Why I've resigned over the third runway

Andy

Im still unsure about the project. Too many issues that are hard to balance.

But I admire your conviction. NuLabour need a lot more "conviction" rather than "career" politicians

I can't say I agree with you on the subject, but I dont hink anyone will criticising you for resigning.

I think really the biggest problems with Heathrow are to do with noise and moving people out of their homes to build the runway. The environmental argument should have the facts re-stated. Firstly, air travel is the cause of 9% of this country's emissions, which is exactly the same as agriculture. No one seems to be protesting about that though. Aircraft are more efficient and quieter than they were even 10 years ago, and will continue to become quieter and even more efficent in the future. We should not let the economic arguments be forgotten either- thie is a recession and we need to get people into work. We need to keep people in work. We need extra capacity for our national Capital to keep it as the Number 1 Business destination. If we are to bid for the Football World Cup then we will need to deal with the extra tourists.

As someone who has used Heathrow relatively frequently, I know what a frustration it is waiting on the tarmac for ages, as the flight is delayed. I know what it is like having to circle over the South East for an Hour. As someone who struggles in pain on landing, this was one torture that I take exeption to prolongiong. The Third runway should be to make the airport more efficient at take off and landing. So I find it puzzling that our esteemed Mayor would say there was a security threat of having more planes flying over London. Clearly a third runway should ease those fears by getting planes out of the air and landing them quicker. Also It cannot be safe that the two current runways run at 100% capacity. That is an environmental hazard these planes flying longer than they need to and having ther engines on for longer than necessary.

I understand that local people will oppose something that intrudes on their lives, but The nation needs this project to keep moving. We should worry about the Environmental impacts, and I was happy to hear that the Government would not allow one extra flight if they diddnt meet the existing standards targets. On balance, however, I do feel that we may need the third runway. I dont expect people to agree with me, but I think there should be a balanced argument, which frankly isnt happening in the Media.

Well done Andy. If only we could have defeated this in the Commons tonight. In the end people's homes and lives and our futures can't be about whether a motion was put forward by the Tories or not. After all, John Grogan wrote the darned thing!

Keep up the fight; we can reverse this thing yet.

Good for you. The government took the 12 bore to their feet when then made this decision. They can no longer claim any moral high ground over environmental policy and the next time people are berated for not receycling enough or are lumbered with another carbon tax through fuel duty or road pricing we can all point to Heathrow and say "yes and...?" I long for the day a party can come up with a creative agenda for turning the UK into a paragon of a low carbon economy (R&D into renewables, support for start ups, feed in tariffs). Another area where Labour are ceding the agenda to the tories.

I do agree that you have made the right decision and I support you fully in your campaign to stop it being built.
The only advantage that I can see to this is that it will bring more money into England to help the economy, but that is only short-term and it is far outweighed by the disadvantages: Pollution, noise and disruption to people's lives. I am 100% against this new runway and I again congratulate you on the stand which you have.

Nicola Mortin

I think you've made absolutely the right decision, and I applaud you for doing so. It can't have been easy.

I am an environmentalist, and the environmental arguments against the Heathrow announcement are clear and obvious, but I am also a lifelong Labour supporter, and what distresses me most about this is what an utterly stupid political decision it was.

It's the sort of decision that should only be made within the first year following an election, as the political fall out is too massive and needs to be ameliorated.

The proposed jobs won't be seen in time to sway anyone's opinion. Most will also be temporary, and are therefore not helping to build sustainable communities.

We will lose seats in West London over this. We will lose council seats and fail to win back council seats in West London over this. We will be at a serious disadvantage in the London Mayoral and GLA elections over this. People and the services they rely on will be abandoned by the Tories, and we will have allowed this to happen by taking a vastly unpopular decision that benefits a few better off members of society at the expense of many.

We have handed Cameron back his environmental credentials in one stroke. He - more than anyone else in the country - needed the Government to make this decision. It gives him back a massive progressive platform, backed by huge swathes of civic society.

When questioning senior Labour figures about this, the answer I have been given is that the polling indicates that people don't care about the environment at the moment because of the recession. True or not, that doesn't make it politically or morally right not to be leaders on this issue. I haven't seen the polls spiking massively in response to this decision. Not one extra parliamentary seat will be won because we have made this decision, and several will be lost. In an election that could be as tight as this one, that matters.

And if we do lose, and losing London seats will contribute towards that, the runway won't be built anyway, and we'll have thrown away - and donated to Cameron - all that political capital for nothing.

I agree with you. But actually I suspect the Tories would build this too. Obviously if an election were soon and they won, they couldn't do such a massive u-turn too early, but wealthy and powerful business interests are always going to sway a Tory government more than environmental concerns and bulldozing a few communities.

As with so many of the mistakes our Labour governments have made since 1997, while there's no getting away from the fact that its a Labour government that's got it wrong, it's actually only a different Labour government that might put it right too.

I don't think the Tories will/would build it anyway. But I think they've given themselves enough wiggle room to increase capacity in Stanstead and Luton, so environmentalists certainly shouldn't welcome a Tory government with open arms.

I agree that it's essential that we maintain a Labour government for so many reasons. That's one of the reasons I get so upset when we do something so pigheadedly stupid!