The Heathrow Decision!

The courts, having declared the new runway decision not legal but doesn't mean that they can't build it. The airport is likely to appeal or put in a new planning application that will comply with the regulations - if they can manage it.

The court ruled that they hadn't taken into account, when presenting their application, the Paris Climate Agreement which is something they have to do. They are entitled to apply again and try to show that their plans would not breach the Agreement. That is somewhat unlikely.

They could appeal the court decision and try to argue that they don't need to take the Agreement into account.

I'm not sure that either will work but it means another chunk of years arguing about it

The anti-HS2 people may now try and see whether they can use the same argument.

It was refused on 22 counts and almost all of those are laid at the door of the Secretary of State not having taken the Paris Agreement and the Kyoto Protocol. He did this on the, incorrect, advice of his legal team!!! Are heads going to roll?

If anyone wishes to read the full judgement you are most welcome

https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Heathrow-main-judgment-1.5.19.pdf

There are only 669 paragraphs and then five pages of the refused 22 Applications and then three pages of explanation and then seven pages of glossary!

If you really want to read some of it I suggest you read pages 168 to 172.

Good luck

 

Aren't they now say all road infrastructure (and I guess by extension ALL infrastructure) projects will not comply with the UK's climate legislation?

It's a ridiculous situation (who'da thunk it?) and on the surface of it cripples any development which is just dumb. I'd say that the Heathrow extension or the roads, whatever, do not, in themselves, breach any climate obligation because how can a piece of tarmac do that? Obviously everyone know's it's the vehicles that come after the event but still...

 

Yes, it's the purpose for what is being built that is the consideration. If you are building another runway, and justify it (for planning) because of the need to accommodate more flights, then the purpose is directly related to the pollution caused by the flights.

There were other environmental issues brought up by the 22 articles under which it was refused.

 

If I were PM I'd be thinking of an amendment to that piece of legislation around now!

 

He would have to give one year notice to withdraw from the Paris Agreement.

 

The Heathrow Saga has been going on for nearly two decades and looks like it will continue to rumble on for at least another........they could run a TV Soap about it.