Return to: Home | Blogs | Public Accounts

2 comments from readers

friends of the North Kent Marshes
19 October 2009 at 23:18

Alongside the RSPB, Friends of the North Kent Marshes are wholly opposed to the construction of an airport anywhere in the Thames Estuary because of the immense damage it would cause to the area’s internationally important wildlife and the wider environment.The whole issue was exhaustively investigated between 2002 and 2005 in the Government’s Aviation White Paper. All the key players, including the aviation industry, contributed. The idea of an airport in the Thames Estuary (not just at Cliffe) was conclusively ruled out and upheld by the High Court. In addition to the unprecedented environmental damage and the resulting massive legal implications, the investigation found that an estuary airport did not make sense economically, would not meet the requirements of the aviation industry and presented a significantly higher risk of ‘bird strike’ than at any other major airport in the UK. It would potentially be the single biggest piece of environmental vandalism ever perpetrated in the UK. The Government would have to recreate any lost or damaged habitat elsewhere BEFORE work on the airport could start and even then only if they could prove there is no alternative site for the expansion and it is in the overriding public interest.They would face a legal battle, which could last for years.

Bernard Jenkin MP
20 October 2009 at 09:35

Your blog is factually wrong. First, Theresa Villiers spells her name with an 'h'. Second, I am not Theresa Villiers' deputy. I am a backbencher. I am Chairman of the All Party Parliamentary Thames Estuary Airport (TEA) Group, whose remit is "To promote consideration of a new airport in the Thames Estuary and its potential to meet airport capacity requirements for London and the South-East of England in the most environmentally acceptable way." Over the weekend I gave my support to Theresa's position on this. She is not currently considering TEA, since the Mayor for London's team has yet to table its proposals. When I served as Shadow Transport Secretary, I took exactly the same line as she is taking, for the same reason. The question is whether a patch-and-mend airports policy for the South East of England is the right answer, or a proper long-term look at all the options. There has been no full consideration of the TEA option since the Roskill Commission of the early 1970s. The recent Aviation White Paper merely included Cliffe as an 'aunt sally', not as a real option. I would never consider Cliffe for environmental reasons. Any TEA option must address all the concerns (such as those raised by the comment above) which prevent Cliffe being a reallistic option.