Representation by Amanda Copperwaite
- Date submitted
- 21 September 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
Increased flights goes against net zero commitments by the Govt. The developers are only committing to net zero for emissions within their control. This ignores the emissions of the aircraft. The surrounding area to Gatwick is a relatively wealthy one. The vast majority of jobs created at Gatwick will be low skilled and low paid. The area already has an issue with being able to recruit to fill such jobs. These additional would mean either more people moving into the area, putting pressure on already scarce and expensive housing or mean those workers needing to commute from outside the area, thus increasing pollution. The developers argument of increasing tourism is very weak as the area is not generally a tourist area anyway. Communities around Gatwick are already blighted by plane noise from the airport. Allowing a 2nd runaway will either increase blight to existing communities or will spread blight if flight paths are spread amongst a wider area. It should also be considered that although not at such a lower altitude, the area is also subject to noise from aircraft using Heathrow. Overall I do not believe that this development will be positive in anyway apart with regard to the profits of the airport developer.