Non-doms get frequent flyer bonus

By Richard on 13/03/2008
Tags:

Nod-doms

The 2008 Budget will be remembered not for a bang, but for a whimper. But behind the tinkering and the lack of clear vision had lain a glimer of hope for the planet. Darling was to have closed a loophole which actively encourage frequent flying by the much-hated and tax-evading non-doms. At the last minute he faltered, and left it in.

Residents of Monaco and other tax dodge hangouts are able to claim non-dom status if they spent no more than 90 days in the UK each year - but can discount "travel days" from the total. The uber-rich jet in on Monday, fly off on Wednesday and claim they've only worked one day in the UK. Unsuprisingly it's often cheaper to grab an unnecessary short-haul (or more often, private) flight to nowhere in particular than break the 90 day rule and have to shell out some tax for a change.

2008 Budget: pathetically inadequate

By Richard on 12/03/2008
Tags:

Darling budget

We were told it would be a the greenest budget ever, but nothing could be further from the truth. Out went the 2p rise in fuel duty, to appease the vocal minority who drive regularly (just under three-quarters of adults may own a driver's license, but a great many, like me, rarely use it). More importantly, Darling stayed true to Labour's obsession with airport expansion, backing unsustainable growth at Stansted and Heathrow.

Behind the spin, the Chancellor didn’t say much about aviation, even failing to get his own government’s statistics right. "Aviation accounts for 6.3 per cent of the UK’s carbon dioxide emissions." Not technically wrong Darling, but aviation accounts for 13% of the UK's climate impact, because of all the other gases and the height at which they are emitted. Ignoring radiative forcing gives the industry a free ride - not a promising start for someone who is meant to be half-decent at numbers. So what else did he have to say?

Stansted expansion is declaration of war

By Richard on 12/03/2008
Tags:

Stansted_1

The public inquiry into lifting the flight cap is not even finished, and already BAA are eyeing up the true prize - another runway and terminal at Stansted airport. While everyone's eyes are on Heathrow, the Airport's owner unleashed monstrous proposals to double the size of the airport by 2015 and serve 68 million passengers a year by 2030.

Unsurprisingly, Stop Stansted Expansion have taken this rather seriously, calling it "tantamount to a declaration of war on the local community and global environment", and have vowed to use "every means at its disposal" to defeat the plans. But it's not just SSE which is up in arms over the plans. Essex County Council have vowed to fight it "tooth and nail"; the Eastern Regional Green Party dismissed the plans as being "driven by corporate greed and blind ignorance to what they are inflicting on communities and the environment." Even the National Trust is up in arms, because of the impact on nearby Hatfield forest, 10,000 years old and counting.

What does Plane Stupid think of these plans? Do you even need to ask? We'll see you at the barricades!

Heathrow councils challenge night flights

By Richard on 12/03/2008
Tags:

Night flights

If the Government thought the end of the consultation marked the end of hostilities, then they're in for a shock. Bolstered by growing militancy across West London and the UK, local councils are upping the ante. With talk of a judicial review of the consultation being banded about like cheap tickets at a Ryanair sale, Richmond, Wandsworth and Windsor and Maidenhead are taking on night flights.

The councils, backed by the Greater London Authority and a host of other West London boroughs, are seeking to challenge the government in the courts over the legality of the current night flight regime, which they say is noisier than allowed, and therefore illegal. It doesn't stop there though; according to Richmond council's leader, Serge Lourie, "This challenge is another important step along the road to our ultimate goal - a total ban on night flights."

Night flights are strictly limited - in theory - but in practice this leads to more and more airlines rushing to get in before the deadline, causing more noise in the process. With BAA under fire from all sides, and the DfT desperate to pretend it didn't collude with the Airports Authority over the consultation, pressure is growing on Ruth Kely to reign in the industry. Will she rise to the challenge? Doubtful, but perhaps the courts will do what Ministers are too afraid to do - just say no.

DfT and BAA collude over consultation

By Richard on 09/03/2008
Tags:

Parliament 5

It was collusion on a massive scale; a stich-up so great that no one would believe it - until 5 of us took to the rooftops to shout about it. Documents obtained by Greenpeace under the Freedom of Information Act show beyond any doubt that BAA and the Department for Transport sat down to fiddle the figures and re-write the consultation on expanding Heathrow airport. But that was just the beginning...

After the rooftop action last week, someone slipped the Sunday Times even more documents (1 / 2 / 3 / 4), and their investigative reporters looked into it further. What they found showed that the collusion went further than even we'd imagined - that the government abandoned its own data on noise and pollution in favour of dodgy data collected by BAA. They set up 'Project Heathrow', headed up by senior civil servant David Gray, to fix the "strict local environmental limits" in favour of expansion. In the words of one official who worked on the project: "It’s a classic case of reverse engineering. They knew exactly what results they wanted and fixed the inputs to get there."

Ediburgh airport: new runway surface, same BAA spin

By Lucy on 09/03/2008
Tags:

Roam

Six members of Plane Stupid Scotland attended an information evening hosted by BAA about the impact that runway resurfacing will have on local communities around Edinburgh Airport. BAA wants to resurface the main runway at Edinburgh airport, renewing its life for 10 years and enabling it to cope with the planned increase in passenger numbers.

The resurfacing work will mean that flight paths will be changed, causing noise pollution over houses that have not previously been affected. Noise pollution from aviation has been linked to high blood pressure, coronary heart disease, strokes and problems in children’s mental and physical development. Unsurprisingly, BAA is keeping kind of quiet about all that - come to think of it, they kept pretty quiet about the consultation meeting as well. The only advert in the local paper gave the wrong venue.