A "catastrophic price" will be paid if a third runway is built at Heathrow airport, the Tory London mayoral candidate has said.
Zac Goldsmith told a rally in London's Parliament Square that expanding the UK's largest airport would make the capital's air pollution problems "unsolvable".
The MP for Richard Park said: "We know a million homes, a million families, would be subjected to noise way beyond what is acceptable, according to the World Health Organisation.
"We know that our air pollution problems in London would be unsolvable if we expand Heathrow. And we know it requires the demolition of more than 1,000 homes.
"It is a catastrophic price to pay."
Mr Goldsmith described the Airports Commission's report which recommended the expansion of Heathrow as "discredited", "bogus" and "hopeless". Hundreds of opponents to a third Heathrow runway gathered outside the Palace of Westminster as London mayoral candidates and local MPs addressed the rally.
They chanted "no ifs, no buts, no third runway" in reference to Prime Minister David Cameron's comments in 2009, when he said: "The third runway at Heathrow is not going ahead, no ifs, no buts."
Building a third runway at Heathrow was recommended in July by the Airports Commission, which rejected expansion of Gatwick. Heathrow was chosen by the commission as the best way to increase airport capacity for London and the south east because it was predicted it would add £147 billion in economic growth and 70,000 jobs by 2050.
Mr Cameron is due to announce a decision on expansion by the end of the year.
Organisers of the rally said London mayor Boris Johnson was due to speak at the event but he could no longer attend.
A spokesman for Mr Johnson said he was not attending the rally because he had a personal commitment out of the country.
"He would be there otherwise," the spokesman said.
"Boris's support remains undiminished. He wishes them well."
Mr Johnson, who steps down as London mayor next year, had previously proposed a new airport should be built in the Thames estuary but the plan, dubbed "Boris Island", was dismissed by the commission.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel