Here is the article (sorry in for the Dutch):
http://www.tijd.be/nieuws/artikel.asp?Id=1770873
Sorry, but for the moment i have no time to translate it. I will asap.
Conflicting opinions about the dispersion plan of BRU
Moderator: Latest news team
Judges have ruled 2 important decisions about Brussels Airport, in short:
- overflying of Brussels not allowed,
- usage of 02/20 not allowed, over-usage of runway 25R on Saturday not allowed.
So the only possible landing will be via Leuven (25L) and take-off will be impossible. He is hoping that a new law will end all those lawsuits and judges decisions (according to Renaat Landuyt on 4FM radio yesterday).
- overflying of Brussels not allowed,
- usage of 02/20 not allowed, over-usage of runway 25R on Saturday not allowed.
So the only possible landing will be via Leuven (25L) and take-off will be impossible. He is hoping that a new law will end all those lawsuits and judges decisions (according to Renaat Landuyt on 4FM radio yesterday).
On the frontpage of Het Laatste Nieuw there is article with title:
Brussels Airport threaten by closure
There is too much noise above the "Brusselse gewest"
if there is no solution within the 3 months the airport has to be closed.
Minister Landuyt says that there are 2 solutions : one closing Brussels Airport
two a law that describes the flight procedures.
What a country
Brussels Airport threaten by closure
There is too much noise above the "Brusselse gewest"
if there is no solution within the 3 months the airport has to be closed.
Minister Landuyt says that there are 2 solutions : one closing Brussels Airport
two a law that describes the flight procedures.
What a country
Best regards,
Airbuske
Airbuske
-
wouter_vda
- Posts: 19
- Joined: 25 Mar 2005, 00:00
actually, they can close Brussels. As far as I know, this judge has set forth an ultimatum, and will close the airport if the conditions are not met. And yes, he can do that. It's unbelievable that people would drive thousands of other people out of work, just to have peace and quiet in their cheap house (cheap because the ground they built it on didn't cost a lot, because of the airport). Just give them an option: let the goverment re-allocate you or shut up.
I don't think the judges are to blame (they only check if existing law has been met).waldova wrote:They will never close brussels. They can't do that. It's just a way to describe that these judges who make this stupid decision are really really STUPID.
It's the lack of a comprehensive legal system that triggers this "watherfall" of judgements...
IMHO, Bru will (can) never be closed...
Hey guys... maybe i'm a bit overreacting here but... What if they build a brand new airport in a not urban area and put a strict law on it to prevent houses being build around it?
Wouldn't it be nice to see a new Brussels airport?
But anyway, i say NO to Brussels airport closure.. If yes, then we should demonstrate in Brussels with all aviation fanatics together !
Wouldn't it be nice to see a new Brussels airport?
But anyway, i say NO to Brussels airport closure.. If yes, then we should demonstrate in Brussels with all aviation fanatics together !
Frustrating thing is that you only hear the people who complain. I want to bet that the majority of the people in Zaventem and surrounding don't even notice the planes, especially those who have been living there for a while. I for one live almost 38 years with the 02 in my backyard (as a matter of speech). I must admit that in summer it gets sometimes busy with the charters taking off one after the other, but, hey, it's a freaking airport! What do they expect? Gliders?
Don't like it? Well, go live somewhere else. But then again, those complainers would even complain about the trees when they live in a wood.
Don't like it? Well, go live somewhere else. But then again, those complainers would even complain about the trees when they live in a wood.
Before it turns political again.
First of all, the airport is located entirely on flemish territory. (despite what many people think, Zaventem is in province Vlaams Brabant and is not a part of the Brussels region) But it is considered as a national place.
A certain law in the Brussels region goes about noise. Airplanes that take off from Zaventem pass over Brussels' region territory.
When the planes are guided to the north , they pass over flemish territory, where there are different laws.
I am not a law specialist. But it is clear that some judges have agreed upon faulty regional laws. I explain: a highway passes over the territory of a community. The local community cannot stop traffic on that highway because it generates too much noise. That highway is considered as a national territory and falls under other legislation. The judges should have declared or themselves as incompetent to deal over such a conflict, or declared that the regional law is obsolete because it concerns national matters.
First of all, the airport is located entirely on flemish territory. (despite what many people think, Zaventem is in province Vlaams Brabant and is not a part of the Brussels region) But it is considered as a national place.
A certain law in the Brussels region goes about noise. Airplanes that take off from Zaventem pass over Brussels' region territory.
When the planes are guided to the north , they pass over flemish territory, where there are different laws.
I am not a law specialist. But it is clear that some judges have agreed upon faulty regional laws. I explain: a highway passes over the territory of a community. The local community cannot stop traffic on that highway because it generates too much noise. That highway is considered as a national territory and falls under other legislation. The judges should have declared or themselves as incompetent to deal over such a conflict, or declared that the regional law is obsolete because it concerns national matters.
And what that remark concerns about relocating the national airport entirely south of the language barrier: not 1 flemish would object it if the wallons really want to spoil that nice quite part of the Hainaut province. As long as all revenue is considered as national. And as long as all employment is falling under the same rulings as now.
Wallons and flemish are the same kind of humans when it comes to airplane noise. In Charleroi there is also a protest group - but not as destructive as Willoo in Ostend.
Wallons and flemish are the same kind of humans when it comes to airplane noise. In Charleroi there is also a protest group - but not as destructive as Willoo in Ostend.
because work pollutes.....
xeno wrote:I don't think the judges are to blame (they only check if existing law has been met).
Indeed, my friend, and for his decisions and his status, a judge is INDEPENDENT.
... don't think the judges are to blame indeed, politicians are: in this case it was minister Evelyne Huytebroeck (Ecolo) the plaintiff.
Some parties make laws, some use them....
Ecolo are the Frenchspeaking Greens in Belgium, they represent not 2% (?) of the total belgian population. Where they are in government the unemployment is the highest: because work pollutes.
Re: because work pollutes.....
Anciau is he a green frenchspeaking?SN30952 wrote:xeno wrote:I don't think the judges are to blame (they only check if existing law has been met).
Indeed, my friend, and for his decisions and his status, a judge is INDEPENDENT.
... don't think the judges are to blame indeed, politicians are: in this case it was minister Evelyne Huytebroeck (Ecolo) the plaintiff.
Some parties make laws, some use them....
Ecolo are the Frenchspeaking Greens in Belgium, they represent not 2% (?) of the total belgian population. Where they are in government the unemployment is the highest: because work pollutes.
Re: because work pollutes.....
Not at all, he's a flemish-nationalist in a socialist disguiseGate-A1 wrote:
Anciau is he a green frenchspeaking?
