Third runway campaigners get another chance to stop expansion
LOCAL residents and environmental groups will have another chance to stop the Heathrow expansion after the Court of Appeal granted permission for a legal challenge.
Campaigners point to the environmental impact of the extra flights and traffic from the planned third runway, but Heathrow has accused objectors of wasting taxpayers’ money with the case.
Lord Justice Lindblom, who granted permission for the challenge, is reported to have said: “The importance of the issues raised in these and related proceedings is obvious.”
Paul Beckford, policy director of the No 3rd Runway Coalition, welcomed the court’s decision, saying: ”Our fight will continue to end the plans that would blight our environment and fall flat in the face of our climate emergency.
“We expect to win.”
A Heathrow spokesperson said it was disappointing that despite the recent High Court judgement in favour of the expansion, taxpayers’ money continued to be spent fighting the case.
Mr Beckford, however, said the previous High Court judgement was a judicial review looking at whether the government had followed the appropriate procedures in allowing the extension, and the rules of climate emissions had since changed.
He said: “The reason that the judge ruled against us previously in the last case on climate change was they effectively said even though government intended to implement the Paris Agreement, it’s not technically a piece of law yet – so they got off on a technicality.”
“Since then we’ve now had the net-zero target laid in parliament, amending the Climate Change Act, to make net-zero law.”
“That’s a change to the legal framework in which the judge can consider the issue.”
The Heathrow spokesman went on to say: “A vast majority of MPs, unions and business support Heathrow expansion as it will provide an economic boost up and down the country, with strict and legally binding environmental targets attached.
“We remain focused on delivering this major piece of privately funded infrastructure that the UK so desperately needs to remain competitive on a global stage.”
Commenting ahead of the election of new Prime Minister Boris Johnson, Rob Barnstone, coordinator of Stop Heathrow Expansion, said: “Boris Johnson knows that Heathrow expansion cannot meet environmental targets, including on noise and air pollution.
“Mr Johnson has indicated he will be following the legal and planning processes very carefully, then at the appropriate time the project can be cancelled.
“We don’t expect any gimmicks but remain confident that Mr Johnson will stop this disastrous project, albeit at the correct time in the process.
“The decision by the Court of Appeal may make that time a little sooner than previously thought.”
Mr Johnson, despite previously saying he would lie down in front of bulldozers to stop the expansion, has recently equivocated.
When asked about the expansion during a hustings before his election, he simply said the decision had been made by parliament to allow the expansion.
Speaking after the announcement, Ruth Cadbury, MP for Brentford and Isleworth, said the appeal was “a glimmer of hope for everyone who lives under the shadow of Heathrow expansion, and everyone who wants to see serious action on climate change”.
She said: “Heathrow expansion means we will have an extra 280,000 flights per year, which means communities will face more noise, more congestion and more pollution.
“On top of this Heathrow expansion will pump six million extra tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere per year, and the extra road traffic will make our air pollution crisis much worse.”
Parmjit Dhanda, executive director of Back Heathrow, said: “We know that the so-called No 3rd Runway Coalition is campaigning off the backs of local people and their council tax payments.
“We estimate over £2 million of taxpayers’ cash has now been wasted, but they will continue to raise expectations that they are going to win another desperate court battle, despite the damning verdict of the last one, where it was made clear that they had not raised any significant issue which had not already been addressed.
“I don’t believe they will change the view of the new Prime Minister and they will certainly not change the view of the vast majority of local people who want to see the project succeed with robust safeguards in place on air quality, noise and carbon reduction.”
A Department for Transport spokesman said the expansion of Heathrow is vital and will provide a “massive economic boost to businesses and communities across the length and breadth of Britain, all at no cost to the taxpayer and within our environmental obligations.”
“The recent judgment from the High Court was unequivocal and made clear that we followed a robust and legally sound process throughout.
“We will continue to robustly defend appeals against that judgment.”
A preliminary date for the case had been set for October 21. It is likely to last three or four days.