Plans to expand Lydd’s London Ashford Airport in Kent spell bad news for birds and, even worse, could result in nuclear disaster, the High Court has heard.
The joint decision of the secretaries of state for Communities and Transport to approve an extended runway and new terminal building are under double-pronged attack from the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds and local campaigners the Lydd Airport Action Group.
The RSPB, which launched the first attack on the decision during a four-day hearing, says that the development will harm a surrounding area of “exceptional importance for birds”, as an increase in commercial aircraft activity will require inevitable increase in control measures used to reduce the risk of bird strikes.
Now the Action Group is also seeking to have the decision quashed as the battleground shifts to the potential risk posed by additional aircraft to the nearby Dungeness B nuclear power station and Dungeness A, which is currently being decommissioned.
Matthew Horton QC said today that Dungeness A and B were not constructed to withstand the impact of aircraft above a certain weight, and if heavy aircraft were to crash on Dungeness B, it “could cause a nuclear accident of the most serious kind”.
Such a “Target 9” accident is defined as one which risks causing 100 or more fatalities, either immediate or eventual, but he said that it could be thousands of deaths or even more.
He argued that, in finding that the proposals were not objectionable on grounds of nuclear safety, the secretaries of state wrongly elected to accept, uncritically, evidence from the Office for Nuclear Regulation which, he claimed, was flawed in respect of flight numbers that will result from the development.
It is claimed that there will be an increase in heavy commercial aircraft that will see passenger numbers rise from 200,000 to 500,000 per year.
The decision is being defended by lawyers for the government and the airport. Ouseley J is expected to reserve judgment in the case.
Lydd Airport Action Group v Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government and Royal Society For Protection of Birds v Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government Administrative (Ouseley J) 23 January 2014
