I want to speak in two capacities today. As a local MP whose constituency is under the flight path, I need to say a few words about how the third runway will significantly exacerbate the quality of life problems that people in my area already suffer as a result of the existing Heathrow operation. I also want to speak about two much more fundamental and overarching issues.
The first of those is climate change. Hon. Members of all parties agree now that it has a stature and importance that matches any issue to do with the economy or the future of the UK, because if we do not have a sustainable future, we do not have a future.
The second fundamental issue that I want to raise is that of democracy in this House. I am shattered that a decision of this magnitude—it has been called ““totemic””, and I think that it easily has that status—should not be subject to a vote. Regardless of whether hon. Members would vote for or against a third runway at Heathrow, this is an issue on which the House should decide. It should not be masked within a paper on aviation policy that, essentially, was drafted six years ago, and which does not concern itself with all the knowledge and understanding that we have gathered since, both from across the House and from our constituents. There is a real question as to whether this House matters—and it is the question of who decides that is at stake today.
I shall speak first as a local MP. I want to do so in the spirit of reaching across the Chamber, because it was a huge relief to my constituents to hear that the Secretary of State had decided not to proceed with mixed mode. Frankly, it would be Chinese water torture for my constituents to live with flights overhead all day. I have some hope that that will be a true and genuinely kept commitment, but I can tell the Government that one of the reasons why the decision not to proceed with mixed mode was taken is that, if a third runway is built, mixed mode cannot be operated on runways 1 and 2. Runway 3 could operate mixed mode, but that could not be done on runways 1 and 2, or planes would crash into one another. I hope that if, for some reason, the third runways does not proceed—and I hope it will not—the commitment that has been given to the House will not be discarded, and mixed mode will not suddenly come back on to the agenda because the third runway has been demonstrated to be impossible and undesirable, and is rejected. That is crucial.
Heathrow (Third Runway)
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Kramer
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 28 January 2009.
It occurred during Opposition day on Heathrow (Third Runway).
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
487 c358-9 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-16 21:09:46 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_524239
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_524239
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_524239