I won­der how much they Back Heathrow

Harefield Gazette - - OPINION -

I AM writ­ing in re­sponse to the one-sided na­ture of the three ‘Cost of fight­ing Heathrow’ let­ters, (Gazette 11.1.17). Firstly I find it very un­likely that within the same week three (or more) per­sons have writ­ten let­ters, ex­tremely sim­i­lar in con­tent, sup­port­ing Heathrow ex­pan­sion and/or con­demn­ing LBH [London Bor­ough of Hilling­don].]

The un­palat­able sug­ges­tion that Back Heathrow is re­spon­si­ble is hardly with­out prece­dent as they have pre­vi­ously con­ducted sim­i­lar “grass roots”cam­paigns where it is be­lieved that they were in fact be­hind let­ters and news sto­ries.

Sec­ondly, it is ex­tremely un­fair and cow­ardly of Back Heathrow to at­tempt to shame LBH by pub­lish­ing how much the bor­ough has spent chal­leng­ing the build­ing of a third run­way with­out be­ing hon­est enough to dis­close how much they have re­ceived from the air­line in­dus­try to sup­port it. An amount I imag­ine, that would match and most likely ex­ceed that spent by Hilling­don Coun­cil; will Back Heathrow now take the op­por­tu­nity to in­form us so that trans­parency pre­vails on all sides?

Heathrow ex­pan­sion is a com­plex and emo­tive is­sue and the coun­cil has a dif­fi­cult path to tread was they must take into ac­count the likely cat­a­strophic dam­age to the south­ern part of the bor­ough along­side the claimed ben­e­fits that ex­pan­sion may al­legedly bring for oth­ers.

Per­haps the au­thors of the let­ters would like to visit Har­mondsworth and Sip­son and ex­plain to res­i­dents why busi­ness trav­ellers or those lucky enough to af­ford for­eign hol­i­days are more im­por­tant than those whose homes will be de­mol­ished and those that will find run­way 3 at the end of their gar­den; these peo­ple will lose their busi­nesses, a school, long term neigh­bours, friends and their wider com­mu­nity.

PAUL O’CON­NOR

Sip­son Road

West Dray­ton

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from UK

© PressReader. All rights reserved.