GATWICK’S BIG ENOUGH PRESENTATION TO GATCOM 17 OCTOBER 2019 Key points No sustainable growth There is no such thing as sustainable growth at Gatwick • Amongst other things, Gatwick’s plans would lead to an estimated • additional 1m tons of CO 2 emissions per annum from new flights, would increase local congestion and would have severe noise impacts for local communities and those under flight paths The master plan makes no mention of those additional emissions and seeks • to hide noise impacts by using a metric that bears no relationship to the way people would experience additional noise Growth without scrutiny • Approximately 60% of the growth proposed by Gatwick would come from more intensive use of its main runway. Only 40% would come from routine use of the emergency runway The airport’s position is that no planning or other consent is required for • main runway growth. That it has an absolute right to impose very substantial growth in passenger and flight numbers on local communities with no obligation to offer conditions and no independent scrutiny It is clearly perverse that 40% of Gatwick’s proposed growth is to be • robustly scrutinized through a Development Consent Order process but that 60% of its proposed growth might escape scrutiny altogether. That cannot be right. • We also do not believe Gatwick’s position is consistent with government policy, which says “ any development proposals should be judged by the relevant planning authority, taking careful account of all relevant considerations 1 …” • Growth without scrutiny is unacceptable. All Gatwick’s proposed growth should be brought within a robust, independent, planning process. Proposals We hope Gatwick will reconsider its position and re-scope the • Development Consent Order process it has initiated If it does not we will ask the Department for Transport to ensure its policy • is followed, if necessary using its Planning Act or Civil Aviation Act powers We invite community representatives on GATCOM to support these steps • 1 Making Best Use of Existing Runways, Department for Transport 5 June 2018 1
Presentation 1. This presentation is principally about the growth proposals Gatwick has set out in its master plan. Its so-called sustainable growth plans. 2. But as context for the future it’s important first to look briefly back at way the airport has developed over the last decade. 3. In that decade passenger numbers at Gatwick have grown nearly 50% and flights numbers have grown some 20%. 4. That’s been good for the local economy and for consumer choice, and both of those facts should be acknowledged and applauded. It’s also been spectacularly good for Gatwick’s owners who’ve made somewhere £4bn and £6bn in equity returns. 5. But that growth, and those returns, have come at a high price. We all know it’s had, and continues to have, serious consequences for communities adversely impacted by the airport’s operations through increased noise, air pollution and congestion. 6. It’s also had a high price in terms of its long-term contribution to climate change. We know less about that, but the facts are becoming clearer and more concerning all the time. 7. If you look at the balance between those positive and negative factors through the lens of government policy there are serious questions to be asked. Questions that should have been asked by a credible regulatory regime, but haven’t been. Question that must now be addressed through a robust independent planning process that scrutinises all Gatwick’s proposed growth, not one which starts by presuming the airport has the right to grow a further 30% first. 8. Government policy supports aviation’s growth, that’s clear. But it also requires fairness, and balance and a sharing of the benefits of growth with adversely impacted communities. 9. Instead we’ve had a decade in which some groups - Gatwick’s owners and its customers particularly - have benefited, but local communities, those under flight paths and the environment have not. 10. Win / lose outcomes are plainly not consistent with the policy vision successive government have set out, and it should be to DfT’s shame that it has been so willing to turn a blind eye to them. Regulators who choose to look the other way devalue the policies it’s their job to implement. 2
11. In some senses all that history is academic. What matters now is whether Gatwick is to be permitted to grow further, and, if any growth is to be permitted, what conditions should attach to it. 12. So let’s look forward. Gatwick is fond of telling us all about its plans for sustainable growth. 13. But anyone who watches the news and reads the papers knows there’s no such thing. Sustainable growth in aviation is an oxymoron. It’s a false picture painted by the industry’s lobbyists and PR teams in the hope that if you say it often enough and loud enough, and if you hide enough facts, people might just begin to believe it’s possible. 14. It isn’t. UK aviation greenhouse gas emissions have more than doubled since 1990 and continue to rise remorselessly. Aviation will be the UK’s biggest source of carbon emissions by 2050, accounting for well over a third of residual positive emissions. The industry’s growth has consistently outstripped its ability to reduce emissions, a fact that until now the industry hasn’t taken remotely seriously. 15. So much for the generalities. Let’s look specifically at some of the impacts of Gatwick’s growth proposals. 16. On CO 2 the master plan conveniently excludes the overwhelming majority of emissions facilitated by Gatwick, those generated by flights using it. It’s completely silent on them. 17. Even excluding flights the airport’s emissions have increased since 2010 and would grow further under any of the scenarios in the master plan. 18. When you include flight emissions the numbers are stark. According to the Aviation Environment Federation Gatwick’s growth would mean nearly 1m tons of additional CO 2 emissions every year. There is no such thing as sustainable growth at Gatwick. 19. On noise the master plan says there will be more flights but that this will be balanced by the fact that aircraft will be quieter, resulting, it says, “in little overall change in the number of people living within each noise contour ”. 20. But the master plan also explains that the new fleet on which Gatwick is pinning its noise reduction hopes will be 2dB quieter on arrival. A 2dB noise reduction is imperceptible to humans. A 40% increase in flights is very perceptible to humans. 21. What Gatwick has done is choose an metric - average noise - that allows it to tell a story it thinks will be acceptable, but which bears no relationship to the way people experience noise. 22. It’s clear that the picture Gatwick is painting of the effects its growth would have on communities and the environment is very different to the reality. 3
23. That might not matter if Gatwick’s data was going to be challenged through a robust planning process. And if community representatives - many of you here today - were going to be consulted on the full impacts of Gatwick’s proposed growth. 24. But in large part the data won’t be challenged and you won’t be consulted. 25. Why? Because some 60% of the growth Gatwick is proposing will come from more intensive use of its main runway. 26. The airport’s position is that no planning or other consent is required for that growth. That it has an absolute right to impose very substantial growth in passenger and flight numbers on local communities. That there’s no need for it to offer conditions, or for there to be any independent scrutiny of that growth. 27. The government’s policy here is quite clear. The Making Best Use of Existing Runways document that Gatwick is so keen to quote says: “ any development proposals should be judged by the relevant planning authority, taking careful account of all relevant considerations … ”. 28. It is clearly perverse that 40% of Gatwick’s proposed growth - the standby runway element - is to be robustly scrutinized through a Development Consent Order process but that 60% of growth – the main runway element - might escape scrutiny. 29. But that’s the position currently. Gatwick thinks it’s found a way to dodge policy and grow without scrutiny. 30. Our view is that that is simply wrong. We hope that all members of GATCOM will recognise that it would be wrong, and insist that the whole of Gatwick’s proposed growth is brought within a robust, independent, planning process. 31. We particularly hope that the Department for Transport will insist its policy is followed. You have Planning Act and Civil Aviation Act powers that enable you to do so, as a responsible regulator. 32. Of course this could be resolved very simply if Gatwick itself recognised that growth without scrutiny isn’t credible and so re-scoped its DCO. That’s not the way it’s started this process, but the choice remains open. 33. The airport is fond of telling us that it wants to be a good neighbour. Good neighbours do things by consent not by imposition. 34. We’ll be writing to all councils on GATCOM directly after this meeting asking you to support our simple request that all Gatwick’s proposed growth is brought within a planning process by any available means. 4
Recommend
More recommend
