POLITICIANS are divided over the benefits of Terminal 5 with many expressing concern for its impact on the environment.

John McDonnell, MP for Hayes and Harlington, described the go-ahead as 'an environmental nightmare for London' and predicted that it would pave the way for a third runway.

He said: "T5 will result in a massive increase in traffic, pollution and safety risk. The New York airline disaster should have taught us that locating busy airport take-off and landing flight paths over the homes of major concentrations of population is intrinsically unsafe.

"Even worse, no matter what promises are given today by the British Airports Authority of no third runway, inevitably the airline industry will come back within the next decade for another runway at Heathrow."

Uxbridge MP John Randall was similarly cautious, adding: "This is welcome news for the aviation industry but, being a conditional supporter, I have obvious concern about the environmental impact on the borough."

Cllr Ray Puddifoot, leader of Hillingdon Council, said: "We must effect a damage limitation exercise to protect the interests of the people of Hillingdon. There is also a huge cost implication in dealing with forthcoming applications."

But John Wilkinson, MP for Ruislip and Northwood, said he was 'overjoyed': "After campaigning for years, this is long overdue and has allowed other airports to catch up with Heathrow's lead in international traffic."

Green groups have described the government's decision to approve Terminal 5 as 'a disaster for the environment'.

Nic Ferriday, West London Friends of the Earth transport spokesman, said: "This is a disaster for the environment and democracy. It has made a nonsense of the public inquiry system.

"The fear now is that it will encourage plans for further expansion there is already a campaign well under way for a third runway."

But John Stewart, chairman of HACAN Clearskies, has vowed to fight on: "The fight is not over for HACAN, we will examine what has been said by Mr Byers and we will be looking to challenge the decision via a judicial review."