This snapshot taken on 03/12/2009, shows web content selected for preservation by The National Archives. External links, forms and search boxes may not work in archived websites.

Minutes of the External Advisory Group, 15 October 2007

Minutes of the External Advisory Group Meeting, Aviation White Paper, held on 15 October 2007 in Great Minister House.

Attendees: Jonathan Moor (Chair) - DfT Barry Humphreys- Virgin, John Parkinson - DfT, Jonathan Bailey - MAG, Martin Capstick - DfT, Stuart Condie - BAA, Lucy Gordon - DfT, Robert Siddall - AOA, Dipak Valand - DfT, Simon Evans - AUC, David Hart – DfT, Nic Ferriday - FoE, John Faulkner - DfT, Jim Bailey - SASIG, Neil Shorten - DfT, Anna Mahoney – SASIG, Chola Mukanga - DfT, Ken Crawford -  SE, Paul Ellis- BA, Mike Carrivick – BAR-UK, Danny Pedri - DHL, Sarah Samuels - SDC, Owen Simon - CBI, Tim Johnson – AEF, Roger Wiltshire – BATA   

Apologies: Eddie Redfern - Charter Airlines Group, Victoria Mayo - DfT

Introduction

John Parkinson, DfT Head of Airports Policy, opened the meeting by welcoming everyone to the tenth meeting of the External Advisory Group (EAG). He apologised on Jonathan Moor’s behalf as he was delayed at another meeting. 

Heathrow Consultation

John Parkinson presented the key steps of the Heathrow consultation and the communications plans. He explained that the timing of the consultation had not yet been fixed, but that it would take place before the end of the year.

He explained that the consultation aimed to report on and invite views on the outcome of the Project for the Sustainable Development of Heathrow, describing how additional runway capacity (including a third runway and Mixed Mode) might be provided, its likely local environmental impacts and how these might be mitigated. The consultation would also invite views on proposed changes to operational procedures, including the Cranford agreement and Westerly Preference.

The Group were encouraged to engage and register their views once the consultation was published. John Parkinson explained that a detailed communications plan had been devised to increase awareness, access and action in order to engage all key groups including local residents, the Heathrow workforce, passengers, the aviation industry, business and commerce, the travel and hospitality sectors, local government and other interest groups.

The Group were interested in knowing more about the process for analysing consultation responses. John Parkinson explained that the response analysis work was going to be undertaken by an external company with expertise in this area, and there would also be a parallel analysis and quality assurance by the DfT. This analysis was expected to take approximately two to three months, which would be used to inform a Ministerial decision expected mid-2008.

Air Passenger Demand and CO2 Emissions Forecasts Report

Neil Shorten, DfT International Networks Analysis and Support, gave a brief presentation on the Air Passenger Demand and CO2 Emissions Forecasts Report, highlighting the purpose, the context and the timing of the report. He explained that the report fulfilled DfT’s commitment set out in the 2006 ATWP Progress Report and provided a single reference document clearly explaining DfT forecasting methods on passenger demand. The report was due to be published at the same time as the Heathrow consultation.

Neil Shorten explained that the report would offer:

  • A clear explanation of unconstrained and constrained forecasting methods – replacing and expanding on explanations in the 2000 ‘UK Aviation Demand Forecasts’ and the 2004 ‘Passenger Forecasts – Additional Analysis’ report.
  • A clear explanation of the new, detailed CO2 forecasting method which replaced the method and explanation in the 2004 ‘Aviation & Global Warming’ report.
  • The latest demand and CO2 forecasts and refreshed Net Present Values of ATWP-supported developments.

A question was raised with regards to the assumptions that were made for the forecasts about tax, in view of the recent pre-budget report. In response it was explained that aviation was assumed to meet its external climate change costs.

Air Transport White Paper Evaluation Strategy

Chola Mukanga, DfT International Networks Analysis and Support, gave a presentation on the ATWP Evaluation Strategy. He explained that the evaluation strategy was an ATWP commitment which had been reaffirmed in the 2006 Progress Report, and that its publication was planned for later in the year, probably at the same time as the Heathrow consultation. Chola Mukanga stressed that the strategy provided a framework for evaluation and was not itself an evaluation. The role of the EAG would be key in taking the work forward.

He explained that, following a competitive tendering exercise, National Economic Research Associates (NERA) had been selected to take forward the work on the evaluation strategy which was also being independently peer reviewed by Professor Steve Martin of Cardiff Business School.

The evaluation strategy would provide a framework for evaluating specific ATWP policies as well as the impact of publishing the ATWP. Members of the Group were interested in the implications of this strategy and some were keen to see that this strategy was aimed at taking a longer term view of ATWP implementation. There were some concerns in the Group that the results of the evaluation could be used to re-open ATWP policies. The DfT confirmed that the results of any evaluation would be used as one of several factors to inform robust policy making and delivery. Future policy decisions would not be made on the basis of evaluation results alone.

ANASE Study (Attitudes to Noise from Aviation Sources in the England)

David Hart, DfT Head of International Networks Analysis and Support (INAS), provided an update on the ANASE study and outlined the emerging key messages, which showed that the point at which annoyance became particularly significant was still not clear and that people were more annoyed now than in the 1980s when the ANIS study was first conducted. However, it was difficult to say by how much, as the non-stated preference peer reviewers had concluded that the detailed ANASE results were not robust for policy purposes. The publication of the study would be accompanied by a peer review report which would make clear concerns about the study’s findings. He informed the Group that the publication was likely to be web-based and the timing of the publication had not yet been confirmed. The Group were interested in receiving future updates on this work.

Transport Strategy Framework

John Faulkner, DfT Head of International Networks, provided a brief update to the Group on the forthcoming transport framework document. He explained that it was the DfT’s response to the Eddington Study and the Stern Report both of which helped to set out forward thinking and long-term strategies for tackling key challenges for the UK transport system. The document would be the first in a series of DfT activities on long-term planning. In particular, he highlighted that the document would set out DfT’s plans for:

  • Changing how DfT engages with stakeholders
  • Building on the strong evidence-based approach
  • Improving dialogue via workshops and meetings, which is expected to begin between January and March 2008
  • Developing a Green Paper and then a White Paper.

He explained that the DfT was keen to hear views from this Group following publication of the framework in December. The Group commented on the positives of a methodical approach, but some members felt that it was also important not to delay delivery of infrastructure. John Faulkner confirmed that this would not stop any existing schemes, but it would simply prioritise and look to reinforce a new cross-modal approach reflected in the new DfT structure.

AOB

Jonathan Moor confirmed that at the last meeting in July the Group had agreed to meet two or three times a year. Based on discussions at the meeting, the Group might consider the review of Air Passenger Duty (APD) as had been announced in the pre-budget report. Some members noted that this might link to the Emissions Cost Assessment. DfT would look to ensure that any discussion of APD in the Group was in the context of the Treasury’s plans for conducting the review. Other suggestions for future meetings were the implementation of ATWP Evaluation Strategy and the Transport Framework document. Jonathan Moor proposed that the next meeting should be in February. He also suggested the possibility of holding tailored ‘brain storming’ sessions on specific topics as needed.

Airports Policy Division,
December 2007