Birmingham Airport anti-Noise Group

Press Release Contact us

Tuesday, 11th February 2003

How many valentines did you get this year, Minister?

Supporters of Birmingham Airport anti Noise Group (BANG) will be sending Valentine's Day messages to Transport Secretary Alistair Darling, telling him that the Government's proposals for airport expansion in the region are "breaking Birmingham's heart".

The special cards [1] were produced by BANG and sent out to each of the group's 400 official supporters, who were urged to forward the cards to Mr Darling at the Department for Transport (DfT), London. BANG is taking advantage of the extended DfT Consultation on the Future of Air Transport [2] to remind the Government that it's plans to massively increase the UK's airport infrastructure are irresponsible, unpopular and would be deeply damaging if implemented.

Birmingham residents fed up with aircraft noise, night flights and pollution from Birmingham International Airport formed BANG in 2001, and have been campaigning ever since against the expansion of the airport. [3] The group held several public meetings last year to highlight what expansion at Birmingham would mean for local communities.

Secretary of BANG, James Botham said:

"Behind our backs, it appears that Mr Darling is carrying on his secret love affair with the aviation industry - and he's breaking a lot of hearts all over the country. Wherever a new runway or airport has been proposed, local people are threatened by more aircraft noise, sleep disturbance, pollution and a ruined environment. The aim of our Valentine protest is to tell Mr Darling to dump the aviation industry and come back to the British people."

BANG are not 'nimbys'; we want a wider debate on air transport, one that examines the many human, environmental, social and economic costs the aviation industry imposes on society. Sadly, this is a debate the Government doesn't want us to have. It would rather see communities turn against each other in an effort either to avoid being hit by new airport developments or losing out economically to their competitors. Many people have already fallen into the trap of thinking that new airports and runways must go somewhere. We are saying a broader perspective is required.

If the DfT abandoned the discredited policy of 'predict and provide', managed the demand for air travel and withdrew the £8 billion of hidden subsidies the aviation industry currently receives then there would be no need for any damaging airport development anywhere in the UK.

Editor's Notes

[1] See attached copy of the Valentine card.

[2] The Government's Consultation on the Future of Air Transport in the UK has been extended following a legal challenge from Medway, Kent, and Essex County Council concerning the exclusion of Gatwick Airport from the document. The case against the Government was heard in the High Court between 13 and 15 November 2002 and on 26th November Mr Justice Maurice Kay rejected most of those grounds of challenge. However, he found that the decision to exclude the Gatwick options was unlawful on three grounds and so ruled that it should be quashed. Transport Secretary Alistair Darling said that he would not appeal against the ruling.

We understand that the second round of consultation together with a second document are not expected until late February/early March and will run for four months. Alistair Darling has said that an Aviation White Paper will not be published before October, but it now looks like the White Paper may not appear until the end of the year or even until early next year.

[3] The Government is considering the following options for the Midlands' airports:

• A 'wide-spaced' runway at Birmingham. This would almost amount to a second airport. Bickenhill Village and parts of Catherine de Barnes would be demolished. Many thousands more people would suffer aircraft noise and air pollution. The Airport has put forward a wide spaced runway option which is 600m shorter than that outlined in the Government's consultation. But campaigners still regard the wide spaced option as unacceptable.
• A 'closed-spaced' runway at Birmingham. This would be a new runway closer to the existing one.
• A new airport between Coventry and Rugby. This would demolish the villages of Church Lawford and kings Newnham and destroy 4000 acres of countryside. The new airport would handle more passengers than Heathrow and over 8 times the number currently using Birmingham, with a flight every 30 seconds.
• A new runway at East Midlands Airport.
• A maximum use option. This involves increasing terminal space at Birmingham and East Midlands Airports allowing their existing runways to be fully used. At Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council's Scrutiny Board Meeting on 24th October 2002, former Director of Birmingham Airport Brian Summers admitted at the Maximum Use option would eventually lead to a second runway being built at Birmingham Airport.