|
reprinted from:
Jet pollution tax 'would fund new airport in Kent'
By Ben
Webster, Transport Correspondent Local authorities are calling on the Government to impose a hefty tax on flights from Britain's airports to encourage the aviation industry to invest in a 24 hour airport beside the Thames Estuary. Passengers using Heathrow would be hit hardest, with higher airport charges accompanied by a "swingeing emissions tax". The Strategic Aviation Special Interest Group (Sasig), which represents more than 70 local authorities and 23 million people affected by airports in England, has produced a report backing a four or five-runway airport at Cliffe, in north Kent. It would handle 58million passengers a year by 2015, just short of the number using Heathrow last year. By 2030 the number would increase to 110 million. The airport, which would cost at least £11 billion to build, is one of the Government's options for coping with an expected tripling in demand for air travel by 2030. The other options are a short third runway at Heathrow and up to three more runways at Stansted. Sasig says that ministers must rule out any new runways at existing airports in the South East. This would force the aviation industry to invest in Cliffe if it wanted to capitalise on growing demand. The Government's own analysis shows that a new third runway at Heathrow, the airlines' preferred choice for expansion, would expose 35,000 people to cancer-causing nitrogen dioxide. By 2015 an extra 107,000 people would suffer aircraft noise above 57 decibels, the level deemed to cause significant annoyance. At Stansted an additional 22,000 people would suffer 57 decibels by 2030 from three extra runways. Sasig states that Stansted has the further disadvantage of being much further from London than either Cliffe or Heathrow as well as having poor transport links. An airport at Cliffe would expose only 14,000 people to 57 decibels by 2030. Planes would land and take off over the Thames Estuary, allowing the airport to operate 24 hours a day. Richard Worrall, chairman of Sasig, said: "The time has come for bold, imaginative solutions. The days of ad hoc growth -an extra runway here, a new terminal there -must be ended for ever." BAA, which operates Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted, has told ministers that it would be impossible to fund Cliffe. But the Sasig report states: "At present it would be perverse commercial practice for BAA to show any keenness, allowing the company to extract the best terms possible from the Government." Sasig accepts that Cliffe would be viable only if a major airline alliance, such as the Star Alliance of 14 airlines, could be persuaded to move there when the first runways opened in 2011. Airlines would be willing to take the risk of setting up at a new airport only if it was significantly cheaper to land there. Sasig offers a number of options, including an airport levy of £4 per passenger at existing airports, higher passenger duty at Heathrow or an environmental levy to reflect the greater impact of flights from airports surrounded by thousands of homes. The main stumbling block for Cliffe is that it is home to 200,000 wintering birds. However, Mr Worrall said that the construction costs included £230 million for creating new wetlands elsewhere on the estuary. The Cliffe proposal is fiercely opposed by local residents, who have put up signs around the area declaring: "You are now entering government killing fields." Kent and Medway councils have resigned from Sasig in protest over its decision to support Cliffe. The Government is understood to be doubtful whether Cliffe could be funded entirely by the private sector. But ministers believe the new airport would help to regenerate a vast area of East London, north Kent and south Essex. Unlike Stansted, Cliffe has a large workforce living close by. The Government's consultation on where to build new runways ends next week and a White Paper setting out firm proposals is expected in the spring. Meanwhile, the High Court is expected to rule
this week on a legal challenge by Kent, Medway and Essex councils, which want
the Government to reverse its decision to rule out any expansion of Gatwick
until 2024. |
