Will it be Boris’s legacy to London or a fanciful dream without a hope in hell of taking off?  It was while he was a candidate for the Mayoral elections in 2008 that Johnson first stumbled across the idea of an airport in the Thames Estuary after reading a newspaper article.

Virgin Atlantic’s chief executive has spoken out against proposals for new airport in the Thames Estuary. Steve Ridgeway used an interview in the Financial Times to warn of the potential impact a new airport would have on jobs and business in the Heathrow area.

Murad Qureshi, a London-wide Assembly member, says Boris Johnson’s call for second hub airport threatens Heathrow’s viability and the business case for Crossrail.

Labour London Assembly Member Murad Qureshi said

"It’s not just the airport itself and the impact it would have on the thousands of people who work at Heathrow. This proposal threatens the wider transport infrastructure as well. Crossrail is being built to get people from east to west – to Heathrow. If we’re to have an alternative airport the business case for Crossrail no longer stacks up.

"The Mayor is a lone voice in calling for this new airport in the Thames. The Government are opposed, the EU would never allow it on environmental grounds and now we have one of the biggest airlines coming out publicly against it."

Ends.

Notes

Murad Qureshi is a London-wide Assembly Member and is Vice Chair of the Assembly’s Environment Committee

He represents the London Assembly on the Heathrow Airport Consultative Committee (HACC)

The Mayor’s aviation report can be found here:

Steve Ridgway was speaking to Pilita Clark in the Financial Times on Monday 24^{th January, 2011:http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/46bfe9ae-2721-11e0-80d7-00144feab49a.html}

For further information please contact Alison Marcroft on 020 7983 4363

http://www.london.gov.uk/increasing-londons-airport-capacity: "Second hub airports are a myth. This is just Boris-speak for replacement airport. Any new hub airport would be in direct competition with Heathrow and one of them would inevitably be eclipsed."

Now that the snow has (hopefully!) left us for the foreseeable future, I think it’s time to sit back and have a good think about the aviation fiasco which took hold of us last month and question for example, whether we can expect Heathrow to cope with the additional passengers coming to London for the Olympics in 2012? 

 Lets face it, it has demonstrated a pretty poor record when faced with adverse conditions like snow, strikes and security issues recently.  These have all caused unacceptable disruption to passengers, or in the case of snow, caused the airport to close altogether.

It is well known that BAA would ideally like to build another runway at Heathrow and cite capacity issues as the driver for that, but as recent events show that they can’t manage the airport adequately with the existing capacity, to have increased that would simply exacerbate the problems.

Given the operational difficulties at Heathrow whenever we’ve had adverse weather like snow, strikes and security concerns during peak travel times in the year like Easter, summer and winter breaks, will it be able to cope with the Olympics?”

A Presentation to the Heathrow Airport Consultative Committee (HACC) meeting before Christmas showed that up to 90 per cent of the Olympic family will be passing through Heathrow Airport during two particular weekends in July and August 2012.  In 2012 more than ever, London will be on show to the world and many foreign visitors, including almost all the Olympic family will be using Heathrow airport.  Granted, we’re unlikely to have snow in the middle of summer, but BAA needs to up their game and be fully prepared for every eventuality.  If Heathrow has to close during the Olympics, it will make London a laughing-stock.

A High Court ruling today blocked resident’s attempt to stop an increase in flights to and from City Airport.  Members of the “Fight the Flights” campaign argued that noise pollution levels at the airport are already very high and therefore any further increase would result in an unbearable increase in levels of noise and disruption to their lives.

The legal challenge was based upon Newham Council’s failure to consult neighbouring London Boroughs of Waltham Forest or Redbridge or their residents before permitting an increase in flights from between 70,000 and 80,000 per annum to 120000.

Murad Qureshi who is deputy Chair of the London Assembly Environment Committee has supported the campaign by Fight the Flights by raising the issue of air pollution and the plight of residents at Mayor’s Question Time.

http://mqt.london.gov.uk/mqt/public/question.do?id=32300

http://mqt.london.gov.uk/mqt/public/question.do?id=30897

http://mqt.london.gov.uk/mqt/public/question.do?id=29882

Murad said: “This was a case which challenged Newham’s decision based upon its technical decision making process.  The court has not ruled upon the morality of Newham’s decision”

“The outcome of this ruling means that Newham Council are able to make a decision which has vast consequences on the quality of so many people’s lives but without proper consultation, this is inherently wrong regardless of the legal technical merits of the case”

Murad goes onto say: “The Mayor should use his office to at least make a case for the many Londoners who will be affected by this decision.  The fact that a decision may be outside of his direct powers has not stopped him commenting in the past.  Only this week, he has spoken up against his own party’s policy in advocating massive airport expansion.  It seems that Boris only speaks up when it suits his own agenda, this is not good for Londoners”

 Ends

Notes

For further information please contact Nikki Salih, PA to Murad Qureshi, on 020 7983 4400

The London Air Quality Monitoring Statistics produced by Kings College London show that the number of days pollution levels recorded at the site fell outside the Government’s Air Quality Strategy Objectives in 2010 topped a staggering 91 days.

This figure massively exceeds the EU recommended level of 35 days.

London Assembly member, Murad Qureshi, said: “These figures reveal the stark and dangerous reality of air pollution in Acton. It’s a problem which has gone on for too long and which requires affirmative action, from the council, mayor and government. 

“Despite a well organised residents’ campaign they have been let down by the authorities. The importance of air quality and the devastating effect on people’s health is simply not given enough credence by the Mayor.

“I intend to keep pushing for action and in particular for more concrete action from the Mayor and TfL who don’t appear to have a grip on this issue.  Lip service and monitoring alone do not reduce air pollution”

The plight of residents of Horn Lane in Acton was highlighted by Londonwide Assembly member Murad Qureshi at a meeting of the London Assembly’s Environment Committee.  The Committee met last week and were able to question representatives from Transport for London about steps they were taking to reduce air pollution in the capital.  Labour assembly member Murad Qureshi who is also deputy chair of the Environment Committee chose Horn Lane as a prime example of where immediate action was needed.

The Environment Committee intends to continue its investigation into pollution hotspots in the forthcoming year.

The minutes of this and other meetings of the Environment committee can be viewed at: http://www.london.gov.uk/moderngov/ieListMeetings.aspx?CommitteeId=143

Ends

Notes

For further information please contact Nikki Salih, PA to Murad Qureshi, on 020 7983 4400