A cross-party group of MPs met with the Transport Secretary Chris Grayling to express their concerns about the Heathrow expansion.

The All Party Parliamentary Group, made up of Zac Goldsmith, Ruth Bradbury and Sir Vince Cable, met to highlight the “significant” gaps in information in the plans.

No flight paths have been included in the first stage of the two-part consultation, which relates to physical changes on the ground, and many believe an informed decision cannot be made until they are put forward.

As well as this, the MPs said that the Airports NPS is “insufficiently robust” on other key impacts of the expansion such as air quality and potential costs to taxpayers.

Mr Grayling said the Government intends to write conditions into the Development Consent Order that would place operational restrictions on Heathrow should they fail to meet air quality standards.

He also agreed to “look closely” at the costs to local authorities if the Lakeside Waste plant is relocated, although admitting he did not know much about it.

The incinerator will have to be moved if the third runway goes ahead and councils could be lefts with bills in the millions for extra landfill taxes.

See related: Fears over future of Lakeside Energy from Waste incinerator if Heathrow’s third runway goes ahead

Mr Grayling said the night flight ban would be applied “more strictly” than the existing agreement, though he could not say that there would never be flights during this period.

The Transport Secretary also revealed that the community compensation and mitigation packages offered by Heathrow would be mandatory should planning permission be granted for a third runway.

Zac Goldsmith said he was “grateful” Mr Grayling listened to the APPG’s concerns but that the “case against Heathrow expansion continues to deepen”.

He said: “There are financial, political, environmental and legal obstacles that simply cannot be overcome.

“Any planning conditions imposed on the Heathrow is likely to result in operational restrictions that render their third runway unviable.”

Ruth Cadbury said detailed flight path information is “fundamental” to understanding the impact of the expansion on local communities.

She added: “A vote in parliament should not take place until this information is publicly available.

“It is also evident that the noise insulation packages offered to communities are far from world class and that further research needs to be undertaken to understand the potential loss of respite.”

Sir Vince Cable said: “The fact that Heathrow continues to seek financial protection from the CAA and the Government for its third runway clearly demonstrates that the airport has no faith in their ability to deliver their own project.

“The Government’s own figures call into question the alleged economic benefits of the scheme and it is far from clear what benefits, if any, will be accrued by local communities.”