Transport select committee calls for seven-hour respite for locals near airport plus pledges on cost

This article is more than 2 years old

This article is more than 2 years old

Tougher rules on night flights and keeping costs to passengers down are needed before parliament should approve Heathrow’s third runway, MPs have told the government.

The transport select committee said it believed the London hub airport’s expansion scheme should go ahead, but only after the government addressed numerous concerns over its environmental impact.

Sign up to the daily Business Today email or follow Guardian Business on Twitter at @BusinessDesk

The MPs demanded more stringent safeguards on noise and air quality, as well as assurances that the cost of development would not be passed on in higher charges, which could mean higher air fares.

They proposed a minimum average of seven hours respite each night for local residents under flight paths, and increased funds to insulate their houses from noise.

Their report also called for more detail and guarantees over domestic flight connections from an expanded Heathrow – a key pledge in winning support nationwide, but which has attracted scepticism from airlines and opponents.

The committee has been scrutinising a draft national policy statement (NPS) on aviation, which will be voted on by parliament this summer. If approved, it would in effect give outline planning permission for a third runway at Heathrow.

True cost of Heathrow third runway must be revealed, say MPs Read more

Despite hearing evidence that the economic benefits described in the Airports Commission report had been greatly revised down by the Department for Transport – to the point where a runway at Gatwick was rated more highly on several measures – the committee accepted that expansion at Heathrow would “deliver strategic objectives for greater connectivity for passengers and freight”.

But the MPs said, despite pledges by the government and Heathrow to mitigate the impacts of expansion at Heathrow, additional safeguards were needed in the policy statement going before parliament.

Committee chair Lilian Greenwood said the recommendations would improve the policy and reduce the chances of a successful legal challenge, which councils and environmental groups are expected to launch. She said:

“At present, the draft NPS does not guarantee that passengers will be protected from the cost risks associated with the scheme. The secretary of state must set out how airport charges will be held down.”

She added: “Thousands of people across London could be exposed to worse levels of noise, air quality and traffic congestion – there must be sufficient measures to protect or compensate them.”

John Stewart, chair of campaign group HACAN, said: “Although disappointed the committee didn’t reject the third runway, we welcome the tougher environmental conditions which it has recommended. In particular we welcome its recommended seven-hour night flight ban.”

Currently there is a ban on scheduled night flights from 11.30pm until 4.30am, which the government has proposed extending to six and a half hours.

Heathrow’s third runway scheme was recommended by the Airports Commission in 2015 and given government approval in December 2016. The airport has since been working to reduce the cost of the project, which the commission estimated at £17.6bn, to £14.3bn, and to allay airline fears that charges would rise steeply to pay for new infrastructure.

A Heathrow spokesperson said: “This report couldn’t be clearer – Heathrow is the right answer for the UK and parliament should green-light the policy for Heathrow expansion and allow the project to move into the planning phase.

“We are also clear that we will deliver an expanded Heathrow that is sustainable, affordable and financeable and maintains Britain’s position as a global trading powerhouse.”

Opponents have warned that the public is not being fully informed about the wider costs of the scheme, which, according to Transport for London, will require at least an additional £10bn of spending on surrounding rail and road infrastructure.

A Department for Transport spokeswoman said the report was very clear that a third runway at Heathrow was the best option for delivering more airport capacity. “Expansion will only proceed if it meets strict environmental obligations and offers a world-class package of compensation and mitigations for local communities.”