New Government

On 6th May 2010 there was a general election which resulted in a new Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition government. All references to the Government on this page in relation to happenings before 6th May 2010 are references to the previous Labour Government first elected in 1997.

For more information see our Other UK Airport Issues page. Some idea of the new Government's future policy towards aviation can be gained from the note issued on 11th May 2010 of the agreements reached by the two parties in their coalition discussions and in the new Government's subsequent programme document The Coalition: our programme for government:. It is worth also looking at the speech to the Transport Times Aviation Conference given on 26th January 2011 by the Rt Hon Theresa Villiers MP who is Minister of State at the Department for Transport. At the same conference somewhat different views were given in a speech by former civil servant Sir David Rowlands who is now Chairman of Gatwick Airport Limited.

Top of Page

Civil Aviation Bill

On 20th January 2012 the Government introduced a new Civil Aviation Bill for the consideration of Parliament .

In the words of the Department for Transport the Bill will modernise "the regulatory framework for civil aviation in the United Kingdom to enable the sector to increase its contribution to economic growth without compromising high standards".

Under the new rules, the CAA will be able to intervene much more quickly when an airport is failing passengers, for example on winter preparedness.

The core of the legislation redefines the role of the regulator, the CAA, giving it a single primary duty to promote the interests of passengers – as opposed to all airport users as is the case now. 

The CAA will also become responsible for overseeing aviation security, although the Government will retain control of security policy and its cost will be transferred from the Treasury to the aviation sector.

The Bill proposes to bring holidays sold by airlines into the ATOL (Air Travel Organisers' Licensing) insurance scheme, an idea supported by ABTA

Further information is available at:

• Civil Aviation Bill documents and progress - http://www.dft.gov.uk/topics/legislation/civil-aviation-bill
• Press notice - http://www.dft.gov.uk/news/press-releases/dft-news-20120119
• Written Ministerial statement - http://www.dft.gov.uk/news/statements/villiers-20120119

Top of Page

White Paper - The Future of Air Transport

Until the election on 6th May 2010 the Government's White Paper - "The Future of Aviation"  published on 16th December 2003 - set out a strategic framework for the development of airport capacity in the United Kingdom over the next 30 years . It did not authorise or preclude any particular development, but set out a policy framework to guide decisions on future planning applications [White Paper and associated documents] [List of supporting reports issued by the Department in February 2004.]

Apart from the impact on individual airports throughout the UK the White Paper outlined a number of environmental and other measures of more general application:-

Chapter 3

• Noise Amelioration/Acoustic Insulation - see paras 3.10 to 3.27 and also the information below on the Control of Noise from Civil Aircraft.
• Climate Change - see paras 3.35 to 3.43
• Local air quality - see see paras 3.28 to 3.31

Chapter 4

• Regional air services to London - see paras 4.39 to 4.48
• Access to and from airports - see paras 4.55 to 4.58

Chapter 12

• Airport master plans - see paras 12.7 to 12.9
• Safeguarding Land -see paras 12.3 to 12.6
• Blight - see paras 12.13 - 12.17
• Delivering surface access improvements - see paras 12.18 - 12.24

Attached is a three page summary of the White Paper prepared for the Liaison Group

The White Paper followed a major consultation on the future of aviation, launched in July 2002, which attracted around 500,000 responses. On 3/4th July 2003 the ACCs Annual Liaison Meeting considered a paper outlining the issues (MS Word - 24kb) and resolved to submit a number of general points for consideration by the Government in drawing up the White Paper - see paragraphs 4-8 of the Minutes the Meeting .

Top of Page

2006 Progress Report

On 28 June 2005 the then Transport Minister, Derek Twigg, made a speech in which he reviewed the progress made on the Government's Aviation White Paper. This promised that a progress report on the White Paper would be made at the end of 2006 and this was published on 14th December 2006 [The Progress Report].

The progress report reaffirmed the Government's commitment to the strategy set out in the White Paper, that is, support for the development of the aviation sector across the UK, predominantly through making the best use of existing capacity, and ensuring where new capacity is required its provision is in line with environmental obligations.

Other achievements detailed in the report included:

• Progress within Europe on including aviation in the EU emissions trading scheme.
• Royal Assent of the Civil Aviation Act, strengthening powers over the control of aircraft noise and local air quality.
• Industry progress in reducing the noise of the airline fleet and in addressing local air quality issues
• Improvements to passenger facilities at airports across the UK .
• Establishment of better dialogue between local communities and airport developers as a result of the publication, for the first time and after local consultation, of airport 'master plans'. These documents provide a basis for ensuring that measures to address noise, air quality, impacts on biodiversity and heritage, and issues of blight are properly considered, clearly set out and taken forward in an open and inclusive way.
• Launch of a Government scheme for offsetting all official flights.

The then Government also said it would bring forward proposals to make it simpler for air passengers to offset the carbon emissions arising from the flights that they take by setting out a government standard for how such schemes should operate.

Top of Page

Research Project

At begining of February 2010 the Department published a report summarising the findings of research on the White Paper. The research aimed to understand stakeholder perceptions of the strategic framework which the White Paper provided for airport development. It also investigated what influence Airport Master Plans have had on airport development processes.

Most respondents saw the value in working to a 30-year timeframe, but pointed to the challenges of needing to maintain the flexibility to respond to changing conditions and to ensure stakeholders had confidence in long-term forecasts. As regards the content of the White Paper the survey results revealed that respondents felt that it broadly covered the right issues.

Top of Page

Airport Master Plans

The Future of Air Transport White Paper set out a 30-year strategic framework for the development of airport capacity across the UK . The White Paper did not authorise or preclude any particular development, but set out a policy framework to guide decisions of future planning applications.

The White Paper invited airport operators to publish master plans explaining how their development proposals would help inform the regional and local planning process, and how they take account of local impacts and the wider environmental impacts of air travel. The Department for Transport, Scottish Executive and Welsh Assembly Government jointly published guidance on the preparation of master plans in 2004 [DfT Guidance]. Airport operators would bring forward development proposals through the statutory land-use planning system in the normal way.

Master plans were developed and owned by airport operators, and the Department had no formal role in assessing or approving them. However, the White Paper committed the then Government to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness and impact of the policies set out in the White Paper. The Department therefore commissioned independent experts to develop a framework setting out possible methodologies for evaluating White Paper policies, including master plans.

Top of Page

Adding capacity at Heathrow

The 2003 White Paper 'The Future of Air Transport' made clear that given the economic benefits to the UK, the Government supported the further development of Heathrow by adding a third runway and exploring the scope for making greater use of the existing runways. But this was subject to meeting strict local conditions on air quality and noise and improving public transport access:

• There should be no net increase in the total area of the 57dBA noise contour. This would be measured at 127sq.km which was the size of the contour in the summer of 2002.

• Government would need to be confident that levels of nitrogen dioxide (the critical pollutant) would be contained within EU limits, which will apply from 2010 or 2015 where the European Commission agrees the case for extension.

• There must be improvements to public transport access to the airport.

The White Paper promised further work and consultation on a number of issues relating to Heathrow Airport. In the light of that work, the Department in November 2007 launched a consultation on how Heathrow could be developed over the next 20 years or more. The ideas for development included:

• A proposal for a third runway and associated passenger terminal facilities, and the Government's assessment of how the strict local environmental conditions mentioned above could be met;

• A proposal to introduce 'mixed mode' on Heathrow's existing two runways as an interim measure. In considering the 'mixed mode' options the consultation would look at the position with or without additional air traffic movements;

• The results of a review of operational procedures on the existing runways - 'westerly preference' (the preferred direction of operation) and the 'Cranford agreement' (which generally prohibits easterly departures off the northern runway) - irrespective of any further changes; and

• An assessment of the effects of night-time rotation between westerly and easterly preference, and of the current trial of runway alternation in the 0600 to 0700 period.

The consultation came to an end on 27 February 2008. It was one of the largest consultation exercises ever run by the Department of Transport with summary documents sent to 217,000 households around the airport and 13 exhibitions visited by more than 5000 people. The proposals stirred up and stirred up considerable controversy over a long period.

The then Government's decision was announced in January 2009 - see also the DfT's press release: In summary the announcement confirmed support for a third runway and associated passenger terminal facilities, while rejecting the case for mixed mode. Westerly preference would be retained, but the Cranford agreement would be ended. Night time rotation and early morning runway alternation are both confirmed.

Allowing 'mixed mode' to go ahead on the two existing runways would have seen them used simultaneously for both arrivals and take-offs. This would have ended the current system of runway alternation which gives local residents respite from overhead aircraft noise for at least 8 hours each day. Ending the Cranford agreement will spread noise more fairly around affected communities and extend the benefits of runway alternation to the residents of Windsor and others to the west of the airport, and Hatton and North Feltham to the east.

On 7 April 2009 a number of environmental groups, together with six local authorities (Hammersmith and Fulham, Hounslow, Hillingdon, Kensington and Chelsea, Richmond upon Thames, Wandsworth and Windsor and Maidenhead) and residents groups, had launched a legal challenge against the government’s decision claiming there was a failure to conduct a lawful consultation, that the decision was irrational and/or disproportionate and there was a failure to provide an adequately reasoned decision. The case was finally heard in the High Court in February 2010 and the Court’s judgement was issued on 26th March.  The judge ruled that:

• If the Government decided to push ahead with the runway project it should review the climate change implications of Heathrow expansion, the economic case for a third runway, and the issue of how additional passengers would get to a bigger airport.
• The Government’s entire aviation policy should now be reviewed to take into account the implications of the 2008 Climate Change Act. The judge found that the claimants’ submissions added up, in his view, to a powerful demonstration of the potential significance of developments in climate change policy since the 2003 Air Transport White Paper. They were clearly matters which would need to be taken into account under the new Airports National Policy Statement.
• On the economic case for Heathrow expansion the judge said he would be ‘surprised’ if the recent tripling of the estimated cost to society of emitting carbon did not have ‘a significant effect’ on the economic case for the runway. The judge also said that it made no sense to treat the economic case as settled in 2003.
• On the issue of surface access the judge said the claimants’ case – that there is no credible plan in place to transport millions of extra passengers to an expanded Heathrow - was ‘justified’. Significantly, he noted that the Government had been  unable to provide a convincing answer in court when it was pressed about over-crowding on the Piccadilly underground line which would result from the construction of a third runway.

The judge invited the Government to sign a legally binding undertaking that it would not base future aviation policy solely on its 2003 White Paper.  There would be a further court hearing to examine the Government's response to the judge's request.

Commenting on the Court’s findings the BAA said,  “Permission to build a third runway at Heathrow is an important decision for the country, which demands extensive consultation. This judgement was about the process of consultation, not the arguments for or against a third runway, which we believe remain strongly in favour of new capacity at the UK's only hub airport. As we produce more detailed proposals, those will be open to full public scrutiny.” The Government said it continued to support a third runway at Heathrow, subject to strict conditions on environmental impact and flight numbers, but if re-elected it would not allow additional runways to proceed at any other airport during the next Parliament.

Top of Page

New Runway Cancelled

The new Government has cancelled plans for third runway at Heathrow and has made it clear it will refuse permission for new runways at Gatwick and Stansted.  The new Government does, however, say it will establish a high-speed rail network. This was confirmed in the new Government's subsequent programme document The Coalition: our programme for government:.

On 24 May 2010 BAA announced that it would stop work on the planning application for a third runway at Heathrow and that itwas withdrawing its application to build a second runway at Stansted. In making the announcements BAA said it continued to believe that new airport capacity is needed in the South East of England, to strengthen the UK's international trading links.

Top of Page

South East Airports Taskforce

On 15th June the Secretary of State announced the establishment of a South East Airports Taskforce to explore how to get the most out of existing airport infrastructure and improve experience for all passengers and users. The Taskforce was chaired by the Theresa Villiers and its initial focus will be on Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted. The membership of the Taskforce was:

• BAA Heathrow
• Gatwick
• BAA Stansted
• CAA (Civil Aviation Authority)
• NATS (National Air Traffic Services)
• BA (British Airways)
• Virgin Atlantic
• EasyJet
• Ryanair
• London First
• AUC (Air Transport Users Council)
• AOA (Airport Operators Association)
• AEF (Aviation Environmental Federation)

The first meeting of the Taskforce took place on 14 July 2010, and one of the first items of business was to agree on the precise terms of reference for the Taskforce. On 13th August 2010 UKACCS wrote to the Government among other things expressing surprise at the exclusion of anyone to repesent Consultative Committees on the new task force. In a letter dated 15th October 2010 the Minister of State at the Department for Transport, Theresa Villiers, replied saying " In drawing up the membership, we have had to strike a difficult balance between having a reasonable cross section of interests on the group and keeping it to a manageable size with a clear focus on airport operations. We have no current plans to extend the membership, but I plan to keep this under review in the light of the specific issues that are raised in the group. I can assure you that we do not want this forum to be exclusive. We will look for opportunities to involve others at working level as the work proceeds, and will be publishing the terms of reference and minutes of meetings on the DfT website, once agreed. In addition, Taskforce members are being encouraged to ensure engagement with the wider airport community through existing channels, such as the Airport Consultative Committees."

There is more about the Task Force in the speech to the Transport Times Aviation Conference given on 26th January 2011 by the Rt Hon Theresa Villiers MP who is Minister of State at the Department for Transport.

On 14th July 2011 the Task Force published its Report which can be seen, along with a Ministerial statement by Theresa Villiers, of the Department for Transport's website. The Report is the culmination of a year long programme of work across seven areas, including security and border controls, and sets out the issues considered by the Taskforce and its conclusions. In her statement Theresa Villiers says she intends "to reconvene the Taskforce in a year’s time to review the progress made".

Top of Page

Developing a sustainable framework for UK aviation

It is the stated aim of the new Governmen is to develop a new policy framework for UK aviation which supports economic growth and addresses aviation’s environmental impacts. The process would start with the Department for Transport issuing a "scoping document" in March 2011 with a view to publishing a draft policy framework for formal consultation in March 2012. In this connection please note the attached text of a speech made by Philip Hammond, Secretary of State for Transport, to the Airport Operators Association on 25 October 2010. On Page 5 he speaks about the need for a new policy noting that in the New Year DfT will issue a scoping document setting out the questions the Government is seeking to answer as it develop this policy. There would then be a dialogue with a wide range of stakeholders to seek their views and to draw on their knowledge and experience. The Government's intention is to publish a draft policy document for formal consultation sometime in 2012.

On 30th March 2011 the Department published the promised Scoping Document  Developing a sustainable framework for UK aviation.  This scoping document begins the dialogue with stakeholders towards developing a long-term high level sustainable framework for UK aviation.  The new policy framework will replace the previous government’s The Future of Air Transport White Paper which was published in 2003 and subsequently updated in 2006.

The Government's objective is to develop a long-term, high-level framework for aviation which:

• sets out the Government's aims for aviation and the parameters within which they can be delivered;
• takes account of the positive and negative impacts of aviation, and achieves a sustainable balance between them;
• integrates aviation policy with wider Government objectives, including delivering sustainable economic growth, combating climate change and protecting the local environment;
• builds consensus among those who rely on and are affected by aviation; and
• provides industry with the clarity it needs to invest in the UK over the long term.

The DfT was seeking views from all those who benefit from or are affected by aviation to contribute towards and influence the future direction of aviation policy. There was a 6 months consultation period which was extended and closed finally on 20 October 2011.

At the UKACCS Annual Meeting at Aberdeen on 9th June 2011 delegates agreed in principle to submit comments on:

• Paragraphs 5.9 and 5.25 to 5.27 - about protecting slots for point-to-point regional services delegates acknowledged that airport companies were private sector enterprises but capacity was becoming more and more limited. Protecting regional slots will require airports to act against their own commercial interests. It was therefore a matter for Government to look at the slot allocation rules, accept that the PSO legislation was not appropriate for protecting slots for UK point-to-point domestic services. Slot allocation must be looked at in a different way
• Paragraphs 5.18 to 5.20 and in particular about the length of time before High Speed Rail lines become a reality and that these will never be extended to reach some cities currently served by airports.
• Paragraph 5.39 noting in particular the potential double costs of the APD and ETS and possible financial or business retaliation by foreign governments.
• Paragraphs 5.40 to 5.44 emphasising the existence and role of ACCs and that there is a need for flexibility of operation – in this case one size does not fit all. It was also to be suggested that the existence and work of ACCs could be better promoted.
• Paragraphs 5.46 to 5.48 - UKACCs did not support greater dispersal of flightpaths but suggested that greater flexibility in the use of existing routes (e.g. within the total swathe of routes rather than just flying the centre line) be considered so as to share the burden for those communities beneath the flightpaths. There was a need for a flexible framework in addressing noise disturbance as one size does not fit all. Delegates also questioned why noise created by other forms of transport over the night time period is seldom reviewed and addressed in the same way!

A draft reply would be drawn up and agreed by a Working Group of UKACCS members.

Top of Page

Restructuring of the CAA

Responding to the Government’s proposals for legislation to place passenger interests at the heart of economic regulation and other proposals relating to the CAA’s role to be contained in the Airports Economic Regulation Bill, the CAA announced in 2011 that it had carried out an internal reorganisation to give a more coherent approach to its regulatory policies and the new focus on consumer issues. A new unit, the Regulatory Policy Group (RPG), has been established. The RPG's remit is to provide policy advice across the CAA, aiming to help the organisation to put the consumer at the heart of its work.

The RPG has four core functions:

• Economic regulation of the three designated airports (Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted) and NATS
• Enforcement of consumer legislation - for example, to protect consumers in instances of flight cancellation and denied boarding, and protect people of reduced mobility when they fly.
• Providing expert policy and economic advise and analysis across CAA, to government and others on airports, airlines and air traffic services
• Collecting and analysing aviation statistics and survey responses

This new unit replaces the old Economic Regulation Group and contains a new sub-group focused on consumer and market issues.

The proposals included the abolition of the Air Transport Users Committee (AUC) which ceased to exist from 9 March 2011. Its complaints handling function has been incorporated into the CAA’s new RPG. As part of the CAA’s restructure and the integration of the former AUC’s work, national air consumer representation will be undertaken by a new consumer panel, ACAP, which the CAA is in the process of setting up. The CAA believes that the integration of the AUC into RPG will reinforce the CAA’s understanding of consumer issues and their impact on its policies.

Details fo the new arrangements can be seen in the CAA's consultation paper. At the UKACCS Annual Meeting at Aberdeen on 9th June 2011 it was agreed to respond to teh CAA's Consultlation and a copy fo the Secretariat's letter has been posted to this website. And in August 2011 the CAA consulted on its various options for the new consumer panel (ACAP) and UKACCS will be among those to respond.

Top of Page

Surface Access

Airport Transport Forums and Airport Surface Access Strategies

Since 1999 all airports in England and Wales with more than 1,000 passenger air transport movements a year have required been to set up an Airport Transport Forum (ATF) and prepare an Airport Surface Access Strategy (ASAS) - click here to see the Government's Gidance on these initiative. It will be seen that it is the responsibility of the airport operator to bring forward proposals for the strategy and to secure funding. The ASAS should set out short and long-term targets for decreasing the proportion of journeys to the airport by car and increasing the proportion by public transport, for both air passengers and airport workers.

Top of Page

Air Transport White Paper & Airport Master Plans

The previous Government asked that existing surface access strategies should be reviewed to reflect the conclusions of the Air Transport White Paper and the development proposals set out in Airport Master Plans. In the White Paper (paras 4.55 - 4.58) the Government said:

• "Ensuring easy and reliable access for passengers, which minimises environmental, congestion and other local impacts, is a key factor in considering any proposal for new airport capacity. All such proposals must be accompanied by clear proposals on surface access which meet these criteria.
• "Increasing the proportion of passengers who get to airports by public transport can help reduce road congestion and air pollution. We expect airport operators to share this objective, and to demonstrate how they will achieve it in putting forward their proposals for developing new capacity.
• "Airports are part of our national transport infrastructure, and need to be planned and developed in that context. The Strategic Rail Authority and (for strategic roads within England) the Highways Agency will take full account of likely future airport development, and regional and local transport strategies should do the same.
  
• "The Government expects developers to pay the costs of up-grading or enhancing road, rail or other transport networks or services where these are needed to cope with additional passengers travelling to and from expanded or growing airports. Where the scheme has a wider range of beneficiaries, the Government, along with the devolved administrations, the Strategic Rail Authority, the Highways Agency and local authorities, will consider the need for additional public funding through their investment programmes on a case-by-case basis. Prospective developers should consult those bodies at an early stage in formulating their proposals. Further detail on this is given in Chapter 12 [paras 12.18-12.22]"

As already mentioned at begining of February 2010 the Department published a report summarising the findings of research on the White Paper. The research aimed to understand stakeholder perceptions of the strategic framework which the White Paper provided for airport development. It also investigated what influence Airport Master Plans have had on airport development processes.

As expected there were some calls for greater coverage of the links between air transport and the rest of the UK's transport network (such as rail and road).  The study identified a few gaps in coverage and the most commonly mentioned of these were issues in relation to surface access, a joined-up infrastructure network and environmental issues. Although it was acknowledged that these topics were included within the White Paper, it was felt they had not been covered in sufficient detail.

As regards Airport Master Plans the survey revealed mixed reactions to surface access targets and commitments included within Master Plans. In particular, there was a lack of consensus across local planning authority respondents around the viability of including these objectives within Master Plans - surface access targets and commitments were felt to be overly ambitious, or in some cases overly conservative. It was also felt that Master Plans in some cases proposed only limited investment into public transport services.

As expected, the study highlighted that linking an airport to other local transport networks was not directly within an airport operator's control and this was seen as an additional tension which made surface access a difficult issue to cover

Top of Page

High Speed Rail

In January 2009, the Government established High Speed Two Ltd (HS2) to consider the options for a new high speed rail network in Britain, starting with a costed and deliverable proposal for a new line from London to Birmingham.

HS2 Ltd’s report was presented to the then Government at the end of December 2009. Having considered the report the Government on 11th March, 2010 published a Command Paper announcing its support for the development of a high speed rail network, subject to consultation, and setting out the next steps.  The Government's response, as well as the HS2 report and maps showing the recommended route between London and the West Midlands, have been published by the DfT and are available on the DfT’s website.

It seems the new Government is in favour of a rail alternative. The "establishment of a high-speed rail network" is among the policy initiatives featured in note issued on 11th May 2010 of the agreements reached by the two parties in their coalition discussions and also in the new Government's subsequent programme document The Coalition: our programme for government:. The Conservative election manifesto says they would focus on making Heathrow better not bigger, bringing it directly into a new high speed rail network.  They say there would be a high speed rail line linking London, Heathrow, Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds with the Continent via the Channel Tunnel with construction to start in five years' time.  Later there would be two new lines bringing the North-East, Scotland and Wales into the high speed rail network.

High speed rail was referred to in the Queens Speech on 25th May and the new Government subsequently issued this note from note from No 10:

"Demand for travel between major British conurbations is expected to increase significantly over the next twenty to thirty years. High speed rail appears best placed to provide significant and sustainable additional capacity to meet that demand, whilst also improving journey times.

"The Government’s vision is for a truly national high speed rail network as part of it programme of measures for creating a low carbon economy, although it recognises that this would need to be achieved in phases. Such a network would include links to Heathrow and potentially other airports to provide an alternative to short-haul aviation.

"HS2 Ltd (the company set up by Government to investigate the case for High Speed Rail) has calculated that a high speed line to Birmingham could reduce journey time from London by around half an hour. Connections to existing main lines would enable high speed services to run on to other destinations, including Manchester and Glasgow. We will also actively study the options for a link between the new high speed line and the existing High Speed One line – which links London to the Channel Tunnel.

For more information see this speech by the Secretary of State in December 2010 and the High Speed Rail page on the DfT's website which includes all the latest documents. It is very likely that the new lines will be hotly contested by those affected along the chosen routes and very unlikely that the first trains on the new system will be running for many years. And it seems the new system will not have much impact on travel to and from the far regions of the UK such as Northern Ireland and Northern Scotland which will continue to rely substantially on air services. It is also interesting to read the views expressed by Sir David Rowlands who is now Chairman of Gatwick Airport Limited - see page 2 of the speech he gave to the Transport Times Aviation Conference on 26th January 2011

In his Budget Speech in 2010 the new Chancellor said the new Government planned to sell its stake in High Speed 1.

Top of Page

Other Initiatives

Other surface access reports to look at in this context are:

1. White Paper 'Delivering a Sustainable Railway' - Published in July 2007 this White Paper looks at the potential future challenges for the railway over a 30-year horizon.  It identifies three long-term agendas for Government and the rail industry working in partnership: increasing the capacity of the railway, delivering a quality service for passengers, and fulfilling rail's environmental potential.
2. Towards a Sustainable Transport System (TaSTS) - This report was published in October 2007. It described the Government’s five goals for transport: supporting economic growth, tackling climate change, contributing to better safety, security and health, promoting equality of opportunity and improving quality of life. The main focus of its programme for the national road network was supporting economic growth by reducing congestion and providing more reliable journeys for motorists and freight operators, but in a way whihc fits with the other four goals.  The programme also included a commitment to improve access to transport networks from ports and airports along key corridors connecting major cities and areas of housing growth and support regional economies. The DfT published an update on progress in July 2008.
3. Delivering a Sustainable Transport System (DaSTS) - This, report published in November 2008, identifies a national strategic infrastructure.  Within this seven airports (Heathrow; Gatwick; Stansted; Manchester; Luton; Birmingham and East Midlands) and ten ports that make up the international gateway based on passenger movements and freight tonnage are identified.  The strategic national corridorswhich link these ports and airports with the largest urban areas are mapped.  The previous Government confirmed its commitment to supporting the improvement of surface access to ports and airports and recognised it has a direct role in part-funding schemes to improve the delivery of the strategic national network.
4. Network Rail: Delivery Plan for Control Period Four (2009 – 2014) -This Report, published at the end of March 2009, says that £8 billion is being invested to enhance the rail network and increase capacity and capability. This figure excludes schemes such as Crossrail.The Delivery Plan also provides details of those Network Rail owned railway stations to receive investment for improvement over the next four years.  Those airport railway stations earmarked are Edinburgh, Waverley, Glasgow Central, Birmingham Central and Gatwick.
5. Better Rail Stations - On 17th November, 2009 the DfT published thisindependent report by the Station Champions, Chris Green and Sir Peter Hall, advising the Government on ways to improve stations, focussing on getting the basic facilities right as well as considering the broader role of stations in the future.  This Report was the subject of a Government consultation ending in January 2010

Top of Page

Review of Planning Law

The Eddington Report

In the 2005 Budget Sir Rod Eddington was jointly commissioned by the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Secretary of State for Transport to examine the long-term links between transport and the UK's economic productivity, growth and stability, within the context of the Government's broader commitment to sustainable development. The study was issued 1 December 2006 to accompany the 2006 Pre-Budget Report [The Eddington Report and related material]

The Report includes ideas for the significant reform of the planning process for strategic transport infrastructure schemes to improve efficiency and predictability without compromising fairness.

On 30th October 2007 the Department for Transport published Towards a Sustainable Transport System which is their response to both the Eddington Transport Study and the Stern Review of the Economics of Climate Change. The Department also issued a press release.

Top of Page

Barker Review of Land Use Planning

The then Government announced in the 2005 Pre-Budget Report that Kate Barker had been asked to lead an independent review of land use planning, focusing on the link between planning and economic growth.

The final report of the review was published on 5 December 2006 and is available on the website of the Department for Communities and Local Government along with a link to a statement made that day by the Secretary of State. [Barker Report and statement]

The report included recommendations for Introducing a new system for dealing with major infrastructure projects, based around national Statements of Strategic Objectives and an independent Planning Commission to determine applications.

Top of Page

Planning for a Sustainable Future: White Paper

This White Paper, published on 21st May 2007, sets out the then Government's proposals for reform of the planning system. It builds on recommendations from the Barker Review of Land Use Planning and the Eddington Transport Study and aims to improve speed, responsiveness and efficiency in land use planning.

Among other things it proposed reforms on how decisions are taken on nationally significant infrastructure projects, including energy, waste, waste-water and transport - including airport projects for a new tarmac, runway or infrastructure which increases an airport's capacity by over 5 million passengers per annum (mppa). It was proposed that decisions on such projects will be taken by a newly created independent commission “within the framework of the relevant national policy statement”.

The White Paper, and associated consultation papers and research reports, can be accessed from this page on the Department of Communities and Local Government website.

The then Government's response to the many thousands of comments made in response to the White Paper was published on 27th November 2007.

Top of Page

The New Government

On 20th May 2010 the new coalition Government issued a programme document The Coalition: our programme for government:. In relation to planning issues an article in the Planning Portal says:

"Ministers have confirmed that “radical” reform of the planning system will be central to the new coalition Government’s programme with the scrapping of Regional Spatial Strategies, the abolition of the Infrastructure Planning Commission and the adoption of the Conservative’s ‘localism’ agenda.

"Details of what the coalition plans to do have been set out today in the manifesto agreement between the Conservative and Liberal Democratic parties. Planning reform is also highlighted in the new Government’s Big Society programme.  

"The document setting out the coalition’s agreement stresses that the Government would “promote the radical devolution of power and greater financial autonomy to local government and community groups. This will include a review of local government finance”.>

"The 30-page paper also says that the administration will “rapidly abolish Regional Spatial Strategies and return decision-making powers on housing and planning to local councils including giving councils new powers to stop ‘garden grabbing’”.

"It adds: “In the longer term, we will radically reform the planning system to give neighbourhoods far more ability to determine the shape of the places in which their inhabitants live, based on the principles set out in the Conservative Party publication Open Source Planning

"The new Government also promises to “publish and present to Parliament a simple and consolidated national planning framework covering all forms of development and setting out national economic, environmental and social priorities”.

"In addition the administration has committed to creating a new designation - similar to SSSIs - to protect green areas of particular importance to local communities.

"Also set out in the agreement are pledges to provide incentives for local authorities to deliver sustainable development and to abolish the Government Office for London."

It is not clear how these developments will impact on the development of airports - we must wait and see!

Top of Page

Planning Act 2008

The Planning Bill, introduced into Parliament in November 2007, received the Royal Assent on 26 November 2008. The new Act builds on the proposals set out in the Planning White Paper and introduces a new system for nationally significant infrastructure planning, alongside further reforms to the town and country planning system. The new Act can be seen on the website of the Office of Public Sector Information.

At it's Annual Meeting at London City Airport on 2/3 June 2010 it was agreed that John Adshead (Chairman at London City) should write to the present Government on behalf of UKACCS resubmitting the paper on public inquiries which he drew up some years ago. A copy of his letter, including the paper on public inquiries, is attached along with the reply received from the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State , Bob Neill. 

Top of Page

National Policy Statement for Airports

The 2008 Act makes provision for the Government to produce National Policy Statements (NPS) which will provide a comprehensive view of the case for national infrastructure development within a wide policy framework, covering economic, environmental and social issues.

On the passing of the Act the Government stated its intention to produce a National Policy Statement for airports. This would be based on the Air Transport White Paper (ATWP) and would be subject to an appraisal of sustainability, consultation and Parliamentary scrutiny. It would also be location-specific so that the airports NPS would cover not only national need but also set out the places the Government thought suitable for nationally significant development.

In drawing up the NPS for Airports the Government will need to decide the shape of the Statement in the current cimate.  In this connection account will need to taken of:

•  the view expressed in the judgement in the Heathrow Judicial Review that the nation’s entire aviation policy should now be reviewed in the light of the 2008 Climate Change Act; and
• the view of the Transport Select Committee  that while the 2003 White Paper, The Future of Air Transport, continued to provide a sound basis for aviation policy the Government would need to update its assessment of the economic value of aviation for the UK economy regularly and ensure that its figures are subject to independent external scrutiny
• the finding of  the Climate Change Committee that that aviation policy should be based on the assumption that demand growth between now and 2050 cannot exceed 60% if the UK is to meet the Government’s target that aviation emissions in 2050 must not exceed 2005 levels.

In section 4 on page 11 of The Coalition: our programme for government: the new Government says it will  “publish and present to Parliament a simple and consolidated national planning framework covering all forms of development and setting out national economic, environmental and social priorities.” For some time there was uncertainty as to what this might mean for the National Policy Statement for Airports. However, in December 2010 the Government published a Work Plan for Major Infrastructure Planning Reform. This noted that in the Localism Bill there was provision for National Policy statements and that these should be approved by Parliament. However in relation to Airports the Work Plan says that the "Government has made clear its position on additional runways at London’s three major airports and its priority is to create a sustainable framework for UK aviation, rather than to produce a national policy statement.

The infrastructure plan published on 25th October 2010 also talks about the publication of the remaining National Policy Statements for those sectors other than energy, where a revised NPS was published that month.

Top of Page

Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC)

The IPC is another feature of the Planning Act 2008.  It is an independent body which decides planning applications for nationally significant infrastructure projects, i.e. large projects that support the economy and vital public services, including railways, large wind farms, power stations, reservoirs, harbours, airports and sewage treatment works.  In the case of existing airports this means developments which have the effect of increasing the number of passengers by at least 10 million per year or increasing by at least 10,000 per year the number of air transport movements of cargo aircraft.  

The IPC makes these decisions within the framework of National Policy Statements, also weighing the national benefit of proposals against the local impact.

The Commission opened for business in an advice role on 1 October 2009. On 1st February the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) issued guidance on how applications for development consent for nationally significant infrastructure projects were to be examined by the IPC. This guidance was to be read alongside the Planning Act 2008, the Infrastructure Planning (Examination Procedure) Rules 2010 (SI 2010/103) and the Infrastructure Planning (Interested Parties) Regulations 2010 (SI 2010/102).  On 1 March 2010 the IPC started to receive applications. A list of the applications currently being handled by the IPC can be seen on its website.

The new coalition Government says it "will abolish the unelected Infrastructure Planning Commission and replace it with an efficient and democratically accountable system that provides a fast-track process for major infrastructure projects" - see page 11 of the new Government's The Coalition: our programme for government.

On 29th June the Minister of State for Communities and Local Government announced it was the intention to replace the IPC by a Major Infrastructure Planning Unit to sit alongside the Planning Inspectorate. Ministers will take decisions on applications within the same statutory fast-track timeframe as the current regime. The abolition of the IPC was highlighted in the UK Government’s first-ever infrastructure plan published in October 2010 which highlighted the need for a fast-track planning approach for nationally significant infrastructure projects such as power stations and reservoirs.

In December 2010 the Government published the Localism Bill which will abolish the IPC and include provision to transfer its functions to the Secretary of State. These functions (other than decision-making, which remains with the Secretary of State) will be delegated as planned to the Major Infrastructure Planning Unit - see also the Work Plan for Major Infrastructure Planning Reform issued by the DCLG in December 2010. There is further detail in a press release issued by the DCLG in March 2011 which describes the "arrangements to ensure a smooth and stable transition to a democratic system for major infrastructure planning decisions". This will ensure it is 'business as usual' during the transition to the new Major Infrastructure Planning Unit, which will sit within the Planning Inspectorate, and will mean "developers can rest assured the transfer will not delay applications". The press release went on to say that:

• Sir Michael Pitt, currently Chair of the Infrastructure Planning Commission will become Chief Executive of the Planning Inspectorate.
• The current team of commissioners examining applications at the IPC will be retained to ensure a high quality professional system continues with no unnecessary delays in the examination of applications. This work will move to the Major Infrastructure Planning Unit (which will be part of the Planning Inspectorate) once the Localism Bill receives Royal Assent probably in April 2010.
• Sir Michael will divide his time equally between both organisations and will become the full time Chief Executive of the Planning Inspectorate following closure of the IPC, on a fixed term basis through to April 2014..

As indicated above at it's Annual Meeting at London City Airport on 2/3 June 2010 John Adshead (Chairman at London City) was asked to write to the present Government on behalf of UKACCS resubmitting the paper on public inquiries which he drew up some years ago. A copy of his letter, including the paper on public inquiries, is attached along with the reply received from the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State, Bob Neill. 

Top of Page

Planning Applications – Notification and Consultation

For some time now there has been concern among consultative committees about the scope for inconsistency in informing/consulting local residents about planning applications which have an impact on the area of more than one local authority.

The issue arose from a planning application submitted by London City Airport to increase the permitted number of flights. London City Airport lies within the southern part of the Borough of Newham. It had become clear that the same steps had not been taken to inform residents living outside the boundaries of Newham in Tower Hamlets and Greenwich where the impact of the application would be similar and who might wish to make representations.

Committees feel that clearer guidance and procedures are needed to ensure that all residents affected by airport planning applications are notified/consulted and in a similar manner. The issue was first pursued with the the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) but the response was judged to be inadequate and letters were sent to Local Government Association (LGA) and London Councils (formerly known as the Association of London Government).

The reply from London Councils said that local authorities in London had already recognised the need for greater consistency regarding notification, consultation and publicity in relation to planning applications which are close to the boundary of neighbouring planning authorities. In order to address this, the Implementation Plans Committee of the Association of London Borough Planning Officers (ALBPO) had produced a consultation protocol to guide the process of identifying properties to notify when an application is close to a local planning authority’s boundary. A copy of the protocal is attached to the ALG reply.

The Local Government Association sent a rather less forthcoming reply and a follow-up letter has been sent asking if a protocol on the lines adopted by the London Borough Planning Officers could be introduced on a countrywide basis. A reply was received in July 2010 whihc said it is for each Local Planning Authority (LPA) to determine what and how consultations need be carried out, subject to statutory minimum requirements. " It is not the LGA’s role to decide whether member councils should sign up to a protocol such as the one that has been agreed by Greater London planning authorities; this is a matter for individual councils. Having said that I will forward the protocol to the Planning Advisory Service (PAS) who identify and disseminate good practise and guidance on all things planning related."

Top of Page

Airport Safeguarding

Safeguarding is the process by which development in the vicinity of airports (and specified en-route technical sites operated by NATS or the MoD) is controlled in order to ensure the continuity of safe operations.  It is primarily concerned with:

• The maintenance of airspace sufficiently free of obstacles to ensure the safety of airborne air craft, known as physical safeguarding.
• The control of developments, including wind farms, which may interfere with aircraft/airport navigational aids such as the Instrument Landing System (ILS), Distance Measuring Equipment (DME) and radio navigational beacons, known as technical safeguarding.
• The control of developments likely to attract birds, or introduce distractions that may compromise the safety of aircraft.

Obstacles include not just buildings but also other structures such as transmitter towers and tall cranes used on construction sites which can present real problems.

New arrangements for airport safeguarding came into force on 10th February 2003.  The details are to be found in DfT Circular 1/2003 which includes the text of the Town And Country Planning (Safeguarded Aerodromes, Technical Sites And Military Explosives Storage Areas) Direction 2002. 

In summary the safeguarding process is centred around the safeguarding map issued to local planning authorties by the Civil Aviation Authority.  This shows colour-coded areas which together represent the safeguarded area around the airport. The safeguarding map can be seen at the offices of the local planning authority or at the Airport.

Where in a proposed development the height of a building or structure would exceed the level indicated on the safeguarding map for that area the local planning authority is required to consult the Airport. Consultation is also required in any case within a 13 kilometre zone marked on the map where the proposed development is for other aviation uses or is likely to attract birds and to wind farm developments within a 30 km radius.  

Consultation applies not only to applications for full or outline planning permission but also to applications for the amendment of an outline planning permission, for the renewal of a planning permission or for the removal or modification of conditions imposed on a previous planning permission.

When consulted the Airport considers whether the proposed development might compromise the safe operation of the aerodrome or interfere with the navigational aids or Instrument Flight Procedures (IFP) and offers its comments accordingly.  If then the local planning authority proposes to grant planning permission contrary to an objection made by the Airport, or not to attach conditions which they have recommended, it is required to notify the Civil Aviation Authority.  There is then a period of 28 days during which the CAA considers the disputed application and, if it thinks it necessary, to ask the Secretary of State to issue a direction under s.77 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 calling in the application for determination by the Secretary of State.

The Circular makes it clear that it is for the local planning authority to trigger the safeguarding process. It is very important that in doing so they should  ensure the Airport is sent appropriate information so that it can properly assess the application. If this is not done the Airport is likely to have to send a holding letter which may delay the completion of the planning process.

Top of Page

Review of Public Safety Zones

Public Safety Zones (PSZs) are areas of land at the ends of the runway within which development is restricted in order to control the number of people on the ground at risk of death or injury in the event of an aircraft accident on take-off or landing.

In July 2002, following a nationwide review, the PSZs at many airports were redefined and the Government issued specific Guidance (DfT Circular 1/2002 ) for local planning authorities on the control of development within them.   The basic policy objective governing the restriction on development is that there should be no increase in the number of people living, working or congregating in PSZs and that, over time, the number should be reduced as circumstances allow.

Another review of PSZs was launched in 2007. The DfT said it would start with the PSZs at those airports which had seen the most significant growth since 1999/2000. An April 2009 update the Department for Transport said that following preparatory work the revision of existing PSZs has now commenced, with revised PSZs recently being established at Southampton Airport.  Following Departmental policy these are based on traffic forecasts for 2024 (i.e. 15 years ahead); the previous PSZs used 2015 traffic forecasts

On 8th March 2010 the Government announced that following an internal review within the Department for Transport (DfT), it had been decided that the administration of PSZ policy should henceforth be carried out by the CAA.  The CAA (Aerodrome Stanadards Branch) has, therefore, taken over responsibility for the implementation of new PSZs and the review and update of existing PSZs.  DfT has retained overall policy responsibility for PSZs. It is understood that the PSZ review will now be taken forward by the CAA. And the 2002 Guidance has been reissued - DfT Circular 1/2010 - to take account of the transfer.

Meanwhile, it is believed that as the number of flights at an airport increases the area covered by a PSZ gets larger. Thus, people living in homes built outside the current PSZ can find themselves living within the new PSZ flowing from the current review. It is understood that in such circumstances the planning status of homes is not affected but concerns have been expressed whether such dwellings are blighted by the new PSZ reducing their value and making them difficult to sell.

Top of Page

Wind Farms - Effect on Radar

The growing emphasis on wind farms as a source of renewable energy has renewed worries about their impact on airports. For some years UKACCs members have been expressing concerns about the impact which wind farms have on the operation of radar installations and thus on the safety of aircraft.

At the 2008 UKACCs Annual meeting at Heathrow concerns were also expressed about the costs incurred by airports in preparing radar assessments as a result of applications for the development of wind farms. The meeting thought such costs should be borne by the developer and not the airport.  This would also help to prevent speculative applications. Delegates also raised concerns about safety issues.  It was agreed there was a need for the CAA to produce clearer guidance on the effect of wind farms on radar and it was felt that the Government should be urged to produce guidance to local planning authorities to require developers to submit a radar assessment with planning applications.

In February 2009, the CAA re-issued CAP 764 CAA Policy and Guidelines on Wind Turbines. Since the initial release of CAP 764 in 2006, the way in which aviation stakeholders and wind turbine developers interact is said to have matured, and the revised document includes updates on Government renewable energy policy and details of how all interested parties should interact.   Additionally, the scope of the document has been widened to include all aspects of aviation that may be affected by wind turbines. Appendix 7 of the document spells out a simplified method for determining if a wind turbine is in line of sight of an aeronautical radar station. Chapter 5 also provides guidance on wind turbine development planning process which encourages a pre-planning application process involving engagement and consultation with aviation stakeholders.  However, the revised document does not address the issue of who should bear the cost of undertaking a radar impact assessment.

In January 2010 there were reports of a "stealth" turbine blade, based on military technology, which might help to overcome the problem of wind farms interfering with aviation radar systems. The reports said that  Vestas Wind Systems is experimenting with stealth technology, developed to help warplanes escape notice, to reduce a turbine blade's radar signature, i.e. the size of the blip it makes on an air traffic controller's radar screen.

UKACCs will continue to monitor the impact of wind farms on airports and press any issues which arise with the CAA and the DfT.  Meanwhile website of the former Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform has a page devoted to windfarms which is a good source of information on the issues

Top of Page

Airspace Change Process

In 2006 the CAA's Directorate of Airspace Policy completed a consultation about the procedures to be followed to ensure effective consultation on proposals to change the use or classification of airspace in the UK.

The consultation documents can be seen and downloaded from the CAA's website along with the DAP's responses to the issues raised by those who responded during the consultation period which ended on 7th July 2006.

On 30th March 2007 the CAA issued an Airspace Change Process Guidance Document (CAP 725) which provides guidance on the various stages of the change process.

At the UKACCS Anual meeting in 2008 concerns were expressed about the lack of consistency in the approach adopted by NATS in its consultations with consultative committees on the plans to change the routes taken by aircraft in London’s Terminal Control North (TCN). There were also concerns about the manner in which NATS had handled consultation with affected local authorities. These concerns were reported to the CAA who said there were currently no plans formally to revise the procedural guidance on airspace changes contained in CAP 725.  However, once a decision had been reached on the TCN proposals the CAA would “review the progression of a proposal in order to identify any areas of weakness in the process or its associated guidance.”  The Liaison Group’s comments on consistency of approach would be considered as part of that exercise.

Redrawing London's Terminal Control North

The new procedure is now being used in the consideration of proposals by the National Air Traffic Services (NATS) to re-draw the routes taken by aircraft in London's Terminal Control North. This is one of the most complex areas of airspace in the world, with routes in and out of major airports including Heathrow, Stansted, Luton and London City as well as smaller airports such as Southend and RAF Northolt.

Full details of the 2008 proposals can be seen on a special website set up by NATS for the purposes of the consultation. The consultation period closed on 19th June 2008 but on 23 February 2009 NATS announced that it is to conduct a new consultation on revised proposals for the TCN region. Then in October 2009 NATS announced that there would be no second Terminal Control North (TCN) consultation on revised air routes until at least September 2010 at the earliest – there had been a downturn in air traffic and there was now less urgency. And then in a further letter sent out in October 2010 NATS confirmed that the downturn in air traffic levels since 2008 meant there is now less urgency and accordingly they would not be taking forward the proposals in their current form.  Instead they plan to incorporate the TCN proposals in a wider review of airspace over a much larger area of southern England.

Top of Page

Developing the United Kingdom’s Future Airspace Strategy (FAS)

During 2010/11 the CAA consulted about its planned Future Airspace Strategy (FAS). The Strategy, said the CAA, aimed to provide "a policy structure to enable a modernised air traffic management system that provides safe, efficient airspace, that has the capacity to meet reasonable demand, balances the needs of all users and mitigates the impact of aviation on the environment. The Future Airspace Strategy will provide a common view or road map, for the development and introduction of new technology into the ground and air elements of the UK’s Air Traffic Management System". As part of the consultation process the CAA ran a briefing for stakholders at the Royal Aeronautical Society in November 2010 - attached are copies of the slides used in the CAA's presentation

Following the consultation the new FAS was published at the end of June 2011

Top of Page

CAP 788 - Policy and Guidance for the Design and Operation of Departure Procedures

In April 2010 the CAA published CAP 778 for use by departure procedure designers, ATS providers and aerodrome operations staff. It sets out requirements against which procedure designs submitted by procedure sponsors will be assessed and spells out how departure procedure design requirements are applied in the UK. This will lead to the uniform application of design parameters which will satisfy airspace safety requirements, provide maximum airspace capacity consistent with both safety and environmental requirements, and which will also be compatible with future Area Navigation (RNAV) procedure design requirements.  Chapter 8 of CAP 778 sets out the procedure for making an airspace change.

Top of Page

Sustainable Development Commission

On 21st May 2008 the Sustainable Development Commission (SDC) published a report, prepared jointly with Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR), which calls for a special commission to establish the true benefits and impacts of aviation.

Drawing on a twelve-month process of dialogue, the report, entitled Breaking the holding pattern - A new approach to aviation policy making in the UK, argued that there is widespread controversy over key data on air travel in the UK, including the benefits to the UK economy, its contribution to climate change, noise and air pollution, and the potential for technology to reduce aviation's environmental impacts. It concludes that the high levels of conflict around the effects of aviation are bad for government, the industry, and citizens, creating rising distrust and undermining policy decisions.

The Report recommended that the government should:

• Convene a special commission to compile an updated evidence base on the economic, social and environmental benefits and costs of UK aviation, seeking maximum consensus amongst stakeholders
• Consult the public and key stakeholders on the future of air travel in the UK, setting out policy options to stimulate a national debate
• Incorporate the findings and recommendations of the special commission into the Air Transport White Paper.

They also advised that the proposed expansion at Heathrow should be put on hold until the Air Transport White Paper has been reviewed. The review would also have implications for decisions on expansion at other UK airports, including Stansted.

On the 22nd July 2010, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs announced that it would stop funding the SDC (£1.9m) in 2011. This news has been met with criticism and, indeed, in January 2011 the Environmental Audit Committee published a new report on how sustainable development can be further embedded in government policy decision-making and operations.

Top of Page

Transport Select Committee’s Report on The Future of Aviation

In a wide-ranging report published on 7th December 2009, the Transport Select Committee called on the Government to ensure that the UK's major airports, particularly Heathrow, are connected to a future high-speed rail system.

Committee Chairman, Louise Ellman MP, said "Aviation is important to the UK economy, both in the southeast of England and in the regions. Regional airports are important for regional economic growth and transport. Heathrow is a major European hub airport but only six UK cities have flights into it. Even with expansion, we need to improve direct access to Heathrow from the national rail network in order to maximise the economic benefits and to reduce the environmental impacts."

The Committee concluded that the 2003 White Paper, The Future of Air Transport, continues to provide a sound basis for aviation policy but warns the Government that it must update its assessment of the economic value of aviation for the UK economy regularly and ensure that its figures are subject to independent external scrutiny.

In view of the economic benefits to the UK, the Committee endorsed the Government's support for a third runway at Heathrow, subject to the effective application of tough environmental conditions. However, it questioned the need for a second runway at Stansted and asks ministers to reconsider whether Gatwick might prove to be a better location for expansion after 2019.

Stressing the need to curb pollution from aviation, the Committee called for higher environmental standards to reduce CO2, air pollution and noise. With regard to carbon emissions from aviation in the UK, the Committee set out a number of principleswhich it believes should be applied to future UK policy in this area, and looked forward to the Committee on Climate Change's report (8 December) detailing how the aviation industry could sensibly reduce its greenhouse gas emissions over the coming decades.

Calling for decisive effort by Government to ensure older and noisier planes are taken out of use promptly, the Committee also asked the Government to review the adequacy of current research into the effects of noise and to revisit its impact assessment procedures and compensation arrangements.

The Committee recognised the importance of Air Passenger Duty (APD), but was concerned that, when setting the level of APD, the Government needed to be mindful of the vulnerability of the aviation industry in the current economic climate. It also needed to take account of competition from other European airports.

Looking to air travellers, MPs repeated a previous call for the ATOL levy to be increased and extended to cover all international flights and not merely package holidays. They also asked the Government to clarify how much revenue is raised from aviation taxes and to set out the basis for its claim that an additional £10bn could be raised if VAT and fuel duty were applied to aviation.

Top of Page

** This item is in .pdf format and to view it you will need an Acrobat Reader. This can be obtained free of charge by clicking the "Get Acrobat Reader" icon opposITE