution, more damage to the environment."

Stop Stansted Expansion - a campaign group which has headed opposition to the development of the airport - said it was considering the implications of the Government's announcement.

"We need to make sure we've read carefully everything that's contained in this," said a spokeswoman.

"We're doing that at the moment and will give our reaction later today."

Greenpeace senior transport campaigner Anita Goldsmith said: "Only this week the Government signalled that it will adopt a new tougher target to cut climate-trashing emissions, including those from aviation. But giving the green light to another 20,000 new flights from Stansted is in clear contrast to that commitment.

"Labour has promoted a binge-flying culture in Britain for too long, and unfortunately it looks like it will be business as usual from the new Transport Secretary.

"Brown's re-shuffled Cabinet is still dealing from the bottom of the pack when it comes to climate change."

Pro-flying lobby FlyingMatters director Michelle Di Leo said the announcement was "very good news" for millions of people who relied on air transport to visit friends and family and do business abroad, as well as leisure travellers.

"The Government's decision demonstrates real confidence in the ability of the aviation industry to meet the twin challenges of increased demand and the environment.

"It allows for long term planning and investment in services and new technology which is vitally important in the current economic situation."

Friends of the Earth's Transport Campaigner, Tony Bosworth, said: "Allowing 10 million more people to fly from Stansted each year shows the Government's climate change strategy is a complete shambles.

"Only this week the Government was advised to cut UK carbon dioxide emissions by 80% by 2050 - allowing airports to grow will make these targets almost impossible to meet.

"Ministers must abandon their airport expansion plans, invest in cleaner alternatives to short-haul flights such as fast rail links, and include Britain's share of international aviation emissions in its climate change targets."

David Frost, director-general of the British Chambers of Commerce, said: "With the UK economy facing a serious downturn, it's crucial that the country's third busiest airport is able to grow and companies can travel freely around the globe to help generate essential business.

"Failure to invest in major transport infrastructure projects now will leave us less able to compete with our European competitors in the future."

The National Trust said the decision showed a blatant disregard for the local community and a cavalier attitude to the country's future.

It would have a "huge negative impact" on nearby Hatfield Forest, an ancient woodland and medieval hunting forest, through air and noise pollution, the Trust warned.

Nick Champion, regional communications manager for the National Trust in the East of England, said: "We will do everything in our power to safeguard Hatfield Forest for future generations, but today's announcement is a major blow to a fragile remnant of Britain's history.

"We urge the Government to listen to other voices than those promoting relentless economic growth and disregarding the consequences for people and wildlife."