Labour

Source: Flickr

It is a great day to be alive - unless you're BAA or the Government. In one of the most devastating condemnations of Government transport policy ever seen, the High Court has ruled that the case for Heathrow expansion has no economic or environmental basis. The ruling is so damning that the 2003 Air Transport White Paper - the cornerstone of the Government's aviation policy - is now only suitable for lining cat litter trays.

Firstly, Lord Justice Carnwath found that the economic case underestimated the economic impact of climate change - the external cost to society of mitigating greenhouse gas emissions. The actual cost is three times larger than the figure used to calculate the economic benefit.

Two years ago WWF and transport academic Keith Buchan found that using proper Treasury calculations and doubling the value of climate change used in the Government's calculations turned the £5 billion claimed benefit into a £5 billion deficit (i.e. it cost society £5 billion). Imagine what tripling the value would do!

Having dispatched the economic case, Carnwath turned to climate change. It was ridiculous, he argued, for the Government to ignore its own legislation, i.e. the Climate Change Act 2008. When the Government rewrites aviation policy later this year, it will have to take account of climate change in a real and considered manner. This means that all airport expansion can be challenged on climate change grounds, until the Government or industry can show how having ever more planes in the sky is compatible with reducing CO2 emissions.

Finally he looked at surface access. The Government claimed that you could increase by around 40% the number of people travelling to Heathrow without turning West London into a giant car park and pushing the Picaddilly line beyond capacity. Nonsense, cried the judge, citing evidence from Transport for London which showed very, very clearly that there wasn't going to be anything like enough road or tube space for all these extra people to fit into.

As if that wasn't enough, Carnwath turned his mind to the wider idea of challenging Government policy at public inquiries. It was not enough for the Government to say "this is our policy, so shut up and take it". While some aspects of policy were cut and dry there were some grey areas which the public had the right to challenge. The need for a particular motorway or airport should be open to challenge and debate, and public inquiries were the forum for doing this.

I've read the occasional verdict in my time, and this one is sensational. It's well worth reading through the judge's reasoning, if only to see just how spurious and ill-thought out the Government's case is. For once, I have nothing but praise for the legal system... normal service to resume shortly!

Source: Flickr

Firstly, a confession. My last post to this site - one of my shortest and least considered - was entirely taken up with gloating about Geoff Hoon's resignation. In my haste I overlooked something rather important. Geoff Hoon was one of the best Secretary of States we've had.

I know it's a radical position, but consider the facts. Hoon entered the Cabinet less than a year ago and made a massive impact. He seized upon Heathrow's expansion and made it his own; fighting Tories, backbenchers, environmentalists and pretty much everyone else to keep the expansion on track. And by doing so, he caused it to derail, spectacularly.

Hoon, you see, was such an unlikeable little shit that he made opposing Heathrow the obvious option. Watching him stagger about the Commons was enough to turn even the staunchest expansionist a deep shade of green. Nothing showed the strength of opposition to the third runway than Hoon having to round up his backbenchers at gunpoint to vote against an opposition resolution.

Look back over the last ten months: a motorway expansion programme left in ruins; airport expansion all but wiped out; every major Government transport initiative collapsing and Hoon's oily fingermarks everywhere. While lesser politicians might have given an inch, Hoon wedged himself into a corner and sat there chewing his own arm off like a rabid dog.

Now the great man is heading to Copenhagen. Environmentalists are scared: this is the climate change denier, they say, who wants to expand airports and tarmac the countryside. But they are wrong: for all his talks of "tree-hugging hoolah" he's obviously a deep ecologist hellbent on exposing the talks as a market-driven folly. After all, this is the man who destroyed any support for neo-Liberal interventionism by dragging us into Iraq. I wouldn't rule anything out now the wild card is in play.

Foreign Secretary David Miliband has asked to get his own private jet. Even when Blair and the royals were refused them last year on environmental grounds, Miliband has the gall to put his perceived needs before all else. Apparently the former Secretary of State for the Environment needs a special plane because... other people have one.

Flying, even in a commercial jet, is one of the worst things you can do in terms of carbon emissions. So for Ministers to demand their own private jet epitomises the lack of understanding, leadership and commitment to environmental issues that we have seen from this government. We can only hope that Ed Miliband, Secretary of State for Climate Change and David’s brother, will give David a good talking to around the family kitchen table.

Not wanting to unfairly berate a public figure, I did some calculations to see what kind of environmental impact this would have. If Miliband took a return flight to Washington he would use approximately 73 tons of CO2. That is over 7 times the average annual emissions for one person living in the UK. Say it again to yourself, slowly. Seven times you or my annual CO2 emissions. On one return flight. Unless Miliband is literally defecating rainforests he won't be able to offsetting these flights.

This comes at a bad time for Government, who just announced that it was unlikely to hit its own emissions reduction target of 12.5 % by 2011-12. No wonder, with officals and Ministers trying to fly everwhere. The Sustainable Development Commission argued that civil servants shouldn't be able to fly domestically or to EU destinations easily reachable by train. I don’t think it even crossed their minds that anyone would be so audacious as to demand a bloody private jet!

I bet Mandy was wishing it was guacamole, but let’s be clear: it was green custard. Now bookies are taking bets as to what the next dessert will be (3:1 on spotted dick). Brown managed to keep the tone nice and light:

"If anybody doubted the greening of Peter Mandelson and his willingness to take the green agenda on his shoulders we've seen it in practice on our television screens already this morning."

Ho ho ho.

Don’t get us wrong, we can see the funny side. Well, actually we were rolling around in hilarity at the pictures. But there’s a serious point here: Mandy met his best mate Roland Rudd several times in the run up to the Heathrow decision. Rudd happens to be BAA’s top lobbyist. So what deals were struck? What happened on that yacht? And why is an unelected stooge of Big Carbon deciding our future?