Green campaigners 'furious' over Stanstead airport expansion » Environment » 24dash.com

Environmental campaigners reacted angrily today to the Government's decision to allow a massive expansion in capacity at one of the UK's largest airports.

The number of passengers travelling through Stansted Airport is set to rise from 25 million to 35 million a year with the number of flights increasing from 241,000 to 264,000.

The announcement left green groups claiming the Government's climate change policy was a "shambles" and that ministers had promoted a "binge-flying" culture.

Conditions limiting the number of flights and passengers were imposed due to noise and environmental concerns by Uttlesford District Council in November 2006.

But Transport Secretary Geoff Hoon - in his first major decision since being appointed to the role in last week's Cabinet reshuffle - today overruled the council following an appeal by airport operator BAA and a public inquiry.

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 reshuffled Cabinet is still dealing from the bottom of the pack when it comes to climate change."

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

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."

He said the decision showed Mr Hoon was "no friend of the environment".

Shadow transport secretary Theresa Villiers said: "We have always taken the view that Stansted could, with some important safeguards, handle more passengers with its existing runway.

"Nevertheless we are concerned about a number of issues particularly as it seems to have taken less than a week for Geoff Hoon to allow BAA to start writing Government aviation policy."

Tim Yeo, the Conservative chairman of the all-party Environmental Audit Committee, said: "It is the wrong decision. It is a bad decision environmentally for East Anglia and it is also wrong economically because the expansion of Stansted has depended on low-cost flights and the expansion of that type of flying."

A letter from the Department for Communities and Local Government to BAA's lawyers, setting out the reasons for the change said 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.

Ms Villiers said the Tories would "strongly oppose" a second runway.

The Whitehall move 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."

Stansted's managing director Stewart Wingate said the decision 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."

Aviation minister Jim Fitzpatrick said: "There is an urgent need for additional runway capacity in the South East.

"We were clear in the Aviation White Paper that the first priority was to make best use of the existing runways, including using the remaining capacity at Stansted.

"We recognise that there have been strong views expressed about Stansted's expansion and all views were given the chance to be heard at the public inquiry.

"Ministers thought long and hard about the case before making their decision to allow an increase of a little under 10% in the maximum permitted number of flights to and from the airport from 241,000 to 264,000 air traffic movements a year."

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."

But campaign group Stop Stansted Expansion (SSE), which has led opposition to development of the airport, said the decision was "entirely predictable, cynical and unjustified".

Officials said they were considering an appeal.

"Given the Government's gung-ho approach to airport expansion, we always knew that the dice were loaded in favour of BAA, not least since the Government wouldn't want to see the policies set down in its Air Transport White Paper fall at the first hurdle," said SSE chairman Peter Sanders.

"Nevertheless, it beggars belief that there has been such a cynical disregard for the evidence presented to last year's inquiry.

"BAA failed to bring forward any direct evidence even to support an economic case for its application. Today's decision is wholly unjustified on the basis of the evidence."

He added: "But the Government's determination to approve this application could prove be its undoing.

"The flaws in the process and the rationale given by the Government in reaching its decision may well provide scope for challenge. That is why we are seeking advice from our legal advisers. We have six weeks to decide whether to appeal."

Essex County Council, which is also opposed to further expansion at Stansted, said it was also considering an appeal.

Its Conservative leader, Lord Hanningfield, said the Government's decision on night flying had taken the council by surprise.

"We're not surprised by the decision - but we didn't expect what they've said about night flying," he said.

"But overall it's not a surprise. This Government is for expansion - and we're against it."

But Lord Hanningfield said he remained confident that a second runway would not be built at Stansted.

"I don't think a second runway will be built because the Conservatives are against it," he said.

"And I believe that by the time that decision has to be made a new Conservative Government will be in power and they will say no."