Dear Mr Holland-Kaye
Thank you for your letter of 15 December.
The changes that NATS made, without consultation, in June 2014 to the Compton Gate have resulted in incessant noise over the Wokingham area due to the concentration of flights over one area, rather than their dispersal. The various mitigating effects that you have described to me over the past months appear good in theory but they are having no effect on reducing the noise level above our houses.
I have no wish to engage in a continuous dialogue or await some new consultation. What I and my constituents wish to see is a return to the pre-June2014 dispersal and Gate policies.
It is difficult to see why Wokingham would wish to support an expansion of the airport if this matter cannot be put right promptly.
Yours sincerely
John Redwood
January 2, 2016
It might be worth quoting from the “Operations – Proof of Evidence” HAL.MB.P.1 that the Heathrow team recently submitted to the Planning Inspectors presiding over the recent Appeal Inquiry hearing regarding the works to end the Cranford Agreement.
“3.8.3. Furthermore, the Civil Aviation Authority (Air Navigation) Directions 2001 (as amended),
published under Section 66(1) of the Transport Act 2000 set out the circumstances when
the CAA must also seek the approval of the SofS for “changes to the design or to the
provision of airspace arrangements, or to the use made of them”, namely where those
changes would have a significantly detrimental effect on the environment or where they
would have a significant effect on the level or distribution of noise and emissions. The
Directions included within the definition of “airspace arrangements” “changes to air traffic
control procedures, or to the provision of navigational aids or the use made of them in air
navigation”. It follows that a number of operational changes involving airspace change,
changes to ATC procedures or navigational aids will trigger the involvement of the SofS
and the consideration of environmental information before any decision can be taken on
their implementation.”
Andrew Haines, Chief Executive of CAA, has argued that changes due to NATS vectoring choices are not changes that are subject to the formal Airspace Change Process ( see
http://www.gatwickobviouslynot.org/docs/GON_Statement_of_Facts_and_Grounds.pdf
)
It is noteworthy that Heathrow does not appear to accept this .