Heathrow — Condemnation of third runway — rejected — 2 Apr 2008 at 18:50

The majority of MPs voted against the motion before Parliament which read:^[1]

• This House
• recognises the urgent need to curb carbon dioxide emissions to tackle climate change;
• condemns the Government for following policies that will instead lead to significant growth in emissions from the aviation sector;
• particularly condemns plans to allow a third runway at Heathrow;
• believes that the consultation paper Adding Capacity at Heathrow Airport^[2] was deeply flawed and is concerned at the undue influence BAA played in the drafting of the paper;
• notes that the paper significantly overstated the economic case for a third runway while greatly underplaying the serious environmental consequences, including, as well as the extra emissions from flights, the increase in intensity and distribution of noise for those living under the flight path through runway alternation and the threat of forced relocation for the inhabitants of Sipson village; and
• calls on the Government to withdraw permanently plans for a third runway at Heathrow, to keep the present cap of 480,000 flights per year as opposed to the 700,000 envisaged in the consultation document, to rule out any further increase in airport capacity in the South East, and to indicate to the aviation sector that it will have to live within its existing infrastructure capacity.

An alternative motion was passed in the next vote.^[3]

• [1] Norman Baker MP, House of Commons, 2 April 2008.
• [2] Adding Capacity at Heathrow Airport - Public consultation, Department of Transport, 27 February 2008
• [3] Heathrow - Expansion is consistent with sustainable aviation strategy, House of Commons, 2 April 2008.

Debate in Parliament | Source |