Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Tamsin Omond

GET UPDATES FROM Tamsin Omond
 

"Book Early, Pay Less" - Regional Airports Are Bad For The Community

Posted: 03/08/11 01:00 BST

A new Easyjet hub for cheap Euro-wide flights is searching for its market. London Southend Airport will open to its public in April 2012. Southend on Sea's council, the airport's owners, Stobart Transport and Easyjet - who stand to benefit the most from this airport - must be basking in excited anticipation. The local residents, bamboozled by their council's lies, nod along whilst their sleepy airport (one commercial return flight a week) prepares itself to be inundated. Easyjet have been promised 800,000 passengers per year by the end of 2012. This figure will rise to 2million by 2020.

What lies do you tell a community whose lives you plan to interrupt - minute by minute - with flights overhead?

Southend council, have gone for 'urban regeneration' and - more extraordinary - that the planes that fly in to Southend will be quiet planes...

The second claim should make you laugh out loud except that it is so accepted by those who stand to suffer. It's the same lie that was told to the residents of Greenwich and Newham when the capacity of London City Airport increased from 73,000 flights a year to 120,000. Unfortunately it's just not true. In the words of the Aviation Environment Federation's most recent report into noise pollution from UK airports: "All 19 airport NAPs [Noise Action Plans] produced in England and Northern Ireland allow, or actively plan, increases in aircraft noise [...] the English and Northern Ireland airports have collectively failed to accept the spirit of the Environmental Noise Directive, and have in fact subverted its aims and objectives." They include Southend Airport and London City Airport in this list of deceivers.

The excuse of 'urban regeneration' is a little trickier to unpick. The number of jobs promised to Southend residents has dropped from the earliest projection of 1,130 to just 150. Questionable short-term economic benefits are promoted by a very powerful lobby who write reports, articles and promote this myth in the halls of influence. The oppositional voice, by contrast, is small, under-funded and says things that people in power don't like to hear, like:

If cheap short-haul flights are so good for the economy then...

Why has the UK tourism deficit risen rapidly over the decade to some £12billion?

Why is the aviation industry exempt from VAT - a revenue-raising tax?

and

Why have there been massive subsidies for aviation manufacturers?

But there remains a more pernicious myth to bust - don't airports give the poorest and most vulnerable in our society an opportunity to enjoy a foreign holiday?

Again - not true.

Social classes A/B/C (i.e. the middle classes) accounted for 65% of leisure flights in 1987 and a mighty 73% in 2004. Airports and cheap flights allow the affluent to make believe an even more luxurious lifestyle. Socio-economic classes D/E - the poorest and most vulnerable in our society - make up 33% of the population but account for just 10% of air travel.

An airport on your doorstep damages health, diminishes house-price and impairs children's education, yet inceasingly local communities are accepting airport expansions in their back yard. If local Council planning committees continue to push through regional expansion plans - as the Localism Bill 2011 encourages - then again and again the health and wealth of the most fragile members of a community will be threatened whilst privileged community leaders reap rewards.

Almost every airport in the UK is expanding. Local residents have complained, written letters, even forked out for expensive legal challenges, yet when it comes to both London City and Southend, every 'democratic' challenge has been defeated. Thomas Jefferson has words of advice for those who will still oppose: 'When injustice becomes law; resistance becomes duty'. What does this mean to the momentum of airport expansion? I encourage you to put your liberty on the line and find out.

Get in touch with @tamsinomond or @climaterush today.

 

Follow Tamsin Omond on Twitter: www.twitter.com/tamsinomond

 
 
  • Comments
  • 7
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Roy Fowler
I try....I really do!
11:18 AM on 08/07/2011
I, when i can afford it, go on holiday abroad. I love to travel to far away places and see new people eat new food and see local sights.

I live in Southampton and therefore i HAVE to go to London to fly.

So i spend money on a taxi or long stay airport parking, i add to the millions of road users, i add to the cost of my holiday, i add to the planes above Londons crowded skies.

I would rather see investmnet put into Southampton Airport, expanding the runway or building a new one, creating building jobs and long term jobs in the Airports infrastructure and putting from then on in my money would go into my local economy.

Regional Airports are vital and the rubbish spouted about "bad for health, bad for residents" is a poor and often spouted line when those who have no "real" answers to modern societies needs have their say.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mediumal57
Moderate Extremist
05:24 PM on 08/03/2011
Another Nimby protesting the fact that people want to fly. These residents that you are saying are having their lives blighted by this decision to expand flight traffic at their local airfield - I suppose none have ever flown, taken a car ride or used public transport of any kind in their entire lives?

Get bloody real will you. We need local airports to expand to take some of the pressure off the major hubs for Christ sake. Go live on a remote island if you want peace and quiet and let the rest of us who value the 21st century we're living in take its course.
01:58 PM on 08/03/2011
Quite a few errors in this article. There are actually 32 commercial flights per week currently to Galway and Waterford in Ireland and a Saturday flight to Jersey. Everybody in the town knows about the airport and about 95% of them want the airport to expand. Also you maybe interested to know that so far Southend has sold three times as many tickets as Stansted on like for like easyJet routes. The job target is still on track for the 1,130. The 150 is based on easyjet staff alone, this does not include airport staff, as well as the hundreds working in the new terminal. Overall this article lacks knowledge and seems to be one big moan about something that is seen as a positive development for the town.
02:37 PM on 08/03/2011
375 flights promised is still significantly less than the number originally promised: http://www.saen.org.uk/2011/06/easyjet-announcement-undermines-entire-case-for-expansion-at-southend-airport/. Southend's expansion hasn't been much challenged by locals. I read an Evening Standard article and it seems most are excited - although whether they will still be when there are 800,000 passengers overhead (and what about the crash zone - I've heard there's a school in the crash zone...).
07:14 PM on 08/03/2011
I have not heard anything about a school in the crash zone and if so the plans would not have been allowed. At the extended end of the runway there are several acres of fields and at the other there is the railway and a road with houses on - no school as far as I know. I agree that there hasn't been much local protest, but there has from just one group SAEN. If you look at their site, it is full of incorrect figures and information for example the road is not being shut, but diverted.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MancRat
12:10 PM on 08/03/2011
What makes me "laugh out loud" is people who pontificate on issues concerning areas they obviously have no connection to.

"South End"....? Please. Even the most disconnected local knows it is Southend, the traditional holiday destination of working class Londoners for generations.

this article stinks of someone looking for a windmill to tilt at and picking up opportunistically on local opposition to Easyjet. The Southend (note spelling) Airport debate is much more complex than the carpetbagger rant above. It is using existing facilities as well as offering better links into London than Stansted, where airlines are drawing down their presence. Southend services could easily see a net reduction in carbon output per passenger as car journeys are replaced by convenient electric train ones to the Southend Airport station from London and reduced taxi/hold times for the aircraft.

Tamsin, next time you look for a campaign to jump aboard, at least do a little research and it will stop you looking foolish.
11:58 AM on 08/03/2011
Re rail expansion which could help reduce soem demand fro flying. Rail systems eat land.

Lord Adonis tells us we need a rail system for the 21st century. I agree.

But he does not agree with me:

New high speed rail should be in CUT-AND-COVER tunnels.

See images:

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&safe=off&rlz=1C1CHFX_en-GBGB437GB437&biw=1920&bih=979&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=cut+and+cover+tunnels&oq=cut+and+cover+tunnels&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=113824l117904l0l118431l21l19l0l9l9l0l331l2076l1.3.5.1l10l0