25th July 2006 updated 30th July

 
STAVERTON AIRPORT MEETING – 26th July

A group of Cheltenham Green party members will be going to the meeting tomorrow night - below is a draft of some of their statements they hope to make:

Click here to read about recent demonstration at Staverton (photo above includes various Cheltenham and Stroud Green party members and the back of Cllr Philip Booth talking to C.I.D. Officer who came to monitor the demonstration along with at least 6 officers).

 
See bottom of page for brief report re meeting.

Statements climate change campaigners are hoping to make:

"What is now plain is that the emission of greenhouse gases... is causing global warming at a rate that began as significant, has become alarming and is simply unsustainable. It is now that timely action can avert disaster.”

“Climate change represents a fundamental threat to our quality of life.”

These assertions are from the Cheltenham Borough Council’s Climate Change Strategy. The first sentence was a quote from the Prime Minister and the second is a quote from CBC and the Cheltenham Climate Change Board. Gloucestershire County Council are a member of this board.

The strategy says that:

“We recognise the importance of tackling climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions. We will endeavour to implement measures in the strategy through activities within our own organisations and through working with the wider community of Cheltenham.”

“The overarching aim of the strategy is to make Cheltenham a carbon neutral borough.”

“The main objectives of this strategy are to establish accurate data of greenhouse gas emissions in Cheltenham.”

“The strategy objectives will be delivered by reducing emissions from activities such as transport by reducing the need to travel.”

“To reduce CO2 from activities in Cheltenham by 20% from 1990 levels by 2010 and by 60% by 2050. The Regional Planning Guidance for the South West commits local authorities to supporting a 20% reduction in CO2.”

“Greenhouse gas emissions have reduced in Cheltenham by 6% between 1990 to 2003.”

All these words are from the strategy.

So a further 14% needs to come from somewhere by 2010. 

Both CBC and Gloucester City Council have signed the Nottingham Declaration which commits the councils to reducing greenhouse gases.

CBC and GCC jointly own Gloucestershire airport. The Strategy confirms that:
“the airport is a source of greenhouse gas emissions and CBC through its representation on the Gloucestershire Airport Board and working group, will ensure that climate change issues are measured and monitored in future plans for Gloucestershire airport. A study published in May 2004 on the long term role of the airport includes an environmental assessment of development options and the impact of CO2 emissions.”

These are fine words from the CBC Climate Change Strategy.

Gloucester City Council say: “The Council has signed up to The Nottingham Declaration on Climate Change, whereby it has been recognised that climate change is likely to be one of the key drivers of change within our community this century. It commits the Council to undertaking a number of objectives to help tackle climate change.”

GCC does not appear to have a climate change strategy, but once again these are fine words.
 
They have both committed to not only not allowing the airport to be expanded in terms of greenhouse gas emissions but to actually reduce them by 20% of 1990 levels by 2010 and 60% by 2050.

Are they on target?

Many people say that transport from the airport is low compared to road transport. A 20% reduction of a small figure is still a 20% reduction. If aviation emissions are not reduced then the reductions would need to come from elsewhere. Is this fair? We would assume that Gloucestershire Airport do not consider themselves to be any different from every member of the general public and business in Gloucestershire? Perhaps they do. Aviation fuel is not taxed. British taxpayers subsidise aviation by nine billion pounds each year.

The government’s Aviation White Paper actively encourages airport expansion. Aviation is the fastest growing source of greenhouse gas emissions. These have doubled in the last 13 years and now contribute 11% of the UK’s total emissions. According to the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research if future growth continues unabated every other sector in the UK will have to reduce its emissions to zero by 2037 to reach the 60% target reduction our government and GCC and CBC are committed to.

That means no more power stations (renewables excepted), so no more TV or music or fridges or microwaves or boilers etc, no more cars or trains or lorries, so no more supermarkets or shopping, etc, etc.

It is clear that aviation must not be treated as a special case. CBC and GCC have a duty to Council Tax payers to cut back emissions at the airport and yet the Cheltenham Climate Change Board Action Notes 4th April 2006* (see *below for quote) shows that they are actually intending to expand it, contrary to what the Echo headline says. The Councils have a duty to cut back transport emissions and it should be extremely simple to implement those from the airport as they own it. This seems too good to be true.

This would appear to be a very serious test of CBC’s and GCC’s commitment to tackling the most serious issue facing anyone alive. Our politicians have been given the responsibility to act on everyone’s behalf. They must not shirk from this. It is clear that they can take action to reduce emissions from the airport in line with their commitment in their stategy. Failure to do so is not an option.

A leaflet was handed to protestors by the airport. The leaflet explains that:-

“No expansion is in place. The runway does not comply with current Civil Aviation Authority safety regulations. Therefore work is to address safety issues. The airport represents a hazard to aviation and public safety.”

If the airport is currently endangering life, especially local residents, why has it not been shutdown to until the work has been undertaken?

The leaflet says that:-

 “The number and type of flights have not changed significantly in the past 20 years and are not expected to rise in the future.”

What does significant mean? The leaflet is entitled ‘THE FACTS…’ What are the figures for each of the twenty years? It is surprising that a business has no plans to increase its business in the future, given that the GCC website advertises the airport.

It then says that:- 
“Airport strategic plans aim to attract small hi-tech business aircraft which apparently emit less greenhouse gases and so pollution will fall. “

This sounds like expansion unless the airport is going to reduce current less efficient traffic in proportion (and then a bit more) to the savings made by the hi-tech planes, so that as they say, emissions will fall. When they say pollution, we have assumed they mean greenhouse gas emissions.

The leaflet says that:-

 “CO2 emissions from the airport is negligible compared to motor vehicles and gas/electricity consumption.” Can they please supply figures so that a figure can be put on negligible? There leaflet does not mention the other greenhouse gases flying emits – nitrogen oxide and water vapour.

2.1 million litres of fuel does not sound negligible. Where does the figure of 18 million litres come from that a housing estate would use? The amount of energy a house uses has absolutely nothing to do with transport.

The airport argues that they emit less than a housing estate. Are they arguing that the people of Cheltenham and Gloucester don’t need the houses? If not then the houses need to go somewhere. If they are built and the airport remains open then the houses will pollute but so to will the airport, so it is difficult to see where this argument is going. If houses were built on the airport then cycle paths could serve the bus route on the Gloucester road and the park and ride greatly cutting emissions for all trips to Cheltenham and Gloucester. All houses could (and should) be built with micro-generation and insulation that would mean that they would emit no CO2.

If they are arguing that the airport is greenbelt then it is difficult to see why having aircraft flying over it prevents houses being built. Surely that is what greenbelt means. In other words no airport would just mean green fields; even a nature reserve, served by cycle paths for the people of Cheltenham and Gloucester.

No mention of Gloucestershire Airport or airports protecting greenbelt in general could be found in the South West of England Regional Spatial Strategy. Could this comment be explained? 


* Reference: Cheltenham Climate Change Board Action Notes – 4th April 2006: “Referral from Cheltenham Sustainability Partnership – climate change and future plans for Gloucestershire airport:  the CSP had requested that an explanation be given of how Cheltenham’s climate change strategy was taken into account in preparing the Gloucestershire Airport Five Year Business Plan.  Marie reported that the council had made various requests in relation to climate change to the airport board, which are being looked at currently.  She also confirmed that the airport plan includes more activities related to aviation training, which may mean additional flights but not increased passenger flights, and also some changes to freight flights.  Both Cheltenham and Tewkesbury Borough Councils supported the proposals.  Any expansion will be subject to planning permission from Tewkesbury Borough Council, which will involve public consultation and will enable climate change issues to be raised.”
 

Meeting comment

The meeting in a packed Hall at Chosen Hill School in Churchdown, saw some 300 people - most of whom were protesting about the airport. Cheltenham Green Party's leaflet on Peak Oil and Climate Change was handed out with another from Campaign against Climate Change. The Airport were also handing out their own Information Sheets.
 
The speeches were basically a presentation from Staverton Airport explaining how they were planning on expanding but how good it was for the local community in terms of providing jobs - their figure 450 on analysis turned out to be 35 people employed by the actual Airport company, the other 415 being employed by businesses on the land of the airport - and in terms of income and revenue for the county and money paid to the local Council in business rates. The questions from the audience were mainly related to the noise of the planes, the times they fly (early am and late eve particularly) and how low they fly. The audience were very vocal and angry - the possible expansion of the airport is clearly a very emotive local issue.
 
The local residents' speaker, David Kaye, spoke a bit about the environment and mentioned the Airport's weak argument about CO2 from their Demo leaflet - he called it an insult to our concerns. John Heywood from the Cheltenham Green party asked the same question about 20% reductions in CO2 by 2010 that he had asked in this letter to the Echo on 25th July and the Director, Ian Statham, replied by saying that the Airport doesn't emit more CO2 than a 650 metre stretch of the nearby M5. Not quite the point.
 
However even better than David Kaye's bit and John's question was the leader of Chelt. Borough Council, Cllr Duncan Smith. He spoke near the end of the meeting and started off by saying that the current Council is "more sceptical about the airport's plans for expansion than the last Council". He went on to list 3 concerns about the expansion: Environment and CO2 / Resident's complaints / Quality of life. He went on to tell the Airport that CBC isn't happy with them because they were given a list of questions to answer in a meeting last Nov. and the Airport still hadn't provided satisfactory answers to those questions.

Cathy Green spoke to him afterwards and ended up writing this letter to the Echo:

Dear Editor,

I refer to your coverage of the meeting in Churchdown last Wednesday 26th July concerning the future of Staverton Airport. I too attended this meeting and was truly heartened by the statement of Cllr Duncan Smith concerning the Council’s views on the proposed Airport’s expansion. Cllr Smith cited environmental concerns as one of his reasons for the Council being sceptical about this expansion, and in chatting to him afterwards I found him to be committed to Cheltenham Borough Council’s Climate Change Strategy and he told me that the Council is definitely working towards becoming a carbon-neutral Borough.

 
More and more people must come to understand that because of the damage we have already inflicted on the planet that in order to safeguard our own futures and that of our children we can no longer continue to ‘fiddle while Rome burns’ or while we burn – we need to stop flying except in emergencies and expanding our local airport is not even an option, whatever the financial benefits to a few, it is simply no longer an option.

Cathy Green,
Campaign against Climate Change