Third runway at Heathrow could spark 'mother of all battles' say campaigners
The Government and the backers of a new runway at Heathrow have been warned to expect the 'mother of all battles' as plans for a third runway and new terminal get a step closer.
ITV News Meridian understands that two rival bids to build it will be submitted to ministers before midnight on Thursday - the deadline set by the Government.
Campaigners against a third runway say it would mean a 50% rise in flights over the Thames Valley causing 'misery'.
Andrew Melville's home lies at the edge of where a new perimeter fence would be built for the proposed runway, and says he feels 'forgotten about'.
He said: "Let's make 5,500 homes uninhabitable, shift out 15,000 people and stick 260,000 extra polluting flights a year in UK air space. So how do you think we feel?"
Backers of a third runway say the prize would be thousands of new jobs and the biggest economic boost the area has ever seen.
Back in 2014 the cost of the scheme was £14 billion - now it is said to be between £40-£62 billion. It would mean the latest plans could be cut back to save money.
Under the existing plans, there would be a full length runway near to the M4 and it would run over the M25 where a tunnel would be built, along with a new terminal. However cheaper options are expected, such as a shorter runway.
As the expansion of Heathrow Airport is considered a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP), it means a Development Consent Order (DCO) must be applied for as the project is too large to be considered through the usual planning process of submission to the local council.
The Government says it will back expansion if the airport can meet environmental targets.
Heathrow will put forward a number of options and Arora, a property company with a billionaire owner from Surrey, will also submit rival plans by the end of the week.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ITV News
26 minutes ago
- ITV News
Taxpayer to foot the bill for Battle of Flowers' overspend with £121,000 government handout
Jersey 's government has decided to pay off all outstanding debt from the 2024 Battle of Flowers' event, despite previously telling ITV News that organisers should cover their own costs. Last year, Battle made a loss of more than £350,000, with many exhibitors and creditors not being paid as a result - despite a record £270,000 government grant. Deputy Kirsten Morel, the island's Minister for Sustainable Economic Development, told ITV News in March that the "Government isn't there to bail out and just pay off the debt". He added: "The Battle of Flowers Association have sufficient assets for us to work out a way for them to pay off their own debts." However, the Government has now confirmed a bailout costing £121,000, only a few months after announcing up to £220,000 of grants to fund this year's smaller celebrations: ITV News understands this latter figure now stands at £158,000. The payment to cover debts has been made as an advance on future funding for the Battle of Flowers, raising questions about whether the event will ever return to its former scale. Steve Bouchard from The Optimists Club, which won last year's event, says: "It is a concern because it's leaving a legacy behind, people will have to take on a debt they didn't incur. "But that's the way it is and at least we have a Battle on this year." In a statement, the island's government explains: "The Battle of Flowers is an essential fixture in Jersey's summer calendar, bringing our community together through thousands of hours of volunteering and drawing crowds to the centre of town. "Ministers have provided this payment to enable the parade to proceed this year." In a letter from Chief Minister Lyndon Farnham and Deputy Morel, addressed to the Chief Officer at the Department of the Economy, the Government adds: "We would ask that any future grants to any organiser of the Battle of Flowers event are made with this funding in mind, accounted for accordingly and deducted from future grants to the event. "It is unfortunate that, despite the efforts of the new organisers and the grant funding already provided by the Department for the Economy, the success of the event should be imperilled due to ongoing challenges in resolving the 2024 overspend." Some islanders believe money from the public purse could be better allocated elsewhere. Ben Shelton from Age Concern explains: "I'm the chair of two charities that do really good work in the island and we could do much better with that money than wasting and squandering it on grants that aren't properly investigated and aren't given out in the right manner."
The Independent
26 minutes ago
- The Independent
What are the pros and cons of introducing digital identity cards?
The prime minister is said to be 'seriously considering' a national system of digital identification, both to make it easier to access online services, including government ones, and to clamp down on illegal working by irregular migrants. Given the push to introduce artificial intelligence in so many areas of our lives, it may be an idea whose time has come. But there are political, as well as practical, complications. What is digital ID? It would in essence be a virtual ID card, and using it in the existing, and enhanced, Government Gateway would make it easier for people to manage everything from tax records and social security entitlements to driving licences, education, citizenship and probate – a vast array of areas in which the individual has dealings with the state. It could also be used, as a passport or driving licence is now, to help with all sorts of other activities, such as banking or getting a job. There is a separate, and obviously sensitive, question about whether digital ID should also encompass someone's medical history, voluntarily or otherwise. Why digital ID now? According to the briefings, the aim is to reduce the cost and increase the efficiency of the government machine, so that, for example, people don't have to spend hours on hold when contacting a government agency. Unavoidably, though, it is also a way to detect people who shouldn't be in the country or working in the UK. That, the theory goes, means less of a 'pull factor' for certain sorts of migrant. Would it work? In a sense it is working already, in that almost everyone must have a unique tax reference, a national insurance number, a driving licence number, an NHS number and so on, and can, if they wish, share this information with others. But at the moment the system is compartmentalised and clunky, even if more and more interactions are taking place online and with chatbots. What stage are we at? Reports emanating from a 'senior minister' say that the prime minister has ordered a 'comprehensive and expansive look' at the proposal: 'Keir is leading on it,' they said. 'This is a serious piece of work. After a year in government, it is clear that technology is underpinning everything. Digital ID is foundational. Things are moving forward.' Didn't we have identity cards before? They were introduced as plain cardboard documents during the Second World War as a national security measure. People had to use them to get rationed food and petrol, and had to be ready to produce them on demand, a serious infringement of the traditional British way of doing things. The request for 'Papers, please' has always been regarded as an alien phenomenon. In the words of Boris Johnson in 2004: 'If I am ever asked, on the streets of London, or in any other venue, public or private, to produce my ID card as evidence that I am who I say I am ... then I will take that card out of my wallet and physically eat it in the presence of whatever emanation of the state has demanded that I produce it.' (He subsequently brought in compulsory photo ID for elections.) Even now, a driver stopped by the police is granted 14 days to produce their driving licence at a police station. The wartime measures were resented, and were abolished in 1952. Mandatory ID would be a minor revolution. What about the ID cards Tony Blair wanted? He still does, by the way. Much of the present momentum for change comes from the Tony Blair Institute (TBI), as if the former PM has never given up the struggle. At any rate, the current prime minister's chief aide, Morgan McSweeney, commissioned the TBI to produce proposals, and is said to be 'forceful' in making the case for them to No 10. Certainly, a more primitive version of this project was very much 'on the cards 20 years ago' when the Blair administration tried to bring in ID cards, but it ran into enormous resistance and administrative problems. The motives, in essence, were no different from today. In 2003, the then home secretary, David Blunkett, argued that cards with biometric data were needed so that 'people don't work if they are not entitled to work, they don't draw on services which are free in this country, including health, unless they are entitled to', and that 'when we find people we can identify quickly that they are not entitled and get them out'. When a limited, entirely voluntary ID card was introduced in 2010, some 15,000 were in circulation, but the incoming Conservative-Liberal Democrat government scrapped the entire scheme, after £5bn had been spent. A voluntary biometric residence permit is available as an option for foreign students or workers. Official photo ID cards for voting have also been introduced in recent years. What does the opposition say? Despite showing little interest in it while in government, earlier this year the shadow home secretary, Chris Philp, conceded that digital ID could help tackle 'illegal' immigration. But Nigel Farage remains stubbornly libertarian, and opposes digital ID because he 'doesn't trust this government' and claims that it 'hurts law-abiding citizens'. Labour, and the Tories, could use his reluctance to argue that, given he is not prepared to use every possible measure in the fight against irregular migration, Farage wouldn't succeed in his own ambition to stop the boats. Will it happen? With 40 Labour backbenchers recently calling for change and the Conservatives warming to the idea, alongside the trend towards digitising everything, it feels pretty inevitable, like it or not. Will it work? To some extent, but there are ways to get around any system, and digital is no different from paper in that respect. It could make things worse for some. If a fraudster managed to 'steal' a vulnerable person's digital ID, for example, then it would be 'open sesame' on their entire life, and comprehensive identity theft might become more common. Leaks cannot be ruled out. There's also the grim possibility that a migrant who wanted to come to the UK to work, deprived of any ID, would just melt into the underground economy, and become even more exposed to crime and exploitation. In a worst-case scenario, some criminals or a malign foreign government could execute a mega-hack in which millions of people's data is stolen or frozen and held to ransom. Last, we must reflect on British governments' past lamentable record on grand digital integration schemes – and the fact that the current proposal, which would potentially bring together HMRC, the DWP, the DVLA, the Passport Office, criminal records, local authority records, and the NHS database, would be hugely more ambitious, and hazardous, than anything attempted before.
Powys County Times
an hour ago
- Powys County Times
Starmer has ‘made a mistake' with plan to recognise Palestinian state
Sir Keir Starmer has 'made a mistake' in announcing plans to recognise Palestine as a state, Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch said. The Government last week said it will recognise a Palestinian state in September unless Israel agrees to meet certain conditions, including a ceasefire and a revival of the two-state solution. Meanwhile, the Prime Minister reiterated that Hamas must release the hostages, sign up to a ceasefire, disarm and play no role in the government of Gaza. The Government will then make an assessment in September 'on how far the parties have met these steps', the Prime Minister said. During a visit to a farm in Little Walden, Essex, on Tuesday, Mrs Badenoch said she would never agree to recognising a Palestinian state while Hamas is still in power in Gaza. She said: 'Absolutely not. No. Hamas is a terrorist organisation. We should not be creating a new terrorist state. 'This is basic stuff, and I don't understand why Keir Starmer doesn't understand that.' The Tory leader added: 'Keir Starmer has made a mistake. What we need to focus on now is a ceasefire and getting the hostages home. 'We've been seeing images of a hostage who looks like he's being starved to death, forced to dig his own grave. This is what Hamas is about. 'Now is not the time to reward them for their atrocities and for the massacre they committed on October 7 by giving them statehood recognition. 'We want to see a two-state solution after a peace settlement done in the right way at the right time. It is not the right thing to do now. 'And I'm not surprised that British hostages like Emily Damari have condemned the Government for the approach they've taken.' Ms Damari, a British-Israeli woman who was held hostage by Hamas for more than a year, has said she believes Sir Keir is 'not standing on the right side of history' after his conditional pledge to recognise Palestine. Mrs Badenoch's comments came as it was announced a protest will take place in London this weekend opposing Sir Keir's plans to recognise Palestine as a state. Demonstrators, including some British family members of hostages still held by Hamas, will march on Downing Street calling for the release of the remaining hostages before any talk about the recognition of Palestine. Marchers will include the relatives of Avinatan Or, who was kidnapped from the Nova music festival with his girlfriend Noa Argamani. Mr Or's cousin Ariel Felber, from London, said: 'Keir Starmer has failed the hostages and their families by not making it a condition that all the remaining hostages are brought home to their loved ones before he can even entertain talk of state recognition of Palestine. 'He urgently needs to correct this.' Steve Brisley from Bridgend, Wales, whose sister and nieces were murdered on October 7 and his brother-in-law Eli taken hostage, said: 'As British families of hostages and victims, devastated by the ongoing suffering of our loved ones, our emotional torture has been exacerbated by the suggestion that the UK may recognise a Palestinian state without securing the release of the hostages as an absolute precondition. 'This is not about politics. This is about basic humanity.' The family members are expected to be joined by Jewish leaders and other supporters on their National March For The Hostages through central London on Sunday afternoon. Tzipi Hotovely, Israeli ambassador to the UK, said on X that Hamas's actions 'must never be rewarded' as she highlighted the plight of one of the hostages, 24-year-old Evyatar David. Hamas released a video on Saturday which showed Mr David looking skeletal and hollow-eyed in a dimly lit Gaza tunnel. Ms Hotovely said: 'He is clearly malnourished and ill-treated. A shadow of his former self, his suffering is unimaginable. 'Like countless others who saw it, I was appalled by the sickening footage of Evyatar being forced to dig his own grave. 'This abhorrent footage shows Hamas for what they are – wicked terrorists who seek to inflict as much death, destruction and suffering on as many Jews and Israelis as they can. Their actions must never be rewarded.'
