text_body: --- DIVISION TITLE ---
  
  Heathrow - Expansion is consistent with sustainable aviation strategy
  
  --- MOTION EFFECT ---
  
  
  The majority of MPs voted for the motion before Parliament which read:[1]
  
  **This House ''recognises''
  * that the Government's policy on airport expansion is consistent with its long term, balanced and sustainable aviation strategy as set out in the 2003 White Paper The Future of Air Transport,[1] 
  * that its support for emissions trading represents the most effective way of tackling climate change concerns, 
  * that the Adding Capacity at Heathrow Airport consultation[2] is a robust document that is the product of a lengthy period of comprehensive analysis, 
  * that the consultation process followed best practice as set out by the Cabinet Office, that the economic case for the expansion of Heathrow Airport, as set out in the consultation, accurately reflects the Government's current understanding of all the relevant costs and benefits, and 
  * that Ministers should base their forthcoming decisions on the future of Heathrow on all the evidence available, including the responses to the consultation.[3]
  
  This had replaced a previous motion that had been voted out.[4]
  
  * [1] [http://www.dft.gov.uk/about/strategy/whitepapers/air/ The Future of Air Transport - White Paper and the Civil Aviation Bill], Department for Transport, 16 December 2003
  * [2] [http://www.dft.gov.uk/consultations/closed/heathrowconsultation/ Adding Capacity at Heathrow Airport - Public consultation], Department of Transport, 27 February 2008
  * [3] [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2008-04-02a.836.0#g848.0 Ruth Kelly MP], House of Commons, 2 April 2008.</li>
  * [4] <a href="http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.php?date=2008-04-02&number=143 Heathrow - Condemnation of third runway - rejected], House of Commons, 2 April 2008.
  
  
  
  --- COMMENTS AND NOTES ---
  
  (put thoughts and notes for other researchers here)
  