French court fines Air France over CityJet Irish contracts
CityJet, the biggest airline at City Airport, was found guilty in a French court last Tuesday of paying its French-based employees using Irish contacts (1). The court fined Air France, the parent company of CityJet, 100,000 euros. Only the previous week, CityJet had announced it was to shed half its staff (2).
Over the years questions have been asked about CityJet’s employment practices. London City Airport has consistently refused to say how many CityJet employees it includes in its own employment figures. All London City will say is that, when totalling the number of people employed at the airport, it does not count individual employers but "security passes". Anyone with a security pass is classed as employed at the airport. It has left the airport open to accusations of double-counting the jobs.
HACAN East Chair John Stewart said, “CityJet was found guilty in the French courts of illegal practices but the bigger scandal may be the fact it is colluding with City Airport in double-counting the jobs at the airport. This could allow London City to claim it employs a lot more people than it actually does. It is time for both organizations to come clean. After all, jobs are one of the main reasons both London City and Newham Council use to justify the noise and pollution caused by the airport.”
CityJet to axe half its staff
Main airline at LondonCityAirport to shed 500 jobs
CityJet, the main airline at LondonCityAirport, is to slash its staff numbers by 50%. In a statement which the company rushed out when the news emerged at the end of last week, CityJet claimed that is “is not considering reducing its network.”(1) However local campaign group HACAN East, which represents people living under the Heathrow and City flight paths, believes routes will be lost.
HACAN East Chair John Stewart said, “It is difficult to accept that the ailing company will be able to operate its current service with 50% less staff.”
It is thought that Air France, CityJet’s parent company, will no longer subsidise the airline’s losses and may have begun to look for a buyer for the troubled business. CityJet’s troubles may also affect the sale of CityAirport, which is expected to go on the market later this year (2).
The news emerged in a week when Green Mayoral candidate Jenny Jones repeated her call for CityAirport to be shut down. At the main transport hustings of the campaign Jones received prolonged applause when she made the call.
John Stewart said, “CityJet’s troubles ask further questions about the long-term future of the airport. When CrossRail is completed, Docklands will be within about half an hour of Heathrow. We hope the new Mayor will seriously examine the case for replacing CityAirport with an environmentally-friendly development that can bring more jobs to the local area than the airport has ever done.”
GLA Environment Committee calls for changes to way London City aircraft noise is measured
Recommends City and Heathrow noise measurements are combined
In a report published today the GLA Environment Committee has called for important changes to the way noise from City Airport is measured (1). It recommends that the noise measurements from Heathrow and London City Airport should be combined to reflect the way people who live under both flight paths hear the noise.
The Committee’s report says: “In recent years, residents in areas in east London, such as the Docklands, have begun to experience combined increased levels of noise from aircraft serving London City Airport and Heathrow. Yet the noise contours for both airports are drawn up separately. We understand that this situation may possibly apply to parts of south east London, such as Lewisham. We were told “That is clearly not how people hear noise…for those areas where you get a significant number of both Heathrow and City aircraft there has to be joint contours, otherwise it completely underestimates the actual noise that people are hearing in the area.” The Committee agrees with these conclusions and would urge the Department for Transport in conjunction with the Civil Aviation Authority to consider the scope for developing joint contours or other indicators…….for those areas of London where residents and communities are affected by the joint impact of noise from aircraft flying to and from Heathrow and London City Airports”.
John Stewart, the Chair of HACAN East, which represents residents living under the Heathrow and London City flights paths, said; “We welcome this recommendation from the committee. It is simple common-sense. At present, the way noise is measured doesn’t properly reflect the levels of noise experienced by people who live under both flight paths.”
In a wide-ranging report, the Committee also recommended that the Heathrow Airport Consultative Committee, and London City Airport Consultative Committee have periodic joint meetings to consider matters of common concern.
Success! Webtrak is coming to LCA website
Following HACAN East's press release earlier in the week, London City Airport have confirmed that they are bringing the popular Webtrak software to their website, allowing residents to monitor aircraft movements to and from London City Airport. Webtrak was installed on Heathrow's website after pressure from residents affected by Heathrow traffic, so we are pleased to see LCA finally following suit and giving east London residents the information they want.
London City New Website ‘a big missed opportunity’
Campaign group HACAN East, which represents residents under the London City and Heathrow flight paths, has called City Airport’s new website (1), that was unveiled last week, ‘a big missed opportunity’. The group has said that the new website should have included a ‘Webtrak’ facility such as BAA has on its Heathrow site. Webtrak allows people to use the internet to watch the planes as they and take off (2).
HACAN East Chair John Stewart said, “Webtrak is incredibly useful. It shows people exactly where the flight paths are and how high the planes are in any particular area. It is especially important for any people moving new into the area. London City missed a big opportunity by not installing Webtrak when revamping its website.”
HACAN East will be pressing London City to provide a Webtrak facility so people can easily access information about flight paths.
London: Too Dirty for Business?
‘London has got to clean up its act if its wants remain the top business city’
A new report (1) released today claims that it is not a lack of airport capacity which threatens London’s position as the top city in Europe to do business but its poor environment. Too Dirty for Business? concludes that London’s excellent transport links to the rest of the world make it Europe’s premier business city. However, that position is under threat because many of its rivals score more highly on quality of life, pollution and a lack of traffic congestion, all key considerations for businesses when deciding where to locate.
The report is published on the same day as London First’s Connectivity Commission is launching its findings. It is expected to call for more airport capacity in the South East.
Too Dirty for Business? highlights the findings of the annual survey carried out by the respected global property consultants Cushman & Wakefield which found that in 2011 “London is still ranked – by some distance from its closest competitors – as the leading city in which to do business.”
Cushman & Wakefield found that London’s international transport links were much better than those of its competitors. This finding has been endorsed by WWF in its report, International Air Connectivity for Business, which said Heathrow was ‘in a class of its own’ as far as its international air links were concerned.
London performed badly in all the surveys on the quality of life it offered, scoring particularly poorly on air pollution and traffic congestion.
Report author John Stewart said, “The message is clear. London has got to clean up its act if its wants remain the top city for business. New runways and new roads will just add to the pollution, noise and traffic congestion. You can’t have more flights and a better quality of life. A clear choice has got to be made.”
Too Dirty for Business? argues that that it cannot be assumed that, if no more airport capacity is built, London will lose its top spot: “The market will determine which destinations are served. Airlines using a constrained Heathrow, for example, will concentrate their resources on their most profitable, inter-continental routes which attract a significant number of business passengers, squeezing out short-haul leisure flights which will relocate to other London airports with spare capacity.”
London City Airport expected to be sold later this year
London City Airport is expected to be put up for sale this year (1). Declan Collier, who takes over as Chief Executive in the Spring, has been asked by its owners, Global Infrastructure Partners (GIP), to review the options for selling the airport.
At present it is thought the airport would struggle to fetch much more than the £742m that GIP paid for it in 2006. In a buoyant market, GIP and the current minority stake partner Highstar Capital could expect as much as £1.25bn.
Business passengers account for over 60% of trips at London City, by some distance the highest percentage of any UK airport. Most of those business passengers are heading for Docklands or the City of London. However, the benefits of the airport to East London are less clear-cut. London City directly employs less than 500 people.
John Stewart, Chair of HACAN East, which represents residents under the London City and Heathrow flight paths, said, “Surely this is the time to question what overall benefits City Airport brings to East and South East London. It causes noise and air pollution but contributes little to the local economy.”
Stewart added: “When Crossrail opens Canary Wharf will be within 40 minutes of Heathrow. Will there be any need for City Airport? Is that the chance to lift the blight caused by the airport?”
Cameron announces Thames Estuary Airport Study
HACAN East: “What nobody has dared tell us is how far the noise footprint from an Estuary Airport would extend into London”
Prime Minister David Cameron has announced that a new airport in the Thames Estuary will form part of the Government’s consultation on its aviation policy, expected in March (1). The Government has ruled out any new runways in the South East for the duration of this Parliament but the consultation will include options for new runways for the longer-term. However, any further expansion of Heathrow has been ruled out.
The decision to include the option of a Thames Estuary Airport appears to have been made under pressure from business interests which are concerned about lack of capacity. However, the Government’s own forecasts of future demand, published last July, suggest that no new runway would be required before 2030.
An estuary airport would call into question the future of Heathrow. The Department for Transport concluded in 2002 that there was not the market in London and the South East for two international hub airports.
John Stewart, Chair of HACAN East, which represents residents under the London City and Heathrow flight paths, said: “There are real concerns in East and South East London that aircraft from Heathrow would simply be replaced by aircraft from a Thames Estuary airport. What nobody has dared tell us is how far the noise footprint from an Estuary Airport would extend into London. It is likely to considerable as they are talking about a four runway, 24 hour airport. Of course flights will either come in or take off over the sea but there is no way they can avoid built up areas. ”
Stewart added: “There are also huge questions to be asked as to whether any government should even be considering this sort of airport given aviation’s fast-growing contribution to climate change.”
Flight Path to Poverty
A shock report published last week has revealed that East London tops the league for child poverty. It contains three of the worst boroughs in the country. Tower Hamlets heads the list. The report from the Campaign to End Child Poverty (4) found 52% of its children are in poverty. Hackney, the fourth worst borough, has 39% in poverty and Newham, in sixth place, 37%.
HACAN East (1), which represents residents under London City and Heathrow flight paths, said that many of these areas are also blighted by aircraft noise. A 2007 report by the respected noise consultants Bureau Veritas found aircraft noise levels in parts of Tower Hamlets matched those in West London (2) while a CAA report into the effects of noise on children showed that noise from aircraft had a serious detrimental effect of a child's cognitive abilities (3).
The CAA report says "there is evidence to suggest that chronic aircraft noise has a deleterious effect on memory, sustained attention, reading comprehension and reading ability. Early studies highlighted that aircraft noise was also implicated in children from noisy areas having a higher degree of helplessness i.e. were more likely to give up on difficult tasks than those children in quieter areas"
HACAN East spokesman Alan Haughton, said, “Many communities close to and under the London City Airport flight path are trapped in poverty. There is cross board agreement that one of the key factors to lift children out of poverty is education. Chronic aircraft noise has a negative impact on a child's reading comprehension and ability which in turn can have a detrimental effect on a child's education and further trapping them in a cycle of poverty. We should be prioritising these children and not those overhead in their private jets”.
Drew Primary School and UEL are two examples of education facilities that are metres from London City Airports' active runway. Drew Primary School is shockingly within the 66 – 69db contour – nearly 20 decibels over what the World Health Organisation say is acceptable.
HACAN East has broken down the figures into wards overflown. It shows that two of the most heavily overflown wards in Tower Hamlets, Bromley-by-Bow and Whitechapel, have child poverty levels of 55% and 53% respectively. In Newham two of the wards closest to the airport, Royal Docks and Beckton, have figures of 37% and 35%.
In Barking, Mayesbrook ward, heavily overflown by departing aircraft, has child poverty levels of 37%. In Waltham Forest, the two wards with the highest poverty levels – Leyton (40% and Cathall 39%) – are flown over by both Heathrow and London City aircraft.
South of the river wards with high levels of child poverty experience aircraft noise: Thamesmead Moorings (33%); Woolwich Common and Woolwich Riverside (both 42%).