Representation by Paul King
- Date submitted
- 25 October 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I strongly object to the proposed expansion of Gatwick Airport. Nothing has changed since the publication of the Sir Howard Davies report in 2015 that recommended that any expansion should be at Heathrow as there was not the transport infrastructure to support Gatwick. Nothing has changed and Gatwick have used a phrase 'make best use of existing' in planning to attempt again to get another runway. There is still only one rail line in and one rail line out of Gatwick. It will be impossible for the rail network to support the millions of additional passengers that Gatwick have said in their proposal they will be aiming to increase using the airport. The fact that they state that an additional 55% of car parking will be part of this proposal shows that they know that it will not be possible to support any large increase in passengers via rail and this will place additional pressure on the road network with only the M23 and A23 supporting and connecting the airport to the north and south. This additional traffic on the road will not be environmentally friendly as there will ne excessive pollution from cars being used to get to and from the airport. Also environmentally damaging that so much land will be tarmacked over to build additional car parking infrastructure. Any area of tarmac and additional buildings such as the planned three new hotels will have water run off. Where is all this rain and waste water with pollutants going to go? I found the adverts that Gatwick used during the very poor consultation period also have figures that are concerning and misleading. They were certainly aimed at showing the public that there would be additional resources coming into the counties surrounding Gatwick. But I call into question the validity of such claims and numbers publicised. One advert stated that there would be an additional 9,700 regional police officers. How? There is a Home Office formula regarding the number of officers per 100k of the residential population. If Gatwick in its proposal has used the Home Office formula then they are implying that millions of new residents will be moving into the surrounding counties. A false figure given by GAL. They also had an advert that 12,300 extra nurses? Again like the false police figures what have they based this figure on? Such figures would be determined by the NHS not GAL. How many new hospitals are being built in the area because of Gatwick? I would suggest this figure in the consultation is also false and they could not verify how and when this would happen. 39,200 extra primary school places? New schools being built because of Gatwick. I think not. Are GAL now in the business of guessing just how many families with young children will move into surrounding counties because of Gatwick? How can Gatwick come up with such figures? Based on what? This figure as with all of them is false and pure guess work. The last advert used in the consultation was that by supporting Gatwicks expansion that an extra £1.5bn will come into the regions economy. False. Gatwick is in the business of taking passengers away on holiday. Passengers spend their money abroad and not in the regional economy. That figure depends on the number of tourists that come to Gatwick to connect to London. It will be London and major London tourist locations and hotels that will benefit not in the counties around Gatwick. A recent commissioned research paper by NEF blow this advert and its figures out of the water. The report showed the inbound and outbound domestic tourism spending in 2019 (source ONS UK) that the UK lost £32bn in 2019 as UK tourists spent more abroad than foreign tourists visiting the UK. All four adverts with extremely misleading and unsubstantiated figures aimed at showing the public that a growing Gatwick was good for local law and order, nursing, primary education and financial benefit to the area were false. The only thing that Gatwick are really interested in is the cost of shares and profits. The airport is owned by two companies from outside the UK and are both linked with infrastructure and profits. Global Infrastructure Partners (GIP) and Vinci the French company who build and take tolls from French motorway system. The public consultation made was Gatwick was in my opinion and many local residents and communities to me flawed. They did not come to and present during the consultation in any area affected currently by Gatwick and its flight paths. They knew that they would get a negative response. And yes they would have done but these communities needed to be consulted. Its very easy to take a van into the back of a superstore car park and have very little banners or other advertising to let people know why you were there and what for! There are many pictures showing the very poor locations that Gatwicks consultation van and employees visited and could then tick a box that they had been and consulted. Too easy for them and flawed. Flight paths cause noise and pollution and we are in a time of climate change emergency. Expansion on the scale proposed would increase very substantially the CO2 emissions. There are currently no proven technologies for reducing aviation emissions at scale. Expansion of Gatwick would therefore have a material effect on the UKs ability to meet its carbon reduction targets. The building of new infrastructure such as the terminals required to cope with millions of additional passengers and the waste produced has to go somewhere and this puts the air and water course at risk. Gatwick will say that they will be carbon neutral in a few years and they maybe regarding buildings and waste but the main part of their business is the landing and taking off of aircraft and this will not be carbon neutral ever. I saw a figure that should Gatwick increase capacity then it will be responsible for 5-6% of the carbon emissions of the UK. This just cannot be acceptable and I ask the Planning Insp to take note that Gatwick and other airports cannot be allowed to expand until a carbon neutral fuel is found. Should this planning application be approved then the DfT and the Planning Insp have let the genie out of the bag and the damage will have been done forever. Gatwick claim in their proposal that there will be an additional 14,000 jobs in the area. An area in the South East that has the lowest unemployment figures, so where will these additional 14,000 jobs and people come from? Yes if any construction takes place then people will be employed on the construction work. But when its finished? The airport and the flight companies are already cutting numbers working at the airport as they automate booking in and luggage drop off. After the CV19 epidemic when air crew and staff were not well protected many flight crew left the business completely and there was a shortage of staff wanting to work in the aviation industry. I do not accept that the proposed changes are indeed making best use of existing infrastructure as the main runway is being moved and widened so how is that an existing infrastructure and the 'new' runway, the current emergency runway will also have to be enlarged and moved and with the knock on effect of new taxi ways for aircraft. These are not existing but by moving, enlarging and creating they are basically having new and not current infrastructure. The noise levels from Gatwick will increase with the proposed increase in flight numbers and this will also impact on new communities. Noise levels have been shown to cause health issues and stress. New communities that will be impacted will possibly just not know what is coming their way if airport is permitted to expand. The noise envelope Gatwick has proposed are not consistent with government policy and CAA guidance and are wholly one sided. They should be substantially revised. There must be a ban on night flights and a condition made for any expansion. Residents must be able to sleep undisturbed or again health issues will arise. For all the reasons stated above I am strongly against the proposed expansion. Gatwick is big enough and does not need expansion. This is greed at the expense of the local communities. The consultation period and how it was conducted was appalling with extremely misleading figures used in adverts in order to entice people to support. The Davis Report released in 2015 made many reasons why Gatwick could not sustain any enlargement due to location and restricted transport links. If Gatwick pinned their hopes on the govt policy re all private vehicles being manufactured would be electric after 2030 then they are sadly mistaken as the govt has moved this environmentally necessary deadline to 2035 so any argument they propose re only electric cars on the road so no carbon emissions has evaporated and no one can see the day that aviation fuel will be not dependant on fossil fuels.