Bristol: Airport Master Plan for next 30 Years - Consultation

[TheLocalYokel]

Two of the mob were arrested last night for obsructing the highway on Clifton Suspension Bridge - they sat down in the roadway on the bridge. The bridge has now been closed to everyone over the next four days with police officers in attendance.

A mob spokesperson said they are disappointed that the bridge has been closed to everyone. It had already been reported that they intended to block it for the whole of today. So really they are upset that the police closed it and not them.

The police are already massively over-stretched because of their virus duties on top of their their normal tasks. Now they have to contend with this. One really has to wonder what are the true motives of many of the protestors. They obviously go well beyond any environmental concerns.

The Mourning Procession to the airport tomorrow could develop into almost anything. This lot simply cannot be trusted to keep to any so-called prior agreement with the authorites as was shown so vividly last year when they blocked the M32.

 

[Jerry]

he police are already massively over-stretched because of their virus duties on top of their their normal tasks. Now they have to contend with this. One really has to wonder what are the true motives of many of the protestors. They obviously go well beyond any environmental concerns.

The more disruption they cause the more media they generate.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

The more disruption they cause the more media they generate.

But do they win the hearts and minds of the uncommitted by these actions? Their argument is that when they just did things like handing out leaflets few people listened, still less the news media, so they feel that direct action is their only option.

It fills newspapers and tv and radio news bulletins and gets them plenty of news media interview time, but if they continue with their antics around the country there is a danger to them that their message will be increasingly looked at by many people as the empty war cry of rabble-rousers.

If anyone has been reading the LBA forums over recent weeks (re LBA new terminal plans where there is an equally implacable opposition group as that at BRS) they will find plenty of evidence that many environmentalists refuse to engage when uncomfortable (to them) rebuttals of their arguments are placed before them.

I've had the same experience at environmental demonstrations in Bristol. The activists to whom I have spoken will discuss the matter civilly but won't debate if points that tend to contradict or weaken their argument are put to them. They merely trot out their mantra again.

Within F4A LBA is a very active forum when it comes to challenging and arguing with opponents of airport expansion.

 

[Jerry]

But do they win the hearts and minds of the uncommitted by these actions? Their argument is that when they just did things like handing out leaflets few people listened, still less the news media, so they feel that direct action is their only option.

That's the problem, by being disruptive they get more media attention but no doubt are going to annoy a lot of the people they are trying to bring over to their cause. Personally i think they might want to take a leaf out of the pro-indy campaigns in Wales and Scotland and adopt a less agressive approach and do something more like the banners on bridges campaign that YesCymru are currently doing. I know they are different causes but both have the aim of bringing people over to their side.

 

[Seasider]

The problem is, they fell their argument is so good they can't understand people not agreeing with them. so create havoc, cause a lot of disruption with very little reward.
If we will not agree with them, they will disrupt our lives as much as possible. Not the best way to get people to get "on board".

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Looking at the local rag pictures and the BBC TV local news report it didn't look as though there were 'hundreds' in today's Mourning Procession as had been predicted by the organisers.

The tv pictures showed them on the roundabout at the main entrance to the airport having processed there from Felton Common. In fairness, they seemed to have kept to their promise and there was no traffic disruption or disorder.

One or two of the leading lights were interviewed by one of BBC Bristol's finest and came out with their usual mantra (one being Emma Crewe who I think we have mentioned before in regard to airport environmental protests). Ms Crewe was particularly concerned that North Somerset Council will have to spend a lot of money justifying its rejection decision. A male interviewee said that a democratic decision had been taken and should be respected by the airport. He failed to mention that in a democracy decisions of governments, local or otherwise, can be challenged. The alternative is a dictatorship.

The protestors are certainly entitled to their views but not to distort or even misrepresent (euphemism for telling lies) unarguable factual points that count against their argument which some airport opponents are in the regular habit of doing, and not only with Bristol Airport.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Bristol Airport lodges appeal against refusal of expansion

Bristol Airport had until September 19 to lodge its appeal against North Somerset Council's refusal of its expansion plans

www.bristolpost.co.uk

The airport has now formally submitted its appeal against North Somerset Unitary Authority's rejection of its planning application earlier this year.

An airport spokesperson said,

Bristol Airport welcomes the opportunity to submit their appeal and commence the appeal process.

The decision to refuse the planning application was contrary to the recommendation of the council’s own planning officers.

The decision on the application will now move to a national level and will be made by an independent planning inspector or, if the appeal is recovered, by the Government.

The plans to expand capacity at the airport will offer passengers more routes and flights from the south west directly, create jobs, facilitate inward investment and inbound tourism, and support greener and more sustainable, regional economic growth.

As the UK emerges from the COVID-19 pandemic it is essential that all regions of the country are given the opportunity to grow to their full potential and contribute to the national recovery effort.

International trade and connectivity will become increasingly important as the UK completes its departure from the European Union – increasing aviation capacity is essential in delivering this goal.

A group calling itself Bristol Airport Action Network (BAAN) is working to actively oppose the appeal according to their spokesperson Tarisha Finnegan-Clarke (lovely name and somehow so apt). I don't know if BAAN is SBAE (StopBristol Airport Expansion) renamed or another group. BAAN seems to want to use this appeal as a platform to test government climate change resolve. I have every confidence that the planning inspector charged with dealing with this matter will not let the public enquiry become a pantomime.

North Somerset Unitary Authority will 'vigorously defend' the action which will be interesting given that the elected councillors' rejection decision was against the recommendations of the council's own professional planning officers.

Finally, one of the pictures illustrating this newspaper article is at least ten years old as it depicts a Continental Boeing 757 parked on stand at BRS. This sort of thing is par for the course for Bristol Live (Reach Plc), aka as the Bristol Post (used to be the Bristol Evening Post) in the hard copy edition.

 

[Marko1]

A very good announcement. Now is the time for investment - think of the post COVID jobs boost for the area.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

A very good announcement. Now is the time for investment - think of the post COVID jobs boost for the area.

Although the newspaper report says the Planning Inspectorate enquiry will begin later in the autumn, because of its scope it will almost certainly involve a public enquiry.

There is so much interest in airport expansion these days that every case sees opponents who are always well-organised, well-prepared, and often supported financially by the environmental lobby and sympathisers, use the case to further their cause nationally and often internationally.

Usually the local authority is tasked with finding a venue for the public enquiry, sometimes council offices or such buildings as community halls. I suspect that the BRS appeal will attract widespread focus (the opponents will do their best to ensure that it does) and many people and organisations, including 'experts' on all manner of things appertaining to the expansion, will want to attend and give evidence.

There lies an immediate problem. Given the social distancing requirements brought about by the virus can this enquiry be conducted in a way that satisfies the accepted procedures? I would have thought a very large room would be required, large enough to permit social distancing and with provision to provide the ancillary support this enquiry would need.

I suspect that it will be many months before a decision is made on the appeal, possibly well into next year or even longer if COVID requirements cause delays.

If the planning inspector, or secretary of state if the appeal is 'recovered', allows the airport's appeal I would anticipate a legal challenge from opponents. This has to be made to the Administrative Court at the Royal Courts of Justice within six weeks of the appeal decision date. Such a challenge would delay matters further and there might even be an appeal against the Administrative Court's ruling if the challengers don't like it.

Taking all this into account, in a worst-case scenario it might be a couple of years from now before the appeal runs its course. Already 21 months have elapsed since the airport first submitted its planning application to the local authority.

The ramifications of the virus have taken the urgency out of the situation from the airport's perspective but no-one would have wanted it to happen that way. Had there been no virus BRS could have been 'maxed out' with passenger numbers by the end of next year.

 

[superking]

I was talking to a guy in the doctors this morning and he was dead against airport expansion. I explained a few things to him if the airport appeal got turned down. I said most of the local objectors lived not far from the airport. My reply to that was people knew the airport was there so why move to where they live now.Another fact i told him was about employment,as it would employ many more people weather airport staff or outside contractors. The main thing and this affects every one that lives in north somerset who pay rates. If the airport closed north somerset would want the rates to continue at high levels so the only place they could come from would be house holds that pay rates,and that would make a lot of people unhappy. After he thought about it he admitted he had not read the report and the biggest thing was higher rates to cover what the airport would not pay. I wonder how many or not thought about rates. In many ways this could go on for years in many ways. The proper thing would be to pass the expansion and let every one get on with what ever they do.It just shows that things have not been explained to what could happen if airport did not get the go ahead,as most objectors i would think would live not in north somerset.

 

[Marko1]

I think the airport needs to counter act the falsehoods more strongly through the media to change perceptions and opinions. They are not asking for that much tbh. They are not asking to have a massive runway extension or high speed rail link. It’s merely an expanded terminal and a bigger car park. They have invested amazing amounts in public transport and the most modern jets fly in and out. There’s no night cargo to disturb sleep and aviation is not the biggest cause of climate change.

 

[Jerry]

aviation is not the biggest cause of climate change.

But it is the easiest high profile target when it comes to climate change and not allowing Bristol to expand won't make much of a difference climate change wise but could be a good PR win for the climate change campaign.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

LBA is in the process of applying for planning permission to build a new state-of-the-art terminal that would allow the airport to handle up to 7 mppa from the current 4 mppa. That application is being met with the same type of opposition that is seen at BRS. In fact, there is far more of a groundswell of public opinion (or at least from certain vocal sections of the public) regarding the LBA application with an organisation there much like SBAE. Supporters of the LBA expansion have formed their own group and attempt to counter the worst of the misinformation and disinformation, mainly the latter, that appears in the local press and on social media sites. I say attempt because the opponents ignore the rational rebuttals from those in favour of the new terminal and continue to repeat the same untruths.

The really ridiculous thing is that LBA already has planning permission to extend its current terminal to permit up to 7 mppa but that would not be as environmentally-friendly as the new one they want to build. It really does sum up the mindset of most of the objectors. They take any opportunity to get their environment argument into the public domain even when they are cutting off their nose to spite their face in order to do so.

SBAE complain in one breath that BRS expansion would exacerbate climate change because of the additional flights, yet in the next breath they demand that any new flights be operated from CWL instead (one North Somerset parish council wants better surface connectivity from the area with CWL). I would say this is another example of muddled thinking but it's not. It's deliberate because in the case of BRS many, probably most, of the local opponents don't regard climate change as the primary focus of their objections. They are basically 'nimbys' who aren't bothered about additional flights so long as they are not in their back yard.

The one argument with which I have some sympathy but which the pandemic has pushed in to the background for the time being is that in a few years time BRS would be back asking for a further expansion. Pre-COVID the BRS expectation was that 12 mppa would be reached around the middle of the 2020s. The argument went that by then the new cap (if permitted) of 12 mppa would be a block on further growth and the airport would find itself in the position it does at the moment with the current 10 mppa cap, so where does it stop? Given the airport's suggestion that it could be seeing 20 mppa by the 2040s it would not stop at all, at least until that figure had been reached.

That argument is not an easy one for the airport to answer convincingly.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Calls for Weca to abandon support for Bristol Airport expansion

Council cabinet member says the stance is "incompatible" with climate emergency declaration

www.bristolpost.co.uk

No surprise that the West of England Combined Authority (Weca) is being asked by a Bath and North East Somerset (B&NES) Lib-Dem councillor to withdraw its support for BRS expansion on 'climate emergency' grounds.

In 2019 B&NES lost its Conservative overall majority to be replaced by a Lib-Dem overall majority. Together with North Somerset Council which rejected the expansion planning application B&NES as a council is anti-BRS expansion, unlike Bristol, South Gloucestershire, ,Sedgemoor and Somerset councils that support expansion along with Weca. BRS is unfortunate that it is situated in one of the local council areas in the West of England whose political philosophy is against airport expansion.

This supports a strong argument that the future of a regional facility should not be left solely in the hands of just one of the local councils.

These people don't seem to understand or don't want to understand, because many of them are 'nimbys', that any additional flights that expansion would create at BRS would simply be transferred to other airports if the expansion does not go ahead. If, as these people allege, extra flights would contribute to climate change they would do so from whichever airport they operate. Yet some of them have actively been arguing that instead of expanding BRS any extra flights should operate from other airports that they say are under-used

It's as fatuous as another argument that is gaining ground which is that the pandemic will render expansion of BRS unnecessary as passenger numbers won't be high enough in future. If they are right why complain as they would have achieved their aim? The airport owners would have wasted a lot of their own money in creating a white elephant. That they do complain obviously means that they don't believe their own argument about future passenger numbers.

 

[superking]

Its a classic case of fly from any where but not here.By getting people to fly from some where else they are creating more pollution than if they flew from BRS,they have to get to other airports.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Still no news on the timeline for the appeal procedure. This notice currently appears on the North Somerset Unitary Authority planning page.

Bristol Airport has submitted an appeal to the Planning Inspectorate against the council’s decision to refuse planning permission for the expansion of the airport.

The appeal is currently being validated by the Planning Inspectorate. Once they have registered the appeal the Planning Inspectorate will confirm what the timetable will be.

There will be a public enquiry as part of the appeal procedure and one problem might be finding a venue large enough to accommodate all those who will want to attend whilst maintaining social distancing.

 

[superking]

When they have concerts on the beach they get thousands and plenty of room. All the planners can sit on the prom and direct the meeting to them on the beach.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Airport Appeal

Bristol Airport expansion "still needed" after Covid recovery

The transport hub expects to see 12million annual passengers by 2030 - four years later than the previous forecast

www.bristolpost.co.uk

The Planning Inspectorate will commence its work on the airport's appeal on 11 January 2021 with a four-week pubic enquiry scheduled for July 2021.

The airport has revised its growth timeline in the light of the virus. Its previous expectation of reaching 12 mppa by 2026 has been delayed until 2030. It still maintains the need to expand is vital for the region.

The Planning Inspectorate has allowed the airport to submit additional material based on the new scenario brought about by the virus, judging the circumstances to be 'exceptional'.

North Somerset Council is inviting public comment on the airport's latest submissions.

This will certainly be fruitful work for lawyers and planning experts. North Somerset Council has already briefed a senior QC to represent it and no doubt the airport will similarly have high-powered legal representation.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Re my previous post, the North Somerset Council planning portal has now entered the additional comments submitted by Bristol Airport with the consent of the Planning Inspectorate regarding the change to aviation brought about by the virus situation. The portal invites public comments on the new airport submission.

The planning portal also contains all the documents submitted by the airport including a long report and analysis on the new situation at BRS prepared for the airport by York Aviation.

In the few days that the new submissions have been open for public comment 216 have been in the form of objections with four in support.

From the wording of a significant number they are from people within the environment lobby given the amount of detail supplied, and it's likely that not all by any means are from the local area. This time the NSC has laid out the public comments in a different order with no obvious immediate access to the name and address of the person or organisation submitting a comment. Some merely say they are renewing the objection they made to the original planning application. That was in the order of four to one in favour of the objectors.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Council passes Green motion against airport expansion - Bristol Green Party

A Green motion passed at yesterday's (8th December) Council meeting commits Bristol Council to opposing Bristol Airport expansion, overturning the administration's previous position of supporting the plans.

bristolgreenparty.org.uk

Bristol City Council Green Party members have finally managed to achieve a vote by the city council members on BRS expansion. Previously the Greens were rebuffed in their attempts to have the matter put to a vote.

Last night the Labour-controlled council voted for a commitment to oppose the airport's expansion plans. The council had formally supported the application when it was determined by North Somerset Council. Bristol's elected Labour mayor is a supporter of the expansion, and a route from the city to the airport is his key route for a proposed city underground transport system although I imagine routes to the outer parts of the city and beyond would not all be sub-surface.

The motion also calls upon the mayor to support councillors who oppose the appeal at the Planning Inspectorate enquiry.

I've not yet been able to find any public reaction from the mayor.