The end of day one

So by the end of day one, the nine defendants pleading guilty, unable to bear the cost of a trial, were sentenced at 1pm today. The court heard how the protest had been a ‘response to a flawed planning process’ and the ‘democratic process being thwarted’. The judge handed out fines of on average £300 each before opening for the prosecution.

Ali Garrigan, from Manchester Plane Stupid, said “Today the defendants have taken responsibility for the protest, been accountable for their actions and will pay their fines. 


Meanwhile, Manchester City Council refuses to take responsibility for the emissions from the airport by excluding them from its Climate Change Action Plan and the aviation industry gets a free ride by paying no tax on its fuel.”


The trial continues tomorrow and is set to be an interesting day. Amanda Walters and Mark Haworth, the two defendants pleading not guilty, will be asked to tell the court what effects the expansion of the airport will have both locally, such as on the residents at Hasty Lane, as well as internationally in terms of CO2 emissions and climate change.

Local councillor Martin Eakins will also be speaking to highlight the local democratic deficit and resident Pete Johnson from Hasty Lane will talk about the threat to local homes.

Manchester Evening News coverage here.

Manchester Airport on Trial begins today!

Day 1

Huge show of support for defendants at Trafford Magistrates Court this morning for the first MAoT(Manchester Airport on Trial). Despite freezing temperatures people from all walks of life including Hasty Lane resident Pete Johnson came down to the courthouse with banners to wish the defendants well. 11 local campaigners are in court charged with willful obstruction of the public highway as a joint enterprise. Nine of the eleven are pleading guilty unable to bear the cost of the trial and two Amanda and Mark are pleading not guilty.

Margaret Westbrook a Trafford resident who came to court to support the defendants said 'the campaigners needed to take direct action due to the devastating environmental impacts of expanding Manchester Airport', she said 'it was a reasonable use non violent direct action to protest against the demolition of local homes and rising emissions especially since they have tried every other political avenue'.

Anne Power another Trafford resident expressed her dismay 'that people are so focused on the business side of the airport expansion and little thought is given to the homes that have to be knocked down or the biodiversity that will be lost.'

The campaigners believe the wreck less expansion of Manchester airport and the effects this is having on the local community and undermining our efforts to tackle climate change are worth risking legal sanctions. Their actions were further justified by the fact that official decision making channels had been exhausted and proven to be ineffective.

Nellie drops in on City Council’s climate change conference

On Tuesday 30th November, a cold and snowy morning, campaigners from Manchester Climate Action took a giant white elephant (lovingly named Nellie) to greet the public and organisations attending Manchester City Council's Climate Change stakeholder conference at the Museum of Science and Industry.

The first annual stakeholder conference aimed to engage with residents and businesses of Manchester about reducing their emissions. It was an initiative which came off the back of the council’s Climate Change Action Plan, named ‘Manchester: A Certain Furture’ (MACF), which was published in 2009 and took some important first steps towards considering the impact of our lives and industries on the environment.

Most significantly, MACF set targets for the city to reduce emissions 41% by 2020. However, as this commitment doesn’t include the flight emissions from Manchester Airport (55% owed by the city council and the regions biggest source of emissions) it seems a little feeble.

So the airport is still the council’s ‘elephant in the room’, and Nellie assisted campaigners in highlighting this, and embarrassing the city council. Everyone attending the conference, including the airport’s biggest supporter Councillor Richard Leese, was handed flyers explaining the elephant and detailing the councils omission of the airport from its climate change plan, as well as its plans to drastically expand over the next 30 years and demolish local homes to do so. Campaigners received a warm reception from both those attending the conference and staff at the museum who express their concerns about the council’s attitude towards the airport.

Sarah Thomas from Manchester Climate Action said “Although the city council are engaging with climate change and intends for the airport to be carbon neutral within the next two years this does not include the emissions from flights taking off or landing at the airport. Our concern is that if the council supports the airport in going ahead with plans to increase flights from 30 million flights a year to 50 million by 2030 then any emission reduction achieved elsewhere will be outweighed. Essentially residents and businesses in the city will be cutting their emissions in order for the airport to increase theirs.”

The event succeeding in getting new people and organisations discussing their emissions reduction plans - as well as the creative delivery of some of the six parallel workshops that happened throughout the day.

The protest was raised in a Mule interview with Councillor Nigel Murphy, Executive for the Environment at Manchester City Council:

MULE: The protestors in the lobby complaining that you’re ignoring the airport, do they have a point that you can’t really make a climate change plan for Manchester without considering the impact which the planes taking off from the airport have?

Nigel Murhy: We’ve never said that we don’t consider the effects but we’re trying to deliver where we can make change. As an organisation the airport are doing their own delivery plan. Airside emissions are not something we can change on our own in Manchester, there has to be an international agreement. More than happy for them to protest, but we’ve got to look at what we can change and what we can change now.

Nellie’s appearance at the conference took place just a week before 11 activists from Manchester Plane Stupid stand trial at Trafford Magistrates Court following their involvement in shutting down the airport in May 2010 in order to draw attention to the council’s plans to allow Manchester Airport to expand at the expense of demolishing local homes and destroying areas of important biodiversity. Their hearing begins on Monday 6th December 2010 and is expected to last one week.

A campaign titled ‘Manchester Airport on Trial’ is being run around the court trial and has received support from Heathrow Labour MP John McDonnell, Johann Hari, writer and journalist for the Independent, and Green Party MP Caroline Lucas. The campaign is playing an important role in highlighting to both the airport and council that people from all sectors of society are concerned about the planned expansion, and also that direct action is being increasing recognised as a legitimate way of opposing the plans due to the lack of effective democratic avenues.

Manchester Evening News coverage 'Jumbo protest at Manchester Airport's cargo centre plans'

£100,000 payout as Manchester Airport runway hits value of houses

From Manchester Evening News - Friday 12th November 2010

By John Scheerhout

Two families have been awarded more than £100,000 compensation from Manchester Airport after being plagued by plane noise.

The couples took the airport to the Royal Courts of Justice in London claiming their lives were ruined by jets using the second runway, which opened in 2001.

And a judge ruled the value of their homes had been slashed since runway two opened.

Retired builders’ merchants Andrew and Annette Spark, who live in an Edwardian semi in Mobberley, were awarded £40,000.

After the ruling, Mrs Spark, said: “At times it’s an aerial bombardment.”

Their neighbours, Adrian and Kathleen Robertson, were awarded £72,500 after telling how the windows of their 19th century farmhouse are rattled by passing planes and it was impossible to hold a conversation in the garden.

The couples took the airport to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) of the Royal Courts where judge Andrew Trott said their account of vibration, fumes and ‘discharge of substances’ was not exaggerated and their evidence was ‘balanced and reasonable’.

Without the second runway, the Sparks’ home would be worth £515,000 and the Robertsons’ farmhouse £725,000, the judge ruled – 7.8per cent and 10pc respectively more than their current market value.

An airport spokesman said: “These were the only two of several hundred claims that were not settled by agreement. The claimants took their cases to the Lands Tribunal who have awarded them compensation and this award is in line with our own expert assessment.”

Manchester Plane Stupid plead not guilty to airport protest charge

Six Manchester residents from the group Manchester Plane Stupid pleaded not guilty to their charge of aggravated trespass as they claim that in the light of Manchester airports contribution to runaway climate change, it was the necessary action to take. The trial will take place on February 21st 2011 and will be the first climate change trial of its kind in Manchester where expert climate scientists will defend the six against the polluting activities of Manchester airport.

On 24th May 2010, the six created a human circle around a stationary plane using arm tube lock-ons in order to keep the plane grounded. The six are challenging the recent decision to expand the World Freight Terminal which will involve the demolition of historic homes on Hasty Lane.

Manchester airport faces continued scrutiny for wanting to increase airport capacity whilst aviation expansion continues to be incompatible with climate change targets across the UK [1]. Following the recent decision to stop expansion at Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted airports, the aviation industry is likely to look to regional airports such as Manchester to increase profits. The environmental and social impact of Manchester airport will further be on the spotlight during the trial as all the local councillors around the airport had their unanimous objection to expansion overturned by the Manchester Council Planning Committee in November 2009 [2].

Penny Woodson from local campaign group Manchester Climate Action said, "Despite the threat of climate change, Manchester Airport wants to demolish local people's homes to expand flight numbers and increase emissions. The public are facing VAT rises this January yet the aviation industry pays no VAT at all. With all these injustices stacking up, direct action is necessary." [3]

Another group who simultaneously used tripods to blockade the World Freight Terminal preventing airfreighted goods from being taken in and out have been charged with obstruction of the highway. Those defendants have already pleaded not guilty and will stand trial on 6th December 2010.

Notes for the Editor:

[1] http://www.aef.org.uk/downloads//AW_Regional_Airports_Paper_Sept2009.pdf A Briefing Paper from AirportWatch 'The Expansion of Regional Airports Really a Good Thing?

[2] In September 2009, local Councillors on the Wythenshawe Area Committee vote unanimously to reject the Airport's plans to demolish homes on Hasty Lane to expand the World Freight Centre.

SEMA submission to planning framework consultation

SEMA made an official submission to the "Core Strategy Pre-Publication Partial Consultation". This is part of forming the Local Development Framework for the Greater Manchester region. This is the framework against which future planning decisions will be made, including airport expansion plans.
 
You can see the documents that are being consulted on here:
http://www.manchester.gov.uk/downloads/download/3983/core_strategy_pre-publication_partial_consultation

The 'Need for Land' documents exactly details exactly how Manchester Airport is proposing to expand. It's a long read but how individual projects such as expanding the Freight Centre over Hasty Lane are part of a much larger, long-term plan to increase capacity and flight numbers. More flights, more noise, more emissions.

SEMA's submission argues that since the future of national aviation policy is unclear, including the High Court ruling that the 2003 Air Transport White Paper is not compatible with the 2008 Climate Act, it would be unwise for the Council to support expansion plans at this time. It also details arguments about the effects of the airport on jobs and the economy in the North West region.