I object. I believe residents and possibly councillors are being mislead.
The JAAP is based on outdated,doubtful information carefully selected from the 2003 Future of Air Transport White Paper to support the case for expansion. It has been acknowledged that the White Paper must be revisited in the light of new information about climate change and the effects of the recession.

The government's independent advisory body on sustainability issues, the Sustainable Development Commission
http://www.sd-commission.org.uk/presslist.php?id=77 state,
'Disputed data underpinning the government's air transport policy is making it impossible to weigh up the true benefits and impacts of aviation, and should be updated by a special commission'
'The SDC and ippr held meetings with the Government, the aviation industry, academics, NGOs and citizens' groups over a period of a year. While we expected to find areas of conflict, we were unprepared for the level of fundamental disagreement over the data underpinning the Government's whole aviation strategy'
Simon Retallack, Associate Director of The Institute for Public Policy Research, said
"Good policy-making needs to be based on evidence that is widely agreed to be sound, which is not the case when it comes to aviation policy. Before any major new decisions are taken on airports, it is vital that the evidence is looked at again through an independent and widely supported process. Establishing a special commission to do that provides the Government with the best way forward."

Areas of disagreement between government departments, the aviation industry, academics, NGOs and citizens' groups include:
• Lack of agreed measures for assessing the benefits and impacts of aviation
Although widely credited with bringing economic benefits through trade and tourism, controversy remains over:
- The benefits of inbound tourism versus the losses from outbound domestic tourism, and the impact of tourism on developing countries
- Job and wealth creation from aviation; actual levels of inward investment, and the opportunity cost to other modes of transport
- The quantifiable impact of aviation on health and well-being, particularly from noise and local air pollution

• Lack of established data on the climate impacts of aviation, and lack of clarity over the role of technology
Significant scientific uncertainties remain over:
- The contribution of aviation contrails to climate change
- The potential for technology to make significant reductions to aviation's climate impacts; how soon improvements can be made, and whether other measures must be taken in the interim

• A lack of policy coherence across government
Clashing government priorities across different departments and agencies - including promoting economic growth, meeting future travel needs, protecting the environment, addressing climate change, and ensuring the health and well-being of communities - are contributing to a lack of coherence across government.

The report also warns that decisions about UK aviation policy must not pre-empt and undermine crucial UK and international policies addressing aviation's climate impacts, including:
• The UK Climate Change Bill
• The UK Aviation Duty Consultation
• European Union Emissions Trading Scheme
• The post-2012 Bali Roadmap'

The Executive Summary of a paper produced in March 09 by Brendon Sewill http://www.aef.org.uk/downloads//Airport_jobs_false_hopes_cruel_hoax_March2009_AEF.pdf
states
1. With the current recession, when thousands are losing their jobs, any promise of more jobs is welcome. Airports and airlines for their own commercial reasons tend, however, to exaggerate the number of jobs that will be created by airport expansion.


2. Claims that airports create 'indirect', 'induced' and 'catalytic' jobs are based on dubious statistical concepts.
3. Between 1998 and 2004, despite a 30% rise in air passengers, the total employment attributed to airports and airlines actually went down.
4. Master Plans produced by each airport are inconsistent, and their employment forecasts are little better than guesses - designed to influence local councillors and planners.
5. The Airport Operators Association has forecast that by 2030 an increase of 104 % in the number of passengers passing through UK airports will produce a 21% increase in jobs at airports.
6. UK residents took 41.5 million more return flights for leisure in 2005 than foreigners came here for leisure. The aviation tourism deficit is costing the UK about 900,000 jobs as a result of people spending their money abroad instead of here.
7. Aviation - direct employment at airports and by airlines - provides under 200,000 jobs in the UK. Thus at present air travel is costing the UK roughly a net 700,000 jobs.

8. That is not a moral judgement that people ought to spend their holidays in Britain, merely a statistical fact that flying abroad creates jobs elsewhere, not in this country.

9. As a result of the Government's plans for the growth in aviation, the situation is due to get worse. By 2030 the UK tourism deficit in terms of return trips by air passengers is forecast to double, to 88.5 million.

10. The growth in air travel is likely to lead to a net loss of a further 860,000 UK jobs by 2030. This loss of jobs will affect every part of the UK.
Brendon Sewill has an economics degree from Cambridge. He has been an adviser in the Treasury, and to the British Bankers Association, a member of the Council of the National Trust, a member of the CPRE national executive, and a vice president of the British Trust for Conservation Volunteers.

This information is easily found on links from government sites. There is no justification for the people planning this development to be ignoring what has happened since 2003.