expansion

As the consultation deadline approaches, councils across London stand united against expansion. Hounslow, Windsor and Maidenhead, Kensington and Chelsea, Lambeth, Wandsworth, Hillingdon and many others are all opposed to expansion. Of the councils near the airport, only Spelthorne supports expansion, although rumours of bribery are emerging, after BAA promised to supply mobility buses to the cash-strapped borough just before it pulled out of the 2M group.

Of course, Lord Soley, Acton resident and head of Future Heathrow, supports expansion. He paints a horrible picture of London's future without an aviation industry given carte blanche to expand at will. "Unless we get permission for this runway we are stuck. Passenger numbers are stuck, destinations are going down and we will have to close Heathrow." Sounds great Clive: on behalf of the two million people who can't get a good night's sleep because of planes overhead, where do I sign?

Want to show the Government you don't support expansion? Come to the Westminster rally on Monday the 25th of February. 7pm, Central Hall.

Heathrow expansion must go ahead, say Ministers, or London will be transformed overnight into a third-world city, whose population huddle under the yellow glare of street lamps and burn copies of thelondonpaper to keep warm. Not so, claim consultancy firm CE Delft, who have released a HACAN-funded report which debunks the economic arguments in favour of expansion.

The report explodes the myth that expansion and the economy are intrinsically linked. The DfT claim that each extra passenger brings £120 into the economy, putting the net benefit of expansion at £4.4 billion over 70 years. But CD Delft point out that this ignores the huge tax subsidy to the industry (currently around £10 billion per year). The overall benefit is closer to £30 per passenger. Additionally, £3 billion of the projected economic benefit will be money raised by the Government through aviation duty - leaving a direct boost to the private economy of about £1.4 billion a year.

As the battle for the London Mayor warms up, so the press releases by the candidates get wilder and wilder. If King Newt announces free bus travel for under-18s, Boris proposes banning non-adults from buses altogether. Meanwhile Paddick throws his lot in with the cabbies, and everyone steals Sian's opposition to the third runway.

But the latest idea doing the rounds is the Thames Estuary airport. Long known primarily for being the sort of place your parents complained that you sounded like you came from, the Thames Estuary is now being promoted by Boris Johnson as the solution to the whole 'economy v Londoners' battle which rages nightly in the Evening Standard.

Could this be the latest excuse for not doing your homework? The Evening Standard has identified that if the third runway goes ahead, over 100,000 pupils will have their lessons interupted by the roar of jet engines.

Although schools closest to the runway will suffer from the loudest noise, schools in Kensington and Chelsea and Hammersmith and Fulham will also have regular overhead flights, at up to one every minute-and-a-half. Hardly a peaceful learning environment.

The schools affected are all listed in the Standard article, and include Oratory Roman Catholic Primary School, the feeder school for London Oratory (as formerly attended by the children of one ex-PM, Tony Blair). Would the runway be getting such government support if they were still going there?