← More from My London
Hillingdon Council has called for the community impact of a third Heathrow runway to be considered in the decision making process and pointed out a flaw in the government's current plan.
In a meeting of Cabinet on Thursday, September 17, Councillor Steve Tuckwell slammed the government's "four tests" measuring whether to approve a third runway at Heathrow. He said: "It talks about four tests - economic growth, air quality, noise, and climate change - but there is no meaningful pass or fail criteria, there are no clear red lines, and no obvious point which the answer becomes no.
"A decision-making framework which cannot realistically say no isn't much of a decision-making framework at all."
On Tuesday, September 15, Ian Thynne, the Head of Environmental Planning Specialists at Hillingdon Council, told the parliamentary Transport Committee that he believes an additional fifth test exploring the local community impact of a third runway should be introduced. Published during the Starmer premiership, the government said it would assess the proposals against:
Mr Thynne said: “We have asked for a fifth test around the community...I think the impacts on communities have been lost in this when we start talking about national growth, and the residents have had to put up with a lot over the years. Elevating a community impact test would not just get a proper assessment of the current implications of Heathrow for the local community, but set stronger targets to ensure that we have proper controls so that the community is put front and centre of growth going forward."
He added: "It is about making sure that the local areas are better off with expansion… It is all well and good for growth to go up for various other parts of the country, but the impacts are felt very much at the local level. If the benefits are not going there, it is just communities being left alone really."
Responding to this, Anna Sutherland Bamber from the National Infrastructure Planning Association said: “The four tests put forward are the four that have obviously faced a lot of scrutiny. I think, if you start putting in a fifth one, the question would be, 'Well, should we have a sixth one? Should we have a seventh one? Should we have an eighth one?' At what point do you draw the line?”
Alex Mayer MP then asked whether it is possible to fail the tests in the way they are currently drafted. Ms Sutherland Bamber said that she could not respond to the question, however Mr Thynne argued that it was not possible to fail the tests - rather they have been set up to pass and ultimately lead to the approval of a third runway.
He said: “What happens here is, because of this fairly contrived designation of critical national growth infrastructure, that basically puts all the small amounts of positivity into a massive great big box that can never be outweighed. It does not matter what is in that box or how weak the economic argument is; that outweighs everything else that we are going to find out.
“In terms of the air quality test, you can pollute and that is allowed. In terms of noise, you can pollute—again—and that is allowed. In terms of climate change, you might not meet your targets, but that is allowed. That is all because of this contrived policy terminology that sits on one side and cannot be outweighed.”
Stay informed about the latest West London news. Sign up for our MyWestLondon newsletter HERE to receive daily updates and more.