Manc airport trial against climate activists begins
In May 2010, 17 campaigners took direct action at Manchester Airport, temporarily shutting it down.
They did this to stop some of the 5 million tonnes of carbon emissions produced annually by the airport and in opposition to plans to destroy local homes in order to expand the World Freight Centre.
Six of the climate protesters involved who breached airside security at Manchester Airport are to go on trial at Trafford Magistrates Court from today, Monday 21st February.
They will plead not guilty to the charge of aggravated trespass, after they formed a human circle around the wheel of a Monarch Airline jet last May 2010. The trial begins ten years after Manchester Airport opened their second runway in February 2001, following some of the largest environmental protests of the 1990s.
The defendants will argue that they acted to try and prevent death and serious injury by attempting to stop emissions from the Airport.
During the trial, which is expected to last three to four days – the defence will call expert witnesses including Professor Kevin Anderson from the Tyndall Centre and experts on health and the effects of climate change.
People from across Manchester have pledged to take direct action to stop the expansion plans, and the threatened homes in Manchester have been ‘twinned’ with the village of Sipson which which would have been demolished to make way for the Heathrow expansion.
Witnesses for the defence at the trial will include a local Lib Dem Councillor and John McDonnell, the Labour MP for the Heathrow area. Supporters from the ‘Manchester Airport on Trial’ group will gather outside court on the first morning (9am on Monday 21st February) with a large paper aeroplane.
Kerry Williams from the ‘Manchester Airport on Trial’ group said,
Manchester Airport said 50,000 jobs would be created with the second runway, which failed to materialise. Ten years after its opening, the aviation industry continues to overstate its economic importance whilst avoiding paying taxes and creating more emissions and more noise. It’s time to put a stop to the industry’s special treatment.
The defendants have received a number of statements of support from national politicians, journalists, lawyers, organisations and individuals including Zac Goldsmith MP, Caroline Lucas MP and John Sauven, director of Greenpeace.
From a press release
---------------------------
| Tweet |
10 Comments || Add yours below
Reader comments
The area around the south side of the Airport is part of the Tatton constituency, isn’t it?
Not much chance of getting *that* local MP on side.
I live about five miles from the airport and sometimes suffer noise pollution. But it would be a wrong impression if your readers elsewhere felt there was widespread local support for action against the airport. There isnt. There are local environmental activists and NIMBY’s, but they are up against a number of factors: the airport does provide a great deal of local employment, and, although managed at arms length, it is owned by the Greater Manchester local authorities (the largest shareholder being Manchester City) – so it generates revenue that supplements council expenditures, huge numbers of people in the North West pass through the airport every year and on the whole they appreciate it. It is true that there were major demos against the second runway, but local opinion saw outside troublemakers and a few posh cheshire set NIMBYs as responsible. Hasty Lane, by the way, is in Cheshire not Manchester! However the trial works out, it will not damage the airport.
Protest all you like, but encroaching on airports themselves is completely wrong in my opinion and people who do that deserve to be prosecuted.
In May 2010, 17 campaigners took direct action at Manchester Airport, temporarily shutting it down.
They did this to stop some of the 5 million tonnes of carbon emissions produced annually by the airport ……..
Completely irresponsible, stupid and smug. Who does these people think they are?
Are they our public conscious made flesh? Give them 90 days each in jail I say.
They did this to stop some of the 5 million tonnes of carbon emissions produced annually by the airport
Can’t help wondering how that went, since to work in stopping emissions the protest would have had to lead to flights being cancelled, not delayed, and the disruption was not that extreme.
Not sure if planes (like ground vehicles) trying to make up time use more fuel, but if so I would suggest this was probably a counter-productive move in that respect.
“The defendants will argue that they acted to try and prevent death and serious injury by attempting to stop emissions from the Airport. ”
If they’re not angling for a severe penalty, that’s a very bad idea. The judge will see this as what is it is – which, right or wrong, is political action – and the above kind of wordplay is not likely to go down well.
Reactions: Twitter, blogs
- Liberal Conspiracy
Manchester airport trial against climate activists begins http://bit.ly/g6UTnm
- Pucci Dellanno
RT @libcon: Manchester airport trial against climate activists begins http://bit.ly/g6UTnm
- Greener London
Manc airport trial against climate activists begins | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/XZqJdRm via @libcon
- sunny hundal
Last year 17 green activists took action against Manchester airport expansion. Six went on trial today http://bit.ly/g6UTnm
- Richard Honeysett
Manc airport trial against climate activists begins http://j.mp/fJgCP9
You can read articles through the front page, via Twitter or RSS feed. You can also get them by email and through our Facebook group.
» Workfare – what does the evidence show?
» The real agenda behind Telegraph’s abortion investigation
» How Scotland Yard monitors prying bloggers and journalists
» When disabled people want to work – employers can hold the back
» Revealed: the reality behind Workfare and why it doesn’t work
» Job snob? No, I’ve got the T-shirt
» Why country-by-country reporting matters to our wellbeing
» If Unions want to become stronger, they need to modernise
» Why work “reforms” in Spain are a warning for workers across Europe
» Five things you need to know about the NHS bill
» Bigger. Fatter. Gypsier. More Racist.
|
62 Comments 15 Comments 23 Comments 10 Comments 24 Comments 19 Comments 17 Comments 83 Comments 204 Comments 85 Comments |
 |
LATEST COMMENTS » Robin Levett posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » Robin Levett posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » Bob B posted on Workfare - what does the evidence show? » pjt posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » pjt posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » pjt posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » Spike1138 posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » Paul posted on YouGov changes that deflate Labour's polling » Spike1138 posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » Watchman posted on Workfare - what does the evidence show? » Dave posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » Sally posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » the a&e charge nurse posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation » cjcjc posted on Ten weeks to London's election: where Ken needs to improve » TimJ posted on The real agenda behind Telegraph's abortion investigation |
