There has
been a mixed reaction to the long expected expansion plans at
Stansted
Airport announced
yesterday, which include a new runway and terminal, and could
see the hub handle 68m passengers by 2030 – as many as Heathrow
today.
Essex County
Council has branded the plans as ‘unwanted and unnecessary’. Leader
Lord Hanningfield said: ‘This is not what the people of Essex want
and it is not what the people of Britain need. If it goes ahead, it
will have a severe impact on the quality of life for Essex residents
with more pollution, traffic, noise and will place huge pressure on
already overstretched infrastructure and public services. We are
strongly opposed to a second runway and we will fight it tooth and
nail. It is time for the Government to go back to the drawing board
and rethink its aviation strategy.’
The Institute
of Directors in Essex, a business group, believes expansion is
demand led and businesses in the region will benefit as a result.
Chairman Paul Rolison said: ‘The development of 13,000 new jobs in
the region is to be welcomed, furthermore the prospect of the East
of England maintaining its international reputation as a part of the
global marketplace is greater now that the planning process has
begun.’
Trade union
Unite (formerly the Transport & General Workers) also said the plans
were necessary to maintain the growth of aviation and the
employment. Regional secretary Steve Hart said: ‘Air transport is a
major contributor to the economy in Essex and the south east and
keeps thousands in work. We have consistently argued for the
expansion of Stansted to reflect the growth in passenger demand. The
plans now are much more advanced in terms of reducing the potential
impact on the local environment; they should go through in our
view.’
The Green
Party has vowed to fight the ‘lunatic’ expansion plans. The party
said they would result in ‘catastrophic damage’ to the countryside
and would cancel out efforts in Essex to tackle climate change.
The Liberal
Democrats condemned the proposed expansion, claiming it reveals the
government's climate change policy as ‘full of hot air’. Lib-Dem
Shadow Transport Secretary, Norman Baker MP said: ‘The Government's
air travel strategy needs to be determined by the needs of the
environment, passengers and affected local communities, not the
needs of BAA's shareholders. Air travel is the fastest growing
source of greenhouse gas emissions in the UK, yet BAA and the
Government continue with an outdated aviation policy.’
Bishop's
Stortford (Conservative) MP Mark Prisk said: ‘I believe this
announcement by BAA could prove prejudicial. An inquiry on the first
runway is currently under way, yet this announcement by BAA assumes
permission will be granted, before a decision has even been made. As
for the scheme, I remain firmly of the view that this runway is
perverse, and unworkable.'
The National
Trust said the plans will have major consequences for the
10,000-year-old Hatfield Forest. Keith Turner, National Trust's area
manager, said: ‘The potential increase in noise pollution alone
would have a major detrimental impact on the tranquility experienced
by the quarter of a million visitors annually and the wildlife
inhabiting this ancient woodland.’
Cambridgeshire Chambers of Commerce said a second runway is for ‘the
good of the region's economy’. Chief executive John Bridge OBE said:
‘If we do not increase capacity at Stansted, businesses currently
contributing to our region's thriving economy will be forced to
relocate to a region which has an infrastructure that can
sufficiently support their growing transport needs.'
Stansted
Airport Chamber of Commerce pledged its support to the expansion.
Director Julie Budden said: ‘It is evident many more people travel
internationally for business and pleasure and the expansion will
allow access to new routes offering the potential of business growth
in the area.'
