Heathrow bosses tells Supreme Court they want to press on with third runway plans that Friends of the East claim would 'contribute to major threat to life on Earth'
Heathrow bosses today told the Supreme Court they want to press on with controversial plans to build a third runway that environmental campaigners insist would be 'a major threat to our environment and to life on Earth'.
Lawyers for Heathrow Airport Ltd told five justices today that the firm, which owns and operates the London airport, still wishes to go ahead with the project.
However, they said construction could not be completed until 2030 at the earliest, even if work begins in the near future.
The firm is challenging a Court of Appeal ruling given in February, which cast doubt on the future of the proposed £14billion expansion.
The Government gave Heathrow, Europe's busiest airport before the coronavirus pandemic, the green light to expand in 2018, with building of the third runway given a 2022 start date.
But campaigners blocked the expansion at the Court of Appeal in February, after three judges ruled that the Government's failure to take into account its own climate change commitments had been 'legally fatal'.
At a virtual Supreme Court hearing today, Heathrow said that the Court of Appeal made various errors of law when reaching its decision.
The airport said it had always been the case that planning permission would depend on its compliance with carbon reduction obligations.
Should Heathrow win the case, it will delay construction by at least two years, with the airport blaming the move on the legal challenges and pandemic.
Demonstrators in favour of a third Heathrow runway gather outside the Royal Courts of Justice, London, where a panel of five Supreme Court justices are due to determine whether the decision to support the expansion of Heathrow Airport was unlawful
Members of ecological protest group Friends of the Earth demonstrate outside the Supreme Court in London today against the expansion of Heathrow Airport
Addressing the court at the outset of the hearing, Lord Anderson QC, representing Heathrow, said: 'My instructions are very clear on this – Heathrow Airport Ltd does still wish to construct the north-west runway.'
In February, three leading judges concluded that former transport secretary Chris Grayling failed to take account of the Government's commitments to tackling climate change when setting out support for the project in an Airports National Policy Statement .
How this is the latest development in 17 years of wrangling over Heathrow Airport
December 2003: Labour ministers publish plans for a third runway at Heathrow, saying it is needed to keep pace with other European hubs.
January 2009: Gordon Brown green lights plans despite opposition from residents, environmental activists and many of his own MPs.
October 2009: As Opposition leader, David Cameron publicly states he will block Heathrow expansion.
May 2010: The Tory-Lib Dem Coalition emerges after the election, and rules out the west London plans.
September 2012: The idea is revived as an independent commission is set up to look at expansion of Heathrow and Gatwick, and a new airport in the Thames Estuary.
July 2015: The Airports Commission recommends Heathrow should get a new runway.
July 2016: David Cameron resigns as PM in the wake of the EU referendum, and is replaced by Theresa May - with no decision taken on Heathrow.
July 2017: Heathrow scales back proposals for a new terminal to reduce project costs.
June 2018: Revised plans with a £14billion price tag are approved by Cabinet, with the proviso that taxpayers will not face any cost.
June 25, 2018: Greg Hands resigns from government to vote against the National Policy Statement - effectively outline planning permission. But Boris Johnson, who previously vowed to 'lie down in front of bulldozers', is abroad in Afghanistan when MPs vote in favour by a majority of 296.
December 2019: As PM, Boris Johnson does not change official policy on Heathrow but says he will 'find a way' of honouring his bulldozer pledge.
February 2020: The Court of Appeal rules that the NPS was unlawful as government had not considered its obligations under the Paris Climate Change Agreement. The Government says it does not support appealing the case, but Heathrow says it will go to the Supreme Court.
April 2020: The airport says all expansion plans will be pushed back by at least two years due to the disruption caused by the coronavirus.
May 2020: Heathrow admits it could be 10 to 15 years before the airport needs a third runway due to the crisis.
The Court of Appeal considered the case following a challenge by a group of councils in London affected by the expansion, environmental charities including Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth and Plan B Earth, and London Mayor Sadiq Khan.
Following the ruling, campaigners hailed it as a victory, saying it had 'killed off' plans for a third runway for good and that the project is now 'politically unacceptable'.
The effect of the ruling, which overturned a previous High Court decision made in May last year, was that current Transport Secretary Grant Shapps would have to review the ANPS to ensure it accords with the commitments on climate change.
The Government did not oppose the court's declaration that the ANPS was unlawful and did not seek permission to appeal to the Supreme Court.
Lord Anderson today argued that the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that the Paris Agreement constituted Government policy and that the ANPS was unlawful.
The airport said it had always been the case that planning permission would depend on its compliance with carbon reduction obligations.
Should Heathrow win the case, it will delay construction by at least two years, with the airport blaming the move on the legal challenges and pandemic.
The airport's appeal is being opposed by environmental charities Friends of the Earth and Plan B Earth – both of which argue that the appeal should be dismissed.
In written submissions to the court, Friends of the Earth's lawyer, David Wolfe QC, said the construction of a third runway would 'lead to many additional flights over a period of up to 80 years which, by generating additional carbon dioxide (CO2) and through non-CO2 effects could – unusually for a single project – contribute significantly to climate change, a major threat to our environment and to life on Earth'.
The Supreme Court hearing will conclude tomorrow and the justices are expected to reserve their ruling.
A spokesman said: 'Heathrow will ensure the expansion project is compliant with the UK's climate-change obligations, including under the Paris Climate Agreement, as part of our plans to reach net-zero carbon.
'We fully expect to be held to account by government through the planning process.'
Ahead of the hearing, demonstrators from Friends of the Earth and from Back Heathrow, a group which supports the airport expansion, gathered outside the court.
Parmjit Dhanda, executive director of Back Heathrow, said: 'Although this appeal is a technical one about whether the Government took the Paris Agreement into account when agreeing its national policy on airports, the need to create jobs for the future is more important than ever.'
In a statement ahead of the Supreme Court hearing, Will Rundle, head of legal at Friends of the Earth, said: 'Without the Government in the picture, this case has become one about business interests versus the wellbeing of people everywhere facing the impact of the climate crisis.
'The Court of Appeal rightly ruled against the expansion of Heathrow, and we're now here to defend our historic win for the planet.'
A computer generated image released by Heathrow Airport on June 18, 2019 shows what the airport will look like in 2050 following the completion of a third runway and new terminals
He added: 'We are pleased that the Supreme Court will now make an authoritative ruling and remain confident the court will re-affirm that the Paris Agreement cannot be ignored, and all the damaging climate impacts of Heathrow expansion must be fully considered in any decision.'
Tim Crosland, director of Plan B Earth, said: 'The Government has distanced itself from the sacked minister Chris Grayling's position that the Paris Agreement was 'not relevant' to the decision to expand Heathrow Airport.
'That's not because the Government is genuinely committed to the Paris Agreement.
'Its actions tell a different story. But it can at least see a problem in admitting it's not taking the Paris Agreement seriously, given that maintaining the Paris temperature limit is vital to our collective future and given that it is chairing the next round of UN talks at (climate change conference) COP26.
'Heathrow Airport Limited, however, has no such concerns.'
Since the ruling against the runway in February, the aviation sector has been hit by its worst ever downturn, meaning Heathrow now has plenty of spare capacity.
But Heathrow, which is owned by Spain's Ferrovial, the Qatar Investment Authority and China Investment Corp among others, continues to want to expand.
'My instructions are very clear on this: Heathrow Airport Limited does still wish to construct the Northwest runway,' said lawyer David Anderson at the hearing.
By 2030, when the runway could be completed, he said the pandemic would be a 'distant memory'.
A judgment is expected in early 2021.