GALBA briefing to Leeds councillors

This briefing paper was sent to all Leeds councillors on 5 November

On 5 November 2024, GALBA submitted a complaint to Leeds City Council about Leeds Bradford Airport breaking the night flight rules for the third year in a row.

This year has also seen other developments around LBA’s attempts to fly more planes, particularly at night, and LCC’s response to those attempts. This briefing outlines the key developments which provide further evidence that:

• LBA’s management is not trustworthy
• LCC needs to improve its monitoring and enforcement procedures

Every extra unlawful night flight adds to the climate crisis by causing emissions, harms human health by disrupting sleep and pollutes the air that Leeds residents breathe. We expect LCC to take strong enforcement action against LBA’s continued flouting of the rules as soon as possible. We have supplied the evidence needed to take that action.

Night flight rule breaches: GALBA’s monitoring has revealed that LBA has exceeded the number of flights permitted at night during the summer season for three years running. As a result of our first complaint, LCC issued a Breach of Condition Notice for the 2022 breach but chose to take no enforcement action over the 2023 breach. LBA’s failure to comply with the 2022 Breach of Condition Notice is a criminal matter but the Planning Enforcement Team decided that further action was ‘not in the public interest’.

On 5 November 2024, GALBA complained to LCC again. We provided verified, independent, industry standard data to confirm that LBA flew 820 more planes than allowed during the 2024 summer season. We have asked for strong enforcement action to be taken as soon as possible. This is expedient and in the public interest to prevent LBA ignoring planning rules year after year after year.

Certificates of Lawful Existing Use or Development (CLEUDs) rejected: LBA submitted four CLEUD applications which sought to reinterpret the meaning of the night flight rules. LBA’s aim is to allow more planes to fly at night and not be counted towards the overall limit on the permitted number of night flights. LCC has rejected three of the four CLEUDs and has not determined the fourth. LBA has submitted appeals about three of the CLEUDs. GALBA will attend the Planning Inquiry appeal and provide evidence to support LCC’s decisions.

LBA ignores LCC’s CLEUD decisions: despite LCC’s rejection of LBA’s CLEUDs, it appears that LBA’s reports to LCC continue to exclude a significant number of flights from counting towards the limit on the total number of permitted night flights. Following LCC’s decisions, these flights should be included. They include delayed flights (that are not emergencies), light jets and turbo-props.

This means LBA is behaving as if the CLEUDs that were rejected had been approved before their appeals are decided. LBA’s management is ignoring the decisions of its regulator – the Council – and to date LCC has not taken meaningful action to ensure compliance with the rules that LCC agreed with LBA.

LBA misinformed its flight slot regulator: LBA uses an independent company to allocate time slots for take-off and landing to airlines using the airport. LBA did not inform that company about the CLEUD applications and, to the best of our knowledge, has not informed them that three of the CLEUDs have been rejected.

Enforcement Notice issued: LCC has issued an Enforcement Notice against LBA which prohibits older, noisier planes from flying at night. While this is welcome, we understand that there is a diminishing number of these planes in service at LBA. However, the use of older planes is attractive to freight operators.

Inadequate night flight monitoring reports: following a Freedom of Information request, we are aware that the monthly night flight monitoring reports supplied by LBA to LCC do not include information that is necessary (and required by planning conditions) for LCC to assess whether LBA is abiding by the night flight rules. LCC has not yet proposed how to rectify the situation. GALBA’s independent monitoring reveals that LBA has repeatedly broken these rules.

Lack of passenger number monitoring: following another Freedom of Information request, we are aware that LCC has not carried out any monitoring of annual passenger numbers at LBA. This is a significant omission because there is a Section 106 agreement between LCC and LBA that requires LBA to submit a new planning application within 12 months of exceeding 4.5 million passengers a year. It is impossible for LCC to know if/when that figure has been reached without monitoring annual passenger numbers. This monitoring is quite a simple process which GALBA carries out monthly. LCC has told us it will now carry out the same monitoring process that GALBA undertakes.

This briefing was produced by the Group for Action on Leeds Bradford Airport

Website: www.galba.uk Email: GalbaUK@protonmail.com  

Facebook: www.facebook.com/GfAoLBA  Twitter/X: @galba_action