No to Heathrow

It gives me no pleasure to criticise the Government over the consultation on Heathrow expansion.

Excluding most Putney homes from the consultation process and making the consultation document itself all-but-unreadable has stripped the process of credibility locally. The consultation overlooks so many crucial questions that this has been just about the worst conducted consultation I've ever seen.

The government argues that they consulted on aviation policy in 2006 and night-flights will be reviewed in 2009.

For me, that's not good enough. How can we decide whether more capacity is needed at Heathrow if the potential capacity of Gatwick, Stansted and Luton isn't compared? Why isn't the possibility of a national high-speed rail network like the Maglev - almost as fast as flying - on the table? Might we be more inclined to back extra day flights if they came with a guaranteed end to night flights?

You cannot slice and dice the issues surrounding Heathrow into little chunks to consider every few years: each issue is interlinked. We need a long-term transport settlement and for governments of all stripes to then honour it.

I oppose a third runway at Heathrow. I oppose using both runways simultaneously for landings and take-offs. And just as Putney's last Labour MP Tony Colman halved night-flights over our area, I will make reining-in nightflights my top priority. London's Labour Mayor Ken Livingstone is also opposing Heathrow expansion.

This is not a party-political issue. I'll work with anyone committed to tackling this challenge, including my political opponents. That's because for me, standing up for Putney comes before standing up for the Government.

It's the easiest thing in politics to just be 'against' something. I believe local leadership also requires setting out a sensible alternative.

And here I do differ from Putney's Conservative MP, who's been good at opposing but bad at the harder task of coming up with a different idea. Putney would have a louder voice if she had managed to set out a credible alternative to Heathrow.

Most of us accept that London needs more air capacity. Gatwick and Stansted should be expanded and a new airport east of London should be planned - all with excellent high-speed links into the capital.

It makes sense to decentralise London's air transport. Economically, so that if an accident or bad weather closes one airport it does not ground our entire air fleet. Environmentally, because it's far easier and less damaging to disperse smaller quantities of pollution in rural areas than far larger amounts in urban areas London. And in terms of national security it makes sense because January's Heathrow air accident would have been catastrophic if the engines had failed seconds earlier and the plane ended up crashing into London.

So that's where I stand. Opposed to Heathrow expansion; supporting the need for more aviation capacity; with a clear alternative that makes sense. Whatever your view, please make sure you take part in the consultation because the louder our collective voice, the more persuasive we will be.