"AS pensioners, the security of our pensions depends directly on the long-term success of British Airways, and that... depends on the success of Heathrow."

I was sent this quote by many British Airways pensioners who are constituents, outraged that their former employer is putting a one-sided argument for expansion. It hardly surprises me. Only two weeks ago the Advertising Standards Authority ordered British Airways to withdraw a claim that the third runway would reduce carbon dioxide emissions because aircraft would no longer have to waste fuel queuing for take off or landing.

In fact, emissions will rise by 2.6m tonnes from 200,000 extra flights. Forget Gordon Brown's promise about joined-up Government. The Secretary of State for Environment wants us to reduce our emissions, yet the transport secretary is proposing an extra 220,000 flights at Heathrow.

BAA will go to any lengths to get its expansion, and Government ministers are following in its wake. The consultation document is not a discussion about the third runway.

Nowhere does it ask people whether they want their homes demolished, peace disturbed and air choked by nitrous oxides.

Instead, the 11 questions ask whether you want to have more flights on both runways, or extra passenger terminal facilities.

Thousands of us will face noise levels that are a significant nuisance, and over the 57 decibel contour that the Government uses as a measure.

Yet the noise limits will be fudged, much like the environmental limits will be, with dodgy claims that falling road traffic emissions will allow the extra emissions from flights.

This is your last chance. In three weeks, the consultation on Heathrow expansion will close, so it is important that Hillingdon Times readers take the opportunity to tell Gordon Brown why expansion is not necessary.

Go to www.dft.gov.uk/heathrowconsultation to respond.