We now have a new message board on the website. To continue this debate or to comment on anything else, please go to the link below or on the left and join in the discussions:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/cgi-perl/h2/h2.cgi?state=threads&board=england.coventry&&sort=T
Thanks
麻豆官网首页入口 Coventry and Warwickshire website team
I am a resident in Coventry City & i am with the planning to build up a new or expand Coventry airport because i think every city in England must have one to ease & encourge flights & holiday makers.
Name not supplied
I am currently a business student at Coventry University. Having lived in Coventry for three months and seen some of the surrounding villages, its obvious that no-one wants this airport built. But you must consider that something must be done about the state of our countrys transport. If a new airport is not built, then the government will go somewhere else and extend one.
You have to consider which would be the best option in the long term and I seriously believe that bringing more jobs and money to the area would be of benefit. You must also understand that I have a slight biased view coming from Luton and living very close to the current airport there.
Ben Agar-Hutton
Coventry
Obviously some of the signatures are from people who don't live in either rugby or coventry and they certainly cannot be from the villages affected or they would not be villages!
I'm totally sick of these so called environment friendlies and others pretending to help, if they want to help try canvassing the people of willenhall who have already had to live with the effects of baginton airport for years and no amount of consultation has removed the risk of accidents as they once again use the area over our homes and schools as a flight path, another thing we were promised that would not happen after the last crash.
Nobody wants to talk to us but we are most certainly going to be affected in a big way, whether it be noise, pollution, loss or gain of jobs. What we will ultimately lose is our ability to take a 5 minute walk and be out in the countryside one of the few assets of living on the edge of the city. But nobody wants our views as this 70,000 signature petition shows by not having mine.
Maybe whoever set up the petition would care to contact me through this talking point.
Cath Harris
What happened to me getting the chance to sign the 70,000 signature petition? Once again I reiterate the people of Willenhall are not being involved in this debate. That petition is winging its way to Downing Street without my signature because I have not been approached for my views. This smacks of bias.
Cath Harris
Willenhall
The new airport would bring new jobs to this area, less people have to be moved out of the area where the new airport would be built, most people go overseas on holiday most of them fly to get there, once again they want to fly away on holiday but not in my back yard.
So the people protesting against the airport should really not fly out of any airport from the UK.
Andrew
Rugby
It beggars belief that people have the time
and passion to complain about signs which
are drawing attention to the outragous proposal on a New airport between Coventry and Rugby.
Don't people realise that once the green belt has gone, it cannot be replaced.
We need to conserve what bit of green belt we have left for future generations,this government, and future governments must remember we are all custodians of the countryside lets preserve.
Can the air traffic reaaly be assessed when flights are priced at 拢9.99 one way to Paris, come on, this is just another dot com waiting to happen. Lodge your protest now before oits to late.
Jean Bird
How many people protesting against the airport fly? Believe it or not our isatiable appetite for 'cheap travel' is probably going towards encouraging future generations to expect to be able to travel by air from anywhere at cheap prices.
Are we telling the future generations that they can't have what we take for granted? Air travel IS growing (how may of us don't fly?) and unfortunately demands growth, just like cars/roads). Would most of the protesters still like to use a new airport, but one built miles away from where they live?
On the silly jobs/business argument, how long will it be before our last few tracts of land are covered up for the interests of creating jobs? Would most of those giving this argument wish for all of their local green areas and countryside to be built on for the creation on jobs?
Clive Greatorex
Nuneaton
I live near Baginton airport and note the local papers are not saying very much. Neither have we had any flyers or info from the council.
Surely we will be affected by the airport just as much as the villagers or do we not matter as we are considered to be living in a 'poorer area'?
Have we reverted back to the class system or are we just invisible? The people of Church Lawford have always had an airport on their doorstep just like the people of Eastern Coventry.
If they decided to knock down parts of Willenhall who would complain, probably no one as I said they are considered 'poor'. Another thing, are people aware that a railway station is to be built in Willenhall within the next 20 years? I wonder why a 'poor' area needs a railway station?
Let's face facts the decision has already been taken that's why the councils are not up in arms about it.
C Harris
Coventry
The airport is a rubbish idea.
Sarah
Rugby
Ignoring, for a second, the rights and wrongs of the proposed airport, can I just make a point regarding the recent 'blockade' of the A45.
I can't see any way in which aggravating already stressed drivers is likely to win more people over to the cause.
If the 'antis' really think they're being ignored by Government, then why not take the protest down to London instead of inconveniencing innocent neighbours and travellers in Warwickshire?
If everyone with a gripe against Whitehall blocks the roads, where does it end?
Russ Cassidy
Coventry
To those complaining about the anti-airport posters and banner, don't worry, soon it will be jumbo jets obscuring your view and distracting drivers!
Surely this is a more pressing issue than the current niggling about the legality/illegality of the poster campain.
Dr Nikki Cooper
Stretton-on-Dunsmore
Considering the proposed Rugby airport will affect 500,000 people, why has it not been covered on the national news?
Perhaps Warwickshire is not deemed important. 7,000 people protested against the airport on sunday. It was only covered on the local news. I'm sure if it had been a protest about Stanstead it would have been reported on.
Caroline Hill
Warwickshire
As you know, I have for months been suggesting that the plans for new or expanded airports in the UK could be greatly affected by the resurgence of well organised terrorism. And that the Department of Transport Consultation Document had not taken sufficient account of this, dismissing the attacks of 11 September 2001 far too easily. This is equally relevant for Rugby, Coventry, Birmingham or the South.
I hate to be proved right in so awful a way, but the appalling attack in Bali suggests that tourism is now being specifically targeted. Tourism there will now collapse. Where next?
And who knows what will happen in the Middle East?
My wife and I will continue to travel as far as our limited finance allows but I was a career Diplomatic Service officer, who saw enormous violence and literally lost count of the threats which I received. Others may seek a quieter life be greatly put off travelling. So, if this goes on, as I fully expect, plans for airport expansion anywhere in the UK need to be looked at very carefully. And, as I have consistently said, the Department should also check the comparable forecasts of other major countries.
Everyone should realise that this whole issue is first international; then national; then regional; and only then local. If the Department had concentrated from the start on the international politico-economic situation, a lot of decent people could, I suspect, have been spared much unnecessary worry.
May I also remind any intending travellers of the Foreign Office website, www.fco.gov.uk <http://www.fco.gov.uk>. This contains excellent advice regarding every country in the World.
David Skinner
Coventry
1) Is the Proposed Rugby airport site a) just a deviation to encourage the "preferred" 2nd runway in Birmingham. or b) is it just another knock at Birmingham following the decisions not to have the "Dome" and "Wembley" alternatives there even after all the Business support which could have saved all the tax payers they have cost.
2) Further to an earlier comment, the vote on the alternate sites to Wembley went for Birmingham; is the consultancy just another waste of time and effort since Birmingham business again has come out in favour of Birmingham; again this undemocratic government seems to ride rough shod over opinion. Does "Public consultancy" really have any bearing on the outcome?
3) I heard a discussion this a.m. on the radio as I left the region and did not catch the name of the politician who stated that he was in favour of the development; this was because if it did not happen investment would not be coming in the future. I wonder what he did to promote the "Dome/Wembley" proposals?
4) Is a full and fully transparent environmental review going to be carried out on the options? After all the UK have ratified Kyoto along with the EU and are supposed also to be encouraging EMS.
5) How much more traffic congestion is predicted in the region and how many more roads will need to be widened and improved if the Rugby option was to be approved?
R Stubbs
Nuneaton
Isn't democracy a joke. In effect the government can do whatever it likes after going through a "consultation". Even if 90% of the people in Warwickshire voted against the airport, this would not make any difference to their plans.
Derek Emery
Bulkington
Crazy! Could not agree more with Liz Lynn [airport meeting]. Someone has to do something before we all go down the pan, and pretty sharpish too!
Geoff Gardiner
Location not specified
With the huge predicted increase in passengers, could you tell me where all the aircraft are coming from to carry them and how will national air traffic control services cope with the increased aircraft movements.
Kenneth Jones
Location not specified
1. Why do we need more runways when aeroplanes are being made bigger i.e more people carried by existing runways?
2. Can we prevent the expansion of all airports in the area?
While we all want a good economy that does not always have to be at the expense of the greenbelt and our countryside. Having just returned from Stansted on Sunday I am absolutely horrified at the prospect of such an airport just down the road from me. Both in terms of noise from the aircraft and traffic around the area. At a stand still for 30 minutes on Sunday evening in October. What a cheek for the South-East who would not give us the national stadium but are prepared to dump an airport on us.
Please can you ask the question:
How many are prepared to sacrfice the convenience of an airport nearby in order to save our countryside?
Neal McGrattan
Location not specified
I would like to know if anyone has considered that in the next 20 years or so we may not need these very long runways. I would expect vertical take-off for aircraft to be developed or at least partial vertical takeoff so that
much shorter runways will be needed.
Lytton Jarman
Rugby
Since September 11 2001, many companies have stopped or reduced travel. As I understand most of the expansion is in the holiday market.
As a general rule these do not use the large jets. Surely the answer is mederate expansion of Birmingham East Midlands and Coventry and a GOOD QUALITY CHEAP monorail link between Nottingham, Coventry and Birmingham centres via the airports?
Keep the airports about the same size. Expand Baginton, then get together with airlines and ensure that all flights are full, instead of two half empty planes.
THEN build a good fast cheap monorail link between Nottingham, Coventry and Birmingham centres via the airports and improve efficiency.
David Cross
Solihull
In the event of the new airport being built at Rugby, what are the implications for Birmingham with particular reference to its second city status?
Michael Hickman.
Location not specified
Surely it will bring a lot of jobs and business to the area? Here is a chance of a positive transport policy for a change yet everybody is opposing it - how stupid!
Ian Payne
Lichfield
The proposed airport at Church Lawford is to being funded by private money only. If problems occur trying to control The River Avon from flooding etc. Will the costs escalate and become like The Channel Tunnel, The Dome. Will any private investors risk their money on such a risky project.
David Sampson
Brinklow
The enlarging of Coventry Airport is happening under our noses but very quietly. Will this airport also be closed if the new airport between Coventry and Rugby is built?
Diane Francis
Stoneleigh
I have four questions that I would like presented to the panel and I can
confirm that I will be present;
1 What percentage of the 175,000 passengers using the new airport each day will be transit passengers just changing aircraft? Does the report give that data?
2 Air pollution, including from aircraft and the surface traffic pollution associated with airports, kills up to 24,000 people in the UK every year and requires medical treatment for thousands more. The health costs of air pollution from the UK aviation sector are estimated at more than 拢1.3 billion a year.
Given these facts would the panel not agree, that it would be better to distribute increased air travel among regional airports rather than creating a monstrous pollution cloud over 1 midland area.
3 Justification of the new airport is based on passenger 'modeling' which assumes that airport users would travel to the Rugby site by rail from London. Given that passengers are moving from rail to air because of the high cost of rail travel, do the Panel really believe that such a rail service would really be a success?
4 Given that we have an International Rail Link close to Daventry, would the Panel agree that development of this service to a direct Channel Tunnel link and from there into the international network via Lille, Paris and Brussels would be a better, cheaper, safer, a lower polluter and more attractive option than ripping up acres of
greenbelt?
Louise Brooks
Question for 麻豆官网首页入口 meeting on Thursday 17 October 2002 at Benn Hall in Rugby.
Rugby Airport proposals incorporate 95% greenbelt. How can the Government
even consider this option, and what was the point of introducing greenbelt,
to subsequently sacrifice it for so called 'progress' ?
Catherine Welch
Long Itchington, Southam
From a pure business perspective, a new airport would be to our advantage.
But profit isn't everything. It is overwhelmingly clear that our local communities DO NOT WANT THIS AIRPORT.
So we have offered to assist with the fight against the airport and will continue to do so until the idea is scrapped!
We would like to see other local businesses make a similar public statement,unless they are quietly hoping that the new airport will actually be built!
Richard Samson
Heart of England Co-op Society, Nuneaton
My questionn for the panel at Rugby is as follows:-
How can the UK state that it wishes to decrease greenhouse gases by 20% below 1990 levels by the year 2008 and at the same time plan to double or treble air traffic thus increasing grfeenhouse gasews by14%? This damage is global in its efecgts and not just a NNIMBY or luddite concern.
Richard Gunstone
Brinklow
I would like to propose that a compromise is discussed.
The proposal on the table seems to be flawed.
Why not consider two midland airports.
Keep Birmingham and build a new one of similar size.
This would mean that the orientation of the runways would be similar to that of Birmingham, so that they do not intersect.
This proposal would therefore service north and south Birmingham.
The fact of the matter is we need additional capacity, to generate super airports creates transport problems.
If the orientation of the new runways cause a problem then a alternative site should be established.
The principle of two airports is sound.
As we have all used air transport it is hypocritical to say just no.
It is also wrong for Warwickshire to be used as a dumping ground for the nations air transport expansion.
Ben Black
Coventry
| 
