Johnny's blog

Source: Flickr

On the day the world's leaders were to release their global emissions target, Plane Stupid Scotland unveiled a new sign welcoming people to Glasgow Airport. Giant letters read "T2 closed" and "Closed for Ethical Rethink", pointing to the increasingly airport.

The action is the first in a growing campaign to keep Terminal 2 shut for good. It was closed over the winter as a cost saving measure after passenger numbers fell by 11.3% to 7.2 million. Glasgow airport operates a huge number of short haul and domestic flights.

Local residents have had fewer sleepless nights due to the decreased air traffic and the airport's emissions have also reduced from the 618,539 tonnes of Co2 it emitted in 2008 (although unsurprisingly BAA won't tell us by how much). This trend must continue if we're to meet our emissions targets, or the "world's greatest Climate Change Bill" (copyright Scottish Parliament) will become the world's biggest embarrassment.

Reggie Whittaker, who lives by Glasgow airport explained: "T2 really is plane stupid. It's unsustainable and unnecessary."

Source: Flickr

Last week the managing director of Edinburgh Airport, Gordon Dewar, became chairman of the Edinburgh Tourism Action Group (ETAG). Dewar talks interchangeably about the needs of the airport and tourist industry. Surely increasing tourism means expanding the airport to allow more passengers to fly here from abroad?

It's not quite as simple as that. Firstly, British people fly twice as much as anyone else in the world. We do this because we're an island, but also because the aviation industry is such a powerful lobbyist. The impact on our tourism industry is dire: each year we spend £20 billion more abroad than foriegn tourists spend here. Visitors from overseas only make up 28% of the passengers flying to Edinburgh. The rest are Brits returning home.

This aviation-driven tourism strategy is unsustainable and embarassing. Remember the Homecoming campaign? Instead of empowering the managing director of the City’s airport we should be encouraging British people to holiday at home. Putting Dewar in charge of tourism is like leaving the fox in charge of the chicken coop.

The appointment puts BAA in an incredibly strong position to fight any increase in passenger duty or tourism taxes. It will allow the airport free reign to promote its expansion plans, which would lead to more noise and carbon emissions. And by equating itself with tourism, you can be sure that they won't be short of cash for expansion. Roll over while we rub your belly BAA.

Source: Flickr

Glasgow Airport is determined to pump more carbon into the atmosphere despite a massive drop in passenger demand. Well it’s no big news that the aviation industry does not require consumer demand to expand. Inspired by the predict and provide of the 1990’s road building which brought us a motorway through the centre of Glasgow, the industry is dedicated to creating demand with cheap flights - whether we want them or not.

Nevertheless, it's amazing that managing director Amanda McMillan just announced plans to invest £25 million 'improving' that airport because it lost one-in-eight passengers over the past year. Fly Globespan and Zoom Airline collapsed and most RyanAir flights moved to Edinburgh. Given that part of the airport was closed over winter due to lack of demand, why are they so dead set on expanding?

Technically, of course, they're not expanding; the airport is being "enhanced". In the Scottish National Planning Framework the word "expansion" was changed to allow airports to expand more easily. This means BAA can up the possible passenger numbers without going through any of a legitimate, democratic planning process.

Following the Copenhagen climate conference and a sparkling new Scottish Climate Change Bill, it would make sense to allow passenger numbers to drop naturally whilst driving for a high speed rail link. However, that wouldn't make BAA any money, so unsurpsingly it's not on the cards. Instead, they're dedicated to generating new and unsustainable demand. It's like the collapse of the passenger numbers which followed the recession has taught them nothing.

On top of this BAA Glasgow are also very pleased to announce that they are contributing £1 million towards the famed M74 extension. Not only are they creating excessive noise in Glasgow’s poorer neighbourhoods by flying jets metres above their heads, but also by helping build a motorway through the middle of the city. I wonder if they'll be putting thaton the 'community matters' section of their website. Thought not.

Source: Flickr

Last week we heard that there is going to be an emergency economic review of Glasgow Airport in the coming year to assess the level of economic importance of the airport. Passenger numbers have fallen 20% in the last two years and BAA have to sell off one of Edinburgh or Glasgow. But Gerry McCartney and Airport Watch Scotland just finished an economic report into the airport. Why not just look at that?

Could it be because the report wasn't complementary about the aviation industry? Gerry showed that Glasgow airport has a tourism deficit of £1.36 billion (which is also in line with the UK deficit of £17 billion) and is a drain on the local economy. This flies in the face of the Government's airport policy: expansion, expansion, expansion. The paper rightly noted that no one has examined what would happen if the airport didn't expand. Would the country go into shock? The fabric of our economic system break down? Not likely.

Halting the expansion of Glasgow airport means fewer sleepless nights for local residents, fewer greenhouse gas emissions and would move us towards our Climate Change Act targets. More people would chose to travel by more sustainable methods of transport, and it would reduce the airport's negative impact on the economy.

When Gerry’s report was launched in the Scottish Parliament after its release in December 2008, apart from the organiser not one single MSP showed up. It seems the politicians are only interested if reports about the aviation industry come from the aviation industry. It’s time for that to change.

Gerry concluded that "An informed way forward would be to plan a staged disinvestment in air travel alongside investment in sustainable industries and travel modes. This Just Transition would create a sustainable economy and more secure employment." Wake up Hollyrood, it’s time to plan for our future.

Source: Flickr

The weekend before last Plane Stupid activists joined residents from around Heathrow to celebrate the strength of community resistance to the third runway with an Adopt a Resident ceilidh. Not only was it a storming success, but it was on the eve of BAA announcing they’re probably going to shelve the third runway!

Never ones to to miss out on a dance, 18 Plane Stupid activists came all the way from Scotland complete with kilts, traditional songs, tartan bunting and 40 litres of veggie haggis! Word of the Scots’ arrival had even spread to the local bobby (and not, we hope, because of the NETCU database).

Local residents spun the activists round and round, stomping and yelling, whirling and twirling to the up-beat music of Cut-a-Shine. Surely there are few better ways to show country-wide solidarity than to dance together arm in arm?

After everyone was suitably sweaty from spinning and line dancing some choice speakers said some powerful words. It is obvious from this event that strong bonds have been forged across the country; as far apart as Heathrow and Aberdeen. Those threatened with compulsory purchase for Donald Trump’s housing and golf resort are not unlike the residents threatened by the Heathrow third runway: we're all suffering from a system that puts the wants of business before the needs of communities.

There followed some new Adopt a Resident pairings, joined in a ceremonial limbo under the arm tube before local band Pig Earth kicked off the rest of the night.

With haggis, kilts and Ceilidh dancing, Plane Stupid and NoTRAG showed BAA that there will no third runway and as if by magic some news the next day was excellent respite from a hang-over. If there’s an airport near you and a town hall close by, you’d better get your kilt on!

Source: Flickr

On Monday British Airways launched a new exclusively fat-cat service from one money Mecca to another. The route from London City to JFK airport is designed for high fliers to go 'City to Wall Street'. It's an attempt to win back business passengers (the backbone of BA's market share) to save them from losing £40 million a month.

The new flight comes as we hear about the impacts of BA's plans to pusht their loss onto - no, not the shareholders, silly - their staff. The airline said about 4,000 staff had volunteered for unpaid leave, 1,400 will switch to part-time work and 800 put their names forward for unpaid work, while 740 overseas staff also volunteered for the cost-saving drive. Suggestions that they should just fire the management and run the airline as a workers' co-operative aren't being taken seriously.

It should be obvious that jobs in aviation are unsustainable and insecure. We should using this recession to create and promote jobs in sustainable transport, but instead we could be moments from bailing out a company whose sole efforts to stay afloat involve pandering to the richest while asking their staff to work for free or face the boot.

Luxury, first-class air travel is the most polluting sector of the aviation industry (with the possible exception of jet packs). With a whole 32 passengers per plane, the City-JFK route reaches new heights of the super rich burning money, ignorant of any environmental consequences. Then again climate change won’t affect the rich nearly as much as the poor so why should they worry?

The flight costs up to £5000 per seat for passengers and about 61,127.9 kg of CO2, 24,462.27 kg of H20, 482.6 kg of NOx, and 194.1 kg of CO to the planet. As BA clamour to save themselves it is telling of the industry that they do so in the most damaging way possible. The aviation industry look hard set on destroying the economy and the environment.

Hooray for the climate-credit-crunch-crash!

In the year 250AB (After Burns), the Scottish Government launches a national advertising campaign to boost our tourism industry. Homecoming 2009 aims to promote Scotland’s natural landscape and unique architecture. The tourists are supposed to fly in, spend a fortune and revitalise our flagging economy. Until you do the maths, that is; then you find that BAA and Donald Trump are the only ones who'll benefit.

Ask almost anyone Scottish and it's clear that this is an unpopular campaign. It makes a mockery of Scottish traditions, depicting Scots as Haggis-munching kilt-and-sporan-wearing bagpipe players; the latest attempt to corporatise Scotland into a postcard country. What is the justification of publicising a country widely known as one of the most beautiful and richly historic in the world by focusing on throwing a caber, and - you guessed it - playing golf!

It’s slightly suspicious we’re championing the sport which through Donald Trump’s endeavours will destroy a true tourist attraction: the Menie dunes. The Homecoming branding is supposed to appeal to stereotype-hungry Scottish descendants but ignores the basis of what our tourism sector depends on: Scottish people. Most money spent at tourist destinations in Scotland is by Scots; evidenced on several occasions, including after the 9/11 and foot and mouth, when spending at tourist destinations in Scotland actually went up, despite a significant decrease in overseas visitors.

It is neither surprising, nor unexpected that BAA back the scheme, proudly stating on the Aberdeen airport site that "with direct flights from more than 25 countries to Scotland, it’s never been easier to come home.” BAA doesn't want to promote ex-pats and foreign tourists; it wants us to "come home" after we’ve spent all our money somewhere else and used one of their airport to get there.

The aviation industry claims that promoting airport expansion will bring tourism to Scotland, but increased flights are having the opposite effect. The UK has a £17 billion tourism deficit because UK residents spend more abroad than overseas visitors do here. The only people we need to come home are those who've bought into the industry's spin and become addicted to holidays abroad - and they won't be swayed by any amount of cliches, kilts and caber-tossing.

On 3rd March we shut Aberdeen airport for 6 hours, cancelling 19 flights and disrupting a further 20. BAA claim that the disruption cost around £1 million, but strangely claim that it wasn't the airport operator who paid the cost, but the cash-strapped North East of Scotland.

This is clearly ludicrous. Aviation gets off very, very lightly: avoiding fuel tax, escaping without paying VAT on tickets and throwing some token APD about every now and then as tif to compensate. This all adds up: £9 billion annually across the UK. This revenue comes straight from other sectors in the economy and is incredibly regressive. We don't all fly equally; by giving the airlines an easy ride we are transferring cash from those who fly least to those who fly most, from the poorest to the richest.

In a year when schools and hospitals are struggling to keep afloat it makes no sense to let wealthy fliers off so easily. Britain has the most expensive walk-on train fares in Europe and inadequate north-south rail links; meanwhile the Government has reduced rail subsidies and wants to expand all the airports. If BAA really gave a toss about the North East it could always volunteer to be taxed like everyone else. Thought not.