PDA

View Full Version : Heathrow noise effects 'ignored'


787FOCAL
22nd May 2008, 21:45
Heathrow (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/7409761.stm)

Heathrow noise effects 'ignored'

About 16 flights arrive at Heathrow between 0430 and 0600 BST daily
The government has been accused of ignoring the disturbing effects of aircraft noise when the latest night flight regime for Heathrow was adopted.

Three councils are at the High Court to get the Department for Transport (DfT) to reconsider which type of plane, and how many, can land before 0600 BST.

London's Richmond and Wandsworth councils and Berkshire's Windsor and Maidenhead are taking the legal action.

The DfT said its policy followed "extensive" public consultation.

Lawyers for the three local authorities accused the DfT of unlawfully failing to act after it was discovered three years ago that some early arrival planes had been placed in the wrong noise category.

Irrational and disproportionate

Transport Secretary Ruth Kelly's predecessor, Douglas Alexander, "failed to address the statutory test of the effect of aircraft noise or, if he did address it, did so in an irrational and disproportionate manner and contrary to his own policies", said David Smith, counsel for the local authorities.

The law required a fair balance to be struck between the interests of society in general and those of individuals, he told Mr Justice Sullivan at the start of a three-day hearing.

The judge heard that the Boeing 747-400 RR, which is the main type of aircraft used by airlines during the night quota period at Heathrow, had been wrongly classified at too low a noise level.

The councils argued, by not acting on the discrepancy, the government failed in its duty to protect residents from excessive noise at night.

Mothers' protest

There are about 16 early morning arrivals each day between 0430 and 0600 BST.

The court challenge is supported by Kensington and Chelsea, Hammersmith and Fulham, Hounslow and Hillingdon councils and the Greater London Authority.

All the councils are members of the 2M Group which opposes Heathrow expansion.

Meanwhile, mothers and children have planned to protest in central London's Parliament Square against Heathrow's proposed third runway.

One protester, Four Weddings And A Funeral actress Anna Chancellor said: "How can we be expanding our airports at a time when the planet's future is at stake?

"It's criminally irresponsible and the government has got to wake up and start listening."

Members of environmental group We Can will form the shape of a giant "no" and hand a letter to Prime Minister Gordon Brown.

A DfT spokesman said: "The case is being heard this week and it would be inappropriate to comment further."

The hearing continues.

colossus
22nd May 2008, 21:59
Under the Wikipedia entry for Anna Chancellor we have

"She has spent time living in several countries around the world and has a particular attraction to Zimbabwe"

Presumably she travels using the frequent ferry services provided between these locations and the UK given her obvious aversion to air travel?

Admiral346
22nd May 2008, 23:15
Cut her some slack - she was only told by her PR guys to go out and spew some unreflected Sh1t....

airfoilmod
22nd May 2008, 23:52
Our new Aircraft come furnished with mufflers, they're yellow, and they go in your ears.

corsair
23rd May 2008, 08:23
One protester, Four Weddings And A Funeral actress Anna Chancellor said: "How can we be expanding our airports at a time when the planet's future is at stake?


That's a classic example of the emotionalism that has permeated the whole climate change nonsense. For one thing, airport expansion is nothing to do with climate change and secondly the planet's future is not at stake.

I wonder where the Mothers will park their 'Chelsea Chariots'. Bought for their child's safety you understand!:yuk:

radeng
23rd May 2008, 08:37
When will they realise that major part of the problem is BECAUSE they are mothers? Overpopulation is the biggest problem of all. If we shut down the UK, removed every living animal (including us), it would make around 0.6% difference. For less than that, Bliar and his cohorts want to hit our economy.

llondel
23rd May 2008, 09:56
As we're now in JB, I'd like to offer my solution to the noise problem.

It's simple, and has been tested - use 777s as per BA038, nice and quiet for the approach, just a loud bang at the end. :E

GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU
23rd May 2008, 10:37
When Miz Chancellor arrived here from Zim or wherever else she previously graced with her presence, It must have been a great surprise to her that the house she had bought was close to a significantly large aerodrome.

Climate change and diminishing natural resources will be wheeled out as a convenient argument against anything now. If the "offenders" are made to look and feel irresponsible on a global scale, it may cause them to modify their behaviour. The campaign against smoking got nowhere until "passive smoking" was latched on to. Immediately afterwards, erstwhile decent law abiding people began to feel guilty for smoking. Personally, I've never smoked and this isn't a "smoking" rant; I'm just using it as a parallel to the new eco fascism.

colossus
23rd May 2008, 11:27
Cut her some slack - she was only told by her PR guys to go out and spew some unreflected Sh1t....

Why should I - if your dumb enough to not reflect on how hypocritical your PR statements might be they you deserve to be roasted by them.

Bronx
23rd May 2008, 21:48
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7416396.stm :):ok: