Airport expansion and a commitment to reduce climate change are a contradiction in terms. We need to reduce air travel to a minimum not encourage it by ever decreasing its cost to the public. The increased revenue from a tax on aviation fuel could then be used to subsidise more environmentally friendly forms of transport such as rail.
544
Helen H
VAT on international airline fuel would be a very just tax for the poor of the world, it could be collected for the effects of flooding and disease due to global warming. We could start with a UK tax now.
543
Dawn
Stansteads campaign against airport expansion says it all quite simply, Cheap airflights cost the EARTH
542
elfgirl13
Just don't do it ! we don't need more and bigger airports !
541
billy angel
i dont want to see any more planes flying in our skies.they pollute and are unfairly subsidised.invest in rail!
540
D.M.Ratcliffe
I certainly won't allow the expansion to happen! The more aircrafts in the sky, pollutes more!
539
Daniel Estermann
I will not use a plane to go anywhere. I would rather stay at home than ten times oxygen as a train.
538
nobby
The government says it wants to take action against climate change but also wants to triple air travel. This is a contradiction. I oppose airport expansion.
537
Richard Martin
The world economy is hooked on carbon, and the increase in airport capacity will only make it worse. Goods that are shipped by sea will take to the skies. Traditional UK tourist destinations will wither and die, as weekend breaks remain ridiculously cheap.
Air Travel needs to be as expensive as the damage it cause. Fuel taxes need to be directly proportional to their Greenhouse emissions, and air travel is no exception. Our soceity needs to plan on reducing air travel, to deal with current unsustainable emissions. We need to have a program of closing existing airports, of scaling back unhealthy infrastructure, till air travel and freight is once more limited to cases where there are no other alternatives.