|
|
Written by Joe Peacock
|
|
Sunday, 01 April 2012 00:00 |
|
When we first suggested that Birmingham wanted to be a London airport, we thought that this would be seen as an awful idea and a real negative for anyone living near it, but in fact they are now playing this card themselves as they get the final funding clearance for the runway extension.
With £25 million of taxpayers money secured for moving the road in order to facilitate the extension, the airport's shareholders have finally agreed to dip their hands in their pockets to fund the building of the rest of it.
From all the coverage in the press, you would think that it was currently impossible for anyone to reach Birmingham by air and now suddenly all these businesspeople will magically appear with open chequebooks ready to pour millions into the local economy and create thousands of jobs.
The reality, of course, is that we already have investment here from India, China, the USA and the Far East, but far more money flows out of the economy due to aviation than flows in. The massive tourism deficit will be exacerbated while local people suffer the effects of noise and air pollution.
Why would anyone want to aspire to have another London airport here? |
|
Last Updated on Thursday, 05 April 2012 17:05 |
|
|
Green Light for More Noise and Pollution |
|
Written by Joe Peacock
|
|
Thursday, 01 March 2012 16:35 |
|
Following the announcement that the main shareholders in Birmingham Airport will sanction the investment in the extension of the runway at the airport Joe Peacock of Birmingham Friends of the Earth said:
“Given the consent that was given to the planning application and the promise of large amounts of public money to help fund it, this comes as no great surprise.
We are obviously still disappointed that the insatiable demand of this over-subsidised industry to expand without taking responsibility for its external costs; such as climate change, the tourism deficit and increased noise and pollution here and abroad takes precedence over other more beneficial local public transport schemes.”
Later on this spring we will be invited by the Government to engage with a consultation on the Sustainable Framework for UK aviation (1). As the debate about the growth of aviation in the South East rages, we in the West Midlands will have to bear in mind the role of “London” Birmingham Airport and its drive for growth.
Peacock continued
“The aviation industry needs reigning in and it has to start to pay its fair share for the damage it causes locally and globally.
"The heavily public funded runway extension project is bad enough but we will all need to engage in the Sustainable Framework for UK aviation consultation if we are not going to see plans emerge for even greater expansion at Birmingham Airport.”
ENDS
Notes for editors
(1)Taking into account the responses we receive to this document, we will publish a draft policy framework for public consultation in March 2012, and formally adopt the framework by March 2013
From Developing a sustainable framework for UK aviation: Scoping document 2011 |
|
Last Updated on Thursday, 01 March 2012 16:45 |
|
Written by Joe Peacock
|
|
Wednesday, 08 February 2012 12:25 |
|
Responding to Birmingham Airport's proud declaration that it is going to save 22 tonnes of CO2 a year by installing solar panels on its terminal roof, Birmingham Friends of the Earth campaigner Joe Peacock said:
"These savings need to be put into context. It is 22 tonnes compared to 900 000 emitted by the operations of the airport overall.
"If they were really serious about saving CO2 the only way to do this would be to have fewer flights, but that conflicts with their business model rather than installing panels that will make them money.
"There is nothing wrong with having solar panels on their roof, but it is totally disingenuous to claim to be concerned about reducing the CO2 emissions of their operations when this action accounts for about 0.003% of them.
"It is rather like the morbidly obese gourmand giving up a weekly tube of Smarties and pretending this will help him lose weight."
More information on the carbon emissions of the airport can be found on the Airport Watch website: http://www.airportwatch.org.uk/?p=1007#CO2
|
|
Last Updated on Wednesday, 08 February 2012 12:51 |
|
|
Birmingham Friends of the Earth response to calls for more investment in Birmingham Airport |
|
Written by Joe Peacock
|
|
Monday, 30 January 2012 17:11 |
|
Press Release: 27th January 2012
Responding to the Chamber of Commerce's proposals that the taxpayer invest money into Birmingham Airport rather than a new one in the South East, Joe Peacock of Birmingham Friends of the Earth stated:
“Not only is it environmentally irresponsible to encourage more public funding of airports, but is likely to increase the amount of job losses locally and the amount of money flowing out of the region as people fly abroad.
“In 2010, the number of British citizens travelling abroad for tourism from Birmingham Airport was 6 times the number of foreign leisure travellers coming in.
“The Thames Estuary airport plans are complete madness and never likely to be built, but using that to opportunistically propose even more government money to damaging the local environment and increasing noise here is equally reprehensible.
“We hope that the government's new aviation policy will finally give us a framework that recognises the need for aviation to meet its environmental costs, as well as paying a fair amount of tax.”
Notes:
1) BIrmingham FoE's report on the costs to the local economy from aviation is available here. www.birminghamfoe.org.uk/images/final report.pdf
2) This is a response to the Birmingham Post article "Chamber Calls for Investment in Birmingham Airport instead of Boris Island":
http://www.birminghampost.net/birmingham-business/birmingham-business-news/businesslatest/2012/01/27/chamber-calls-for-investment-in-birmingham-airport-instead-of-boris-island-65233-30212167/ |
|
Last Updated on Monday, 30 January 2012 17:11 |
|
Airport Benefits? Lost Jobs and a Massive Deficit |
|
Written by Joe Peacock
|
|
Thursday, 27 October 2011 11:26 |
|
Birmingham Friends of the Earth have dismissed claims that the government should prioritise Birmingham Airport in their new policy.
With new research showing overblown projections of growth, billions already being lost to the local economy and totally misleading job creation predictions, the green group say that allowing further subsidies to the industry will only further damage businesses in Birmingham.
Joe Peacock from Birmingham Friends of the Earth said “Our research for this policy review shows that on average, the tax subsidy per (direct) job in the aviation industry is £50,000 a year. This simply cannot be a wise use of money in times of such economic uncertainties.
“The climate change problems with aviation are well known and if the predicted increases in flights happen, CO2 emissions from the airport will dwarf those from the city of Birmingham. However, what's been ignored is the negative impact it's having on jobs and a local thriving business environment.
“Aviation last year cost the region 85,431 jobs according to our research and if the numbers of flights increase, this could peak at around 300 000 jobs in 2030.”
Birmingham Friends of the Earth calls for subsidies into the runway extension to be re-examined and a moratorium on airport expansion.
Notes to Editors
-
This press response refers to the article “Hope for Birmingham Airport ahead of new UK aviation policy”: http://www.birminghampost.net/birmingham-business/birmingham-business-news/other-uk-business/2011/10/26/hope-for-birmingham-airport-ahead-of-new-uk-aviation-policy-65233-29660217/#ixzz1bs6kQLR2
-
For more information on Birmingham Friends of the Earth’s stance on Aviation issues, please visit http://www.birminghamfoe.org.uk/aviation
-
Their response to the Government's aviation consultation is available at: http://www.birminghamfoe.org.uk/bfoe-on-flying/developing-a-sustainable-framework-for-uk-aviation
For more information contact: Joe Peacock (Birmingham Friends of the Earth)
0121 632 6909
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
|
|
Last Updated on Thursday, 27 October 2011 11:26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 7 |
