division_name: Opposition Day &#8212; [9th Allotted Day] &#8212; Heathrow
motion: <p class="" pid="b.836.2/1" pwmotiontext="yes">I beg to move,</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b.836.2/2" pwmotiontext="yes">That this House recognises the urgent need to curb carbon dioxide emissions to tackle climate change; condemns the Government for following policies that will instead lead to significant growth in emissions from the aviation sector; particularly condemns plans to allow a third runway at Heathrow; believes that the consultation paper Adding Capacity at Heathrow Airport was deeply flawed and is concerned at the undue influence BAA played in the drafting of the paper; notes that the paper significantly overstated the economic case for a third runway while greatly underplaying the serious environmental consequences, including, as well as the extra emissions from flights, the increase in intensity and distribution of noise for those living under the flight path through runway alternation and the threat of forced relocation for the inhabitants of Sipson village; and calls on the Government to withdraw permanently plans for a third runway at Heathrow, to keep the present cap of 480,000 flights per year as opposed to the 700,000 envisaged in the consultation document, to rule out any further increase in airport capacity in the South East, and to indicate to the aviation sector that it will have to live within its existing infrastructure capacity.</p>
  
  <p class="" pid="b.848.0/1" pwmotiontext="yes">I beg to move, To leave out from "House" to the end of the Question, and to add instead thereof:</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b.848.0/2" pwmotiontext="yes">"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, that its support for emissions trading represents the most effective way of tackling climate change concerns, that the Adding Capacity at Heathrow Airport consultation 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."</p>
  
  <p pid="b.881.2/1" pwmotiontext="yes"><i> Question put,</i> That the original words stand part of the Question:&#8212;</p>
  
  <p pid="b.881.2/2" pwmotiontext="yes"><i> The House divided:</i> Ayes 66, Noes 265.</p>