Originally Posted by
fanrailuk
There is nothing new in this. The Bath and North East Somerset unitary authority (B&NES) altered its political complexion radically at the May 2019 local elections changing an overall Conservative majority to an overall Lib-Dem majority. The newly constituted council was against Bristol Airport expansion from the outset. The Lib-Dem councillor who wants the West of England Combined Authority (Weca) to alter its stance on supporting the expansion is merely echoing climate change-based anti-expansion comments made frequently by her council colleagues since they were elected.
North Somerset unitary authority (NSC) in whose area the airport is situated also lost its overall Conservative majority at the May 2019 local elections to be replaced by a ‘rainbow council’ consisting of Lib-Dems, Greens, Labour and Independents, with the greatly reduced number of Conservatives in opposition. Some of the new councillors had previously expressed opposition to Bristol Airport expansion.
A perusal of the 235-page report submitted by the NSC planning officers to their planning committee councillors prior to the planning hearing, in which the officers recommended approval with conditions, shows that most of the other councils in the extended city region were, like Weca, in support of the planning application (Bristol, South Gloucestershire, Sedgemoor and Somerset County - Mendip made no comment).
I’m not aware of any of these councils changing their attitude, whether in support or in opposition, since the planning application was rejected by NSC in February this year with the rejection confirmed the following month.
There is an argument that the future of a regional facility such as an airport should not be left solely in the hands of just one council in the area.
I believe that an appeal to the national Planning Inspectorate will be in the best interests of the city region and its hinterland. The matter will be investigated thoroughly, objectively and impartially by a professional planning inspector who, unlike many councillors, will have no pre-conceived ideas, local pressures, prejudices or ingrained opinions. An appeal of this nature will involve a public enquiry.
The planning inspector can decide the outcome of the appeal himself or herself but with this one it’s likely that the secretary of state will ‘recover’ the appeal and make the final decision himself, with the planning inspector’s recommendations taken into account but not binding.
My ears are not completely closed to the views of anti-expansionists. I respect their right to hold them and indeed can empathise with some of their arguments, and whilst on balance I disagree with their main thrust I don’t support expansion at any cost. Improvements need to be made in a number of areas including those recommended by the NSC planning officers.
As someone who has used BRS a lot over many years and who lives near the flight path a few miles from the airport I will be entirely comfortable with whatever a planning inspector decides or, as the case may be, recommends to the secretary of state because I will be confident that it is based on legal and planning guidance and principles.
This could run and run because even if the planning inspector or secretary of state allows the airport’s appeal, and the appeal process won’t be quick, legal challenges would likely follow from opponents.
Pre-pandemic the airport had projected that its current 10 mppa cap would be reached or nearly so by the end of 2021. It’s obvious that won’t now occur for several years which provides more breathing space for the airport to wait out the appeal process.