Put brakes on airport expansion plans, campaigners urge transport sec

The group of seven campaign groups – Aviation Environment Federation, Possible, New Economics Foundation, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, Climate Catalyst and Opportunity Green – believe decisions on the two proposals would be "premature" without work being undertaken to review and update the government’s overall airports planning framework, which they point out was drafted before the UK legislated for net zero.

"We are deeply concerned that the significant increase in carbon emissions that these expansions will generate will undermine the UK’s ability to meet its legal carbon budgets, environmental goals and net zero plans, and erode the savings envisaged in the government’s Clean Growth Plan," they said, writing to Alexander this week. "It will also bring unacceptable levels of noise, air pollution and disruption for local communities."

’Prevailing assumptions’

The campaigners highlight how the Climate Change Committee has repeatedly advised the government airport expansion should be paused until the aviation sector is on a path to reducing emissions, flagging the slow adoption of alternative fuels and a lack of policy plan to drive technological advances such as zero-emissions aircraft. They also highlight the government’s seventh carbon budget, which is due in February.

In addition, the groups have called for a fresh assessment of the "claimed" economic benefits of aviation, including the maxim that expansion "drives productivity and trade" following a decline in corporate air travel post-Covid. "[The] prevailing assumptions about airport expansion’s contribution to growth must urgently be scrutinise," read the letter.

"We urge you to consider a serious review of the central planning guidance documents around aviation... before taking any decision to expand airports, which will surely throw all these targets into disarray."

The Department for Transport on Tuesday (17 December) confirmed the deadline for a decision on Luton’s expansion plans had been extended by three months, citing Alexander’s recent appointment.

"The reason for the extension is to allow the newly appointed secretary of state appropriate time to fully consider this complex application before making a final determination," said the DfT. "The department will, however, endeavour to issue a decision ahead of the deadline above where possible."

Paul Kehoe, independent chair of Luton Rising, the Luton Council company that owns Luton airport, said the further delay naturally came as a disappointment, although he acknowledged the importance of a "robust" decision-making process – adding Luton stood ready to provide additional information, if needed.

Kehoe said expansion would have a "transformational" economic, employment and social impact for the city and surrounding regions, creating or supporting 11,000 new jobs and making an additional £1.5 billion economic contribution each year.