DfT Missing Emails 16 February 2010
Department for Transport civil servants face criminal investigation over missing Heathrow emails
Civil servants from the Department for Transport (DfT) are facing a criminal investigation over missing emails about the consultation into the expansion of Heathrow. It is alleged that the officials unlawfully got rid of emails to and from the airport’s operator, BAA, between September and November 2007 as the government prepared to push through its controversial plans for a third runway.
The allegations came to light after the Conservative MP for Putney Justine Greening, a member of David Cameron’s Shadow Cabinet, spotted gaps in email conversations between transport officials and BAA. She had requested a number of emails under the Freedom of Information Act. Earlier emails had shown evidence of collusion between DfT civil servants and BAA in drawing up the consultation into Heathrow expansion.
The Information Commissioner’s Office, staffed by former police officers, has asked to interview civil servants at the DfT about the apparent destruction of evidence.
Read the full story in the Sunday Times..
Green Light to 3rd Runway 1 February 2009
In his announcement to Parliament on 15th January Transport Secretary Geoff Hoon gave the green light to BAA to draw up detailed plans for a 3rd runway at Heathrow. But that is all he did. It is not a final go-ahead for a new runway and 6th terminal. BAA has acknowledged that it will take at least two years before final permission could be given (see timetable below)
With Conditions
Geoff Hoon imposed a number of conditions.
What, in a very confused statement to Parliament, he called “additional capacity” will only be allowed if the EU legal limits on air pollution and the Government’s own limits on noise are not breached. If they are, the Civil Aviation Authority and the Environment Agency will be given powers to “take action.”
The number of planes using the new runway would be limited to 125,000 a year, rather than the 220,000 originally envisaged, to allow the Climate Committee to assess the impact on CO2 emissions. Only if the Committee were satisfied that the emissions would not be excessive and that cleaner planes would come in use would BAA be allowed to go to 220,000.
In our view: the conditions are broken promises in the making
The conditions are meaningless. Is Geoff Hoon really saying the Government would step in and prevent BAA using just over half the capacity of the new runway if the environmental conditions turn out not to be right? If so, how would he do it? And would any business invest in a runway knowing the Government could block it making full use of its valuable asset? Or has Geoff Hoon just added these conditions to keep the Cabinet dissenters happy? Broken promises, we suspect, before he even uttered the words.
Mixed-Mode Dropped
Geoff Hoon announced that the plans to introduce mixed-mode have been dropped. This means that residents in West London will still enjoy a half day’s break from the noise as landing aircraft will continue to switch runways at 3pm. Hoon said that mixed-mode was dropped for the benefit of the residents. Certainly HACAN and other groups campaigned hard on mixed-mode, but it could as easily have been dropped because NATS (National Air Traffic Control) said it would not be safe to introduce without several years’ work.
Cranford Agreement to go
The 50 year old Cranford Agreement will be abolished. It prevents flights taking off from the northern runway over Cranford. The Government has decided to get rid of it in order to allow for the introduction of runway alternation when planes land over Berkshire. This will bring some relief to Windsor but will mean aircraft landing over Old Windsor and Wraysbury on a regular basis for the first time. The Cranford Agreement is independent of a 3rd runway. At the time of writing it is not clear when it might be scrapped.
The Timetable
The timetable for a 3rd runway is not at all clear but there are a number of things which need to take place:
• BAA has to draw up detailed plans for a 3rd runway and 6th terminal as well as any associated access roads. This is quite a lengthy process as BAA is required by law to carry out both an Environmental Impact Assessment Study and a Health Impact Assessment. It would be a big surprise if BAA had the plans ready within a year, particularly in light of the fact it will be busy with the Public Inquiry into the 2nd runway at Stansted which starts in April and is predicted to last 12-18 months.
• Those detailed plans would need to go out to public consultation before being heard at a Public Inquiry. Recent planning legislation limits the length of public inquiries but it would be a surprise if an inquiry into a project of this scale lasted less than 6 months.
• Given that the last date for a General Election is June 2010, it will be the next Government that will take the final decision on Heathrow. There are reports that BAA may try to force the hand of the next Government by offering to buy homes in Sipson and Harmondsworth and the surrounding area at higher prices, but it would be surprising if people were tempted to sell given the real chance the runway will not be built.
Heathrow has been in the headlines all this year 20 December 2008
At the beginning of the year the Department for Transport held its consultation into its plans to expand the airport. Over 20,000 people attended almost 50 meetings held by local authorities and campaign groups to protest against the plans, culminating in 3,000 people packing Central Hall, Westminster to attend at rally addressed by politicians of all parties.
The opposition to expansion has grown all year. Residents’ campaign groups have been joined by 21 local authorities, national campaign groups such as Greenpeace, politicians from all the political parties and environmentalists from across the country. Direct action activists from Plane Stupid climbed on to the roof of the Houses of Parliament to protest against Heathrow expansion.
The Conservative Party has said it does not support the expansion plans. The Liberal Democrats have promised to build no more runways in the South East. The Green Party and Respect are firmly opposed. All the main candidates for Mayor of London came out against.
In a big blow to the Government the former Chief Executive of BA Bob Ayling has come out against expansion. London First, representing big business in the capital, has said the priority is for a better not bigger airport. The Government’s own environmental advisors, the Environment Agency, have questioned the Department for Transport’s air pollution figures. Its other main advisors, the Sustainable Development Commission, have cast doubt on the robustness of the Government’s economic claims. The RMT trade union has come out against, arguing for a high-speed rail alternative. They have been joined by five other unions.
The Government and the aviation industry are being assailed from all sides. Their economic arguments for expansion are being challenged. Their environmental claims about air pollution, noise and climate change are being undermined. The destruction of at least 700 homes, including the entire village of Sipson, is being ever more fiercely criticised. Over 50 Labour MPs have called on the Government to think again. And the Cabinet is divided over Heathrow expansion.
It is not surprising that the Government has put off a final decision until January 2009.