Environmental campaigners joined opposition parties and the Mayor of London today in mocking the Government’s assertion that the expansion of Heathrow would not raise noise and pollution levels.

Ruth Kelly, Transport Secretary, has insisted that plans for a third runway and increased capacity at Europe’s busiest airport would not increase pollution because cleaner and quieter engines were bound to have been developed by 2020.

Proposals include a 2,200 metre third runway to be built north of Heathrow and a sixth terminal, the construction of which would require the demolition of an entire village. The total number of passengers using Heathrow is expected to grow from 67 million last year to 120 million in the next 13 years.

The capital would be the biggest economic beneficiary of expansion, but Ken Livingstone, the Mayor of London, rejected the Government’s environmental assurances just three days after Gordon Brown pledged to set an 80 per cent reduction in Britain’s greenhouse gas emissions.

“Let me make myself absolutely clear – I am firmly opposed to this expansion of Heathrow airport as it runs contrary to all the growing evidence we now have on the impact of aviation on climate change,” he said.

“Half of the population never fly at all, and of course it is vital to maintain business and long-haul air travel. But a small proportion of people are taking ever more short-haul leisure flights.”

The public has been invited to give its reaction to the consultation document by February 27, 2008, but critics have suggested that the Government has already decided to go ahead with the plans.

Leila Deen, a member of the anti-aviation group Plane Stupid, said: "This so-called ‘consultation’ would be funny if it wasn't so dangerous.

"You cannot expand airports and stop climate change. The science shows it is just not possible. If the government condones the building of a third runway, Britain will have no chance of reducing emissions in line with Gordon Brown's own targets.”

The consultation document accepted that a new runway and changes to runway take-off and landing patterns would increase noise levels in the short term for some local residents.

Ms Kelly refused to guarantee a freeze on the number of people subjected to noise above 57 decibels – the level that the Government deems to be a significant annoyance.

Under the Department for Transport’s plan, up to 20,000 more people than at present will be affected. Twenty schools would be at or above 63 decibels under proposals to alter flight patterns and ten more would suffer the same volume of noise if a third runway was built.

The Conservative Party has called for Ms Kelly to appear in the House of Commons, where the proposals could be scrutinised and debated.

Theresa Villiers, Shadow Transport Secretary, said: “This is not democracy. This is one of the most important decisions we face as a nation and it is scandalous that Ruth Kelly won’t answer in Parliament to the MPs who represent people whose lives are directly impacted by the future Heathrow.

“Yet again, she’s running scared. We recognise that the economic arguments for expanding Heathrow are much stronger than any other airport in south east England but Ruth Kelly has got some very tough questions to answer.

“Before a decision can be made on this critically important issue, we believe that four tests must be met - on pollution, on noise, on alternative ways to meet demand and free up capacity, and above all, on meeting our climate change targets.”

The proposed expansion of Heathrow, however, was welcomed by business groups and trades unions.

Brendan Barber, general secretary of the TUC, said: “Aviation supports around 500,000 jobs in the UK, and many others in support services, so the future of Heathrow is crucial to our economy.”

The consultation document said the expansion would bring net economic benefits of around £5 billion.

David Frost, director general of the British Chambers of Commerce, said: “The economic and business case for a third runway at Heathrow is clear. It is a must for the British economy and the Government should stand firm in order to deliver the proposals presented today.”

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• Margot Fonteyn: In her footsteps
• Forget beautiful people, let's have wonky Brits
• Fundamentalist brew: faith and power