Response to the Future of Air Transport in the UK: Scotland

by John Barrett, Member of Parliament for Edinburgh West and Margaret Smith, Member of the Scottish Parliament for Edinburgh West.

INTRODUCTION

1. As the elected parliamentary representatives of the Edinburgh West constituency, we welcome this opportunity to submit a response to the Future of Development of Air Transport in the United Kingdom: Scotland consultation document.

2. With Edinburgh airport located within our constituency, any development of the site will have a major impact on the people we represent. We therefore look forward to the early publication by the Government of a white paper, following the analysis of the responses to this consultation. In light of the delay that has already taken place to the white paper, following the court decision over the South East document, we hope that the Government will produce concrete proposals as early as it is possible to do so, so that the uncertainty in local communities around Edinburgh airport or under the flight paths, such as Kirkliston, Ratho Station and Cramond can be brought to a speedy conclusion.

3. We hope that the views which have been submitted by our constituents to the consultation will be listened to closely. We have sought to advertise the consultation as widely as possible and hope the first hand experiences of people living close to Edinburgh airport and its flight paths will be taken on board.

4. We endorse the response to the consultation, submitted by Don Foster MP, the Liberal Democrat Shadow Transport Secretary and Tom Brake MP, the Liberal Democrat Transport and Aviation Spokesman and would agree with the general comments made to overall UK development of air transport.

NEW CENTRAL SCOTLAND AIRPORT

5. We fully support the conclusion contained in the consultation document that building a brand new airport in Central Scotland is not economically viable. We believe that it makes sound fiscal and practical sense to make maximum use of the existing facilities which exist both in Edinburgh and Glasgow.

THE BENEFIT OF AIR EXPANSION

6. From the onset, we recognise the significant benefits of an expansion in air transport to and from Edinburgh Airport. Edinburgh is a city which is heavily dependent on tourism and we believe an increase in the number of direct flights to and from international destinations will encourage foreign visitors to visit the City, with corresponding positive benefits to the local and wider economy. We recognise that Edinburgh acts as a gateway for Scotland and that any development of Edinburgh airport should be used to also benefit the wider Scottish economy.

7. We also recognise the current disadvantages which many of our constituents suffer in comparison to those living in the South of England, through a lack of direct flights to holiday destinations from Edinburgh and Scotland in general. Since our respective elections, we have received complaints from a number of constituents, angry that they are forced to travel to other airports in England or to mainland Europe in order to board connecting flights to their final intended destination, often at an increased cost. We hope that an increase in the number of direct flights from Edinburgh will, first and foremost, benefit our constituents through quicker journeys and at cheaper prices.

8. We realise that Edinburgh airport and the air transport industry acts as a major local employer. This is so, not just in terms of airport staff, baggage handlers and security personnel but also in terms of local hotel staff, ancillary service staff, car rental staff in addition to transport staff, especially in the way of taxi and bus drivers. BAE Systems, a major player in the UK aerospace industry, is also a significant employer in our constituency. We believe the development of air transport offers the potential for direct and indirect job creation on a significant scale which would be of real benefit to an area which has suffered a series of company closures and job losses in recent months.

9. We recognise that Edinburgh airport is already one of the most rapidly growing airports in the country. Passengers numbers have risen from 2.5 million in 1993 to the current level of 6.6 million. A £100m terminal and stand development was completed last year and a multi-storey car park is under construction.

RUNWAY CAPACITY

A Second Runway

10. One of the most contentious issues for Edinburgh is whether a second runway is required and should be built. We note the 30 year period in which the consultation document makes estimates on increased passenger numbers and air traffic and that the document argues that ‘an additional runway would be required in Scotland before 2030’.

11 We recognise the tremendous experience of the British Airports Authority (BAA) in operating Edinburgh Airport. We therefore also note with interest their admission in their response to the consultation that a second runway at Edinburgh would not be required ‘until the latter part of the 30 year period’. We believe this should be stressed in any white paper so that local people living around the airport are made fully aware of the timescales involved.

12. We believe that the basis on which the requirement for a second runway is, at this stage, subject to a great deal of scientific error, something BAA admitted in their own submission. Until this error and uncertainty is overcome, we believe that the land on which a second runway would be built should be safe-guarded at present, until a more informed decision can be taken at a later stage. We firmly believe that a decision on whether a second runway should be built is not required at this stage but that the option should be kept open for the future.

13. However, in the event that the Department of Transport does decide to progress with a second runway, we strongly believe it should only be constructed after the greatest possible consideration of the effects on the local environment and local communities. This is something we will return to and discuss at further length, later in our submission.

14. The consultation document included two options for a second runway. We believe that in the event of a decision being taken to build a second runway, the option which had the second runway built 760m north of the existing runway to be, by far and away, the better of the two options. We do not recognise, in any way, a need for the second runway to be built 1035m north of the existing runway. We note from the submission by BAA that they also dismiss the 1035m option. We believe the 1035m option would result in the destruction of a larger area of greenbelt than is required. Such a development would also take the runway close to residential areas in the south of Kirkliston. We would oppose the 1035m option vigorously.

Extension of Taxiway

15. We welcome the construction which BAA is currently undertaking to extend the taxiway at Edinburgh airport, due for completion in the autumn of next year. We hope that this development will allow Edinburgh Airport to make maximum use of the existing runway which will delay any requirement for a second runway.

16. We recognise the environmental benefits of extending the taxiway. By reducing the time it takes for aircraft to taxi, air pollution, specifically the emission of carbon monoxide, un-burnt hydrocarbons and PM10 particulates can also be reduced. We will return to local air pollution later in our submission.

Extension of the Existing Runway

17. We recognise and welcome the admission by BAA that ‘the length of the main runway at Edinburgh is sufficient for the airport’s anticipated requirements in the medium term.’

18. However, we also recognise that the current length of the existing runway does place restrictions on the models of aircraft which can land and take-off. If the direct flights to new holiday destinations, particularly North America, are to be introduced, we recognise that the current length of the runway is not suitable for the B777 and A340 aircraft which would likely be required.

19. We therefore accept that an extension to the existing runway is required beyond the medium term if the economic benefits, in the way of increased tourists, and the social benefits of better direct holiday destinations are to be realised. However, we call on BAA, the Department of Transport, the Scottish Executive and City of Edinburgh Council to work closely in this regard to keep local communities, representative groups and others fully up to the date with the requirements and progress of such a development.

20. We recognise the potential environmental benefits which an extension to the existing runway could in fact bring. The current short length of the runway forces aircraft to land at Edinburgh at steeper descents than would be preferred. It is also the case the aircraft taking off are required to do so with increased thrust, again because of the short length of the runway. Combined, this results in the production of more NOx, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and PM 10 particulates than would otherwise be the case. We will return to the issue of local air pollution later in our submission.

Use of the Cross Wind Runway

21. We note that the consultation document argues that the current cross wind runway offers the potential to handle additional air traffic. We recognise and accept that there is a clear need to have another runway on standby in the event of essential maintenance or for other similar reasons.

22. However, the flight path to use the cross wind runway brings air traffic over more residential parts of our constituency, particularly the South Gyle and Wester Broom areas. We would oppose any extension to the use of the cross wind runway which we see as unnecessary and potentially damaging to some of the communities which we serve.

TRANSPORT LINKS TO THE AIRPORT

23. We recognise the unsustainable way in which traffic flows are developing on the West side of Edinburgh. We also recognise that much of the pollution caused around the airport comes from traffic travelling to and from the site via the A8.

24. We believe it ridiculous that the airport serving Scotlandís Capital City does not have a rail link. We therefore strongly welcome the £368m which the Scottish Executive has committed to the development of a new rail route connecting the airport with the City Centre and other destinations, both North and South. We would strongly urge the Executive and all other interested parties to work together to make this project a reality as soon as possible, noting that figures suggest over 20% of passengers travelling to Edinburgh airport would go by train if they could.

25. We hope that in the event of a rail link being delivered with good, reliable and affordable transport provided, the volume of traffic using the A8 for access to the airport will decrease with a corresponding reduction in local pollution.

26. We recognise the options, as contained within the consultation document and the submission by BAA, to have a new slip road constructed to remove traffic flows from the A8. We believe that all new road building ventures have to be fully justified before implementation and look forward with interest to hearing from the Scottish Executive and Department of Transport as to the impact, both positive and negative, which a new road would bring.

27. We also welcome the proposed new tram link connecting the Gogar roundabout with the airport and believe that this will also help reduce local car use and pollution.

NOISE POLLUTION

28. We accept that the evidence which exists relating to the impact which aircraft noise has on sleep deprivation is inconclusive. However, we do question the high 57dB level at which the Government consider there to be ‘community annoyance’.

29. However, we also recognise the consistent complaints we receive from constituents, especially in Kirkliston, Ratho Station, Newbridge and Cramond relating to the noise of aircraft and the impact which it has on their quality of life. We would oppose any expansion in air transport at Edinburgh airport which included an increase in night flights over our local communities and would support legislative moves to restrict night flights in general.

30. We recognise the advances that have been made in aerospace technology that have decreased average aircraft noise by approximately 20db. However, we hope the Government will pursue and support further research and development as to how aircraft noise can be further minimised, particularly on landing and take-off so that our constituents can benefit further.

31. We are concerned about the evidence which suggests that pupils studying in schools located close to airports may be adversely affected by the noise of landing and departing aircraft. However, we also recognise the need for further research in this field. We hope that in the event of an increase in air transport at Edinburgh that the Department of Transport will work closely with the Scottish Executive and the City of Edinburgh Council to consider how noise disruption can be minimised at Kirkliston Nursery School, Newbridge Nursery School, Hillwood Primary School in Ratho Station, Cramond Primary School and Kirkliston Primary School, all located in our constituency.

LOCAL AIR POLLUTION

32. We recognise the air quality strategy being followed by Edinburgh airport but remain concerned about the negative impact which an increase in air traffic would have on the levels of air pollution in the surrounding areas.

33. As mentioned earlier, we look forward to some short and medium term developments at Edinburgh airport actually resulting in an improvement in environmental standards locally. However, we also recognise the need for further development into sampling, data collection and analysis which are required to gain a better picture of the levels of air quality and more importantly the effect on human health and the local environment over a prolonged period. We believe this should form a key part of the Government’s plans.

34. We would urge the Department for Transport and the European Union to continue to demand improvements in standards of aircraft emissions and work with the aerospace industry to consider how this can be achieved. We warmly welcome the advancements which have already taken place in this area.

35. As we have mentioned previously, we believe that an improvement to the public transport connecting Edinburgh airport to the City and to other Scottish destinations will decrease the pollution caused by traffic travelling to and from the airport.

OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

Impact on Lennymuir & Lennie Cottages

36. We note that the development of Edinburgh airport would likely involve the land take-up of the Lennymuir and Lennie Cottages residential areas and recognise that the current uncertainty has already resulted in planning blight. We believe that in the event of the Department of Transport progressing with the expansion of the airport, BAA should enter into early negotiations with residents regarding relocation options and compensation packages. We believe there should be regular and thorough communication with residents so that medium to long term decisions, for example, over schooling, can be made.

Implications for the Royal Highland Showground

37. We are concerned at the optional developments which include the airport taking over land currently occupied by the Royal Highland Society, which plays host, each Summer to the Royal Highland Show. We believe the event has a long and proud tradition at Ingliston which this year alone, is expected to attract 150,000 visitors. It remains one of the most popular events for local people and the Scottish agricultural community.

38. Given its importance to the Cityís tourist industry throughout the year and recent significant investments by the Society, we believe that every effort should be made to secure the land near to the airport for the continual use by the Royal Highland Show and hope that this will be a priority for BAA and Government of all levels, when consideration is given to the development of the airport. However, part of the area currently held by the Society is used for car parking during the period of the Highland show and it is likely that this requirement may diminish following the delivery of the tram system and rail link as mentioned above.

Impact on the Greenbelt

39. We note that most of the options contained in the consultation paper involve the boundaries of Edinburgh airport being extended. We are concerned about the impact which this will have on the local greenbelt land, especially to the north of the airport.

40. We hope that every possible effort will be made to preserve the wildlife habitats and minimise ecological damage in the event of any expansion taking place. However, we take heart from other airport developments, in particular, the development of Manchester airport, which included the construction of a second runway. In this development, £17 million was allocated for an environmental management plan with progress monitored by a Nature Conservation and Landscape Steering Group.

41. We believe that in the event of an expansion to Edinburgh Airport to include the wider environment, similar conservation measures should be a priority. We look forward to an airport development plan which includes prominent, specific and detailed proposals as to how the impact on the local environmental will be minimised.

Water Pollution

42. We are concerned by the admission of BAA that a development of Edinburgh could have an impact on water quality levels locally. We welcome the communication being entered into with SEPA and expect a full impact analysis relating to water pollution to be included in any development plan. Specifically, we hope that lessons will be learnt from other airport developments with specific concerns relating to polluted surface water discharges, impact on local habitats, emergency procedures for accidents and spills, recycling and reuse properly addressed.

43. We concerned at some suggestions that the course of the Gogar burn and Almond river could be changed. We would expect a full impact analysis of the impact on the flooding prone Gogar burn and Almond rivers.

Development of Air Transport as Part of an Integrated Transport Strategy

44. We remain concerned that the consultation document appears to consider air transport in isolation from other modes of transport. We believe that the consideration which the Government is paying to air transport should in no way detract from the planning and development of other transport schemes, especially high speed rail links connecting Edinburgh with London and other southern Cities.

45. We believe that fast, reliable and cheap rail links offer commuters an alternative and less environmentally damaging mode of travel. To this end, we hope that the Department of Transport will fully consider the expansion of rail transport when formulating their white paper in the autumn.

46. We appreciate that is about balancing the needs of passengers, the economy, local residents and the environment, finding a solution which delivers a greater role for Edinburgh airport in the delivery of air transport.