BAA, the airport operator, paid its security staff to protest at a public inquiry hearing evidence about the environmental damage that would be caused by the expansion of Stansted.

The staff were given paid time off from carrying out security checks at the Essex airport to support their employer’s application to increase the number of flights by 75,000 a year. People living under Stansted’s flight paths accused BAA of sacrificing customer service to stage a bogus protest.

More than 40 BAA staff and airport contractors attended the inquiry yesterday at a building close to the passenger terminal. The Timeshas learnt that BAA encouraged staff to join the protest by suggesting that their jobs would be at risk unless the expansion was approved.

Ryanair and other airlines that use the airport have repeatedly accused BAA of failing to provide enough security staff to cope with the extra checks introduced last year. Scanning machines are frequently left unmanned and passengers have to queue for up to an hour to pass through security.

BAA, which is owned by the Spanish company Ferrovial, wants to increase passenger numbers at Stansted from 23 million last year to 35 million by 2014.

A second inquiry is expected to start next year into a separate application by BAA to build another runway at the airport. The runway would allow passenger numbers of more than 60 million a year but would require the demolition of more than 70 homes, including 18 listed buildings.

The inquiry yesterday heard evidence from Sir Alan Haselhurst, the Tory MP for Saffron Walden and Deputy Speaker of the House of Commons. Sir Alan has repeatedly challenged BAA’s claim that expansion is essential for employment. He has accused it of “breathtaking arrogance” in proposing to build a second runway before obtaining planning permission to make full use of the existing one.

He wrote this year: “Perhaps they are confident that they have the Secretary of State in their pocket and that the public inquiry will be no more than a charade.”

BAA was keen to give the impression that Sir Alan was out of touch with the needs of people working at the airport. As he arrived at the inquiry yesterday, BAA staff waved banners and chanted their support for expansion.

BAA admitted that staff had been given time off to attend the inquiry.

But it claimed that there had been no impact on passengers because the protest began after the morning peak.

The company also admitted that its claim that jobs could be lost was based on the theory that airlines would move to other airports if expansion was rejected. It failed to point out to its staff that all other London airports were either full or close to capacity.

Brian Ross, of Stop Stansted Expansion, said BAA had misled staff to suit its commercial agenda. “It is bizarre when passengers are standing in security queues to send security staff to protest about the local MP speaking at a public inquiry.

“Many of our supporters are airport employees who feel that enough is enough and that excessive expansion could threaten their future job security, not to mention their quality of life.”

Sky-high numbers

3.8m Passengers using Stansted in 1996

23.7m Passengers using Stansted in 2006

35m Passengers using Stansted in 2014 if BAA’s application succeeds

2015 BAA plans to open second runway

74m Government’s passenger forecast for a two-runway Stansted in 2030

Sources: DfT; CAA; Stop Stansted Expansion

Times Recommends

• Brown targets fat cats after nationalising banks
• US shares soar on global banking rescue
• Europe follows Brown to head off meltdown