Can a map make you cross?

See the Manston flightpath, and see where the TDC councillors live. Now wail and gnash your teeth... bit.ly/p8OsEl

Straight from the horse's orifice...

In the interests of even-handedness and fair play, I thought I would publish Manston's statement on the importance of night flights, despite it being crap. If you can bring yourself to plough through this litany of self-serving distortions and special pleadings, do please bear a few things in mind... bit.ly/nQAZlW

Dear Bob...

An excellent letter to Cllr Bayford that "may be of interest and stimulate other residents to convey their views to our councillors". A rattling good read. bit.ly/nV88K1

Needle and threat

Charles Buchanan, CEO of Manston Tumbleweed Airport, has launched the next round of his campaign to make the airport more sellable... bit.ly/nHkWeA

More on the night flights bid

Yet another "independent" report, written by an aviation lobbying group and commissioned by Manston, is coming out. It will probably forecast employment apocolypse for Kent if Manston doesn't get its way... bit.ly/qIpib5

No more cheap flights

The aviation industry has finally twigged that the price of oil is going up (because it's running out) which means that they won't be able to sell flights at daft prices... bit.ly/nahqEG

What a difference a letter makes...

(A) Fair Tax On Flying: clearing up the confusion... bit.ly/neNHnU

Big Apple pie in the sky

Job losses at Manston: definitely, now. Flights to New York: maybe, sometime. bit.ly/p6Z78n

Shameless greed

Regional airports have the cheek to demand yet more special treatment, when the aviation industry is already being feather-bedded by the Treasury (i.e. every tax payer in the country, fliers and non-fliers alike) to the tune of £10bn or more. bit.ly/q43C0r

How KCC chooses a consultancy to write a report

It's all about how "calculation of the additional employment" and "quantification of the economic benefits". There's no mention of accuracy... bit.ly/pzeSXx

Night Flights motion killed

The motion on night flights policy was scotched at the very last minute. Incompetence on the part of officers for accepting an illegal motion? Or political finesse on the part of the majority party? You decide: bit.ly/q9a3Xp

Airport Working Party neutered

Crumbs!  "Consideration of the airport's proposed night flying policy" is no longer the AWP's responsibility - so whose is it? bit.ly/pVmfwz

Caption competition

After the wisdom of crowds comes the wit of crowds... exercise yours: bit.ly/nahqEG

Night Flights: too hot to handle?

Calling all TDC-ologists: what's going to happen on Thursday? bit.ly/orpulo

Trickle of funding for Manston Parkway

"Trickle" may be over-stating it a bit. This is more of a slight dampening - enough funding for 0.13% of a station... bit.ly/osLkfV

Infratil's 2011 results...

... make grim reading for Charles Buchanan, and carry an ominous threat for Manston: bit.ly/jpbxxw

Manston unmonitored

At last - TDC explain how important the S106 is to them... bit.ly/jnCrZ8

90 days: time's up, what's happened?

Charles Buchanan said the 90 day consultation was "not planning to identify significant redundancies". That was just over 90 days ago. Anyone know what's happened? bit.ly/lol0PL

Southend vs Manston: easyJet decides

Manston must have been competing for easyJet's business, so they'll be sorely disappointed that Southend got this 10 year deal. Could be a game-changer. Could be the final nail? bit.ly/ke8UHJ

Sound-activated video recording

The wisdom of crowds: does any know how to set up a sound-triggered video recording (for planes over Ramsgate)... bit.ly/lJTBWH

Air Anon at Manston

The once-secret document kindly spares Air Anon the shame of being associated with Manston airport by scribbling out their name with the blackest marker pen money can buy. You can win a priceless prize by identifying the mystery flying machines... bit.ly/jMg6nM

Airport maths: irrational numbers and variables

In public, Manston use the laughable statistic of "one thousand jobs per million passengers".  In private, the numbers are VERY different... http://bit.ly/llGBmj

KCC: daft beggars

Thanks to the Freedom of Information Act, we know why KCC's bid for £10.8m to feather-bed Infratil was doomed to fail: http://bit.ly/kERtqA

Manston Parkway

Why the secrecy? KCC want £millions to start Parkway, and to bribe an unnamed foreign airline to use Manston, thus profiting the airport's foreign owners. Oh, maybe that's why they're being so secretive... maybe, just maybe, they realise that pouring our money into foreign companies won't go down so well when they should be boosting UK and Kentish companies... http://bit.ly/jibnVI

Only the crumbliest, flakiest statistics...

Job forecasts based on ten year old statistics, from a tiny sample, applied to an "aspirational" growth projection, seven years into the future.

See the whole story at: http://bit.ly/kaf6nW

Another bid for Night Flights

For the latest, pop over to NoNightFlights.info, or click here: bit.ly/lfz6Oh

Nostrildamus nose the future

See www.NoNightFlights.info for your sneak preview of what's to come...

Buchanan in court

See:  www.NoNightFlights.info for the awful truth...

New website

The No Night Flights blog is changing from an ugly duckling into a beautiful swan! Visit

www.NoNightFlights.info

to see the new version, and tell us what you think.

Cargolux fined. Again.

The European Commission has fined 11 airlines almost 800m euros (£690m) for fixing the price of air cargo between 1999 and 2006.  Had the Commission not intervened the "deplorable" cartel "would have continued", said EU Competition Commissioner Joaquin Almunia.  The illegal cartel had harmed both companies and consumers, he said.

British Airways was fined 104m euros, Air France-KLM 340m euros and Cargolux Airlines 79.9m euros.  The fines follow lengthy investigations by regulators in Europe, the US and Asia, dating back to 2006.  The EU said that the airlines "co-ordinated their action on surcharges for fuel and security without discounts", between early 1999 and 2006. "The carriers contacted each other so as to ensure that worldwide air freight carriers imposed a flat rate surcharge per kg for all shipments."

The Commission imposed the biggest fine - 340m euros - on Air France-KLM, which was formed from a merger in 2004 and which now owns Martinair, which was also fined.  "It is deplorable that so many major airlines coordinated their pricing to the detriment of European businesses and European consumers," said Mr Almunia.  "With today's decision the Commission is sending a clear message that it will not tolerate cartel behaviour."

Airline: Fine (euros)
Air France-KLM (includes Martinair): 339.6m
British Airways: 104m
Cargolux: 79.9m [Click here to read about their earlier $124m fine in the USA]
Singapore Airlines: 74.8m
SAS: 70.2m
Cathay Pacific: 57.1m
Japan Airlines: 35.7m
Air Canada: 21m
Qantas: 8.9m
LAN Chile: 8.2m

BA said it had already made a £350m provision for any possible fines over the cargo price fixing.  A BA spokesman said the airline's fine fell "within the provision made by the company in its 2006/7 report and accounts".  The German carrier Lufthansa escaped a fine because it alerted the regulatory authorities to the cartel.  The maximum fine the Commission could have imposed on any single carrier was 10% of their 2009 turnover.

The US Department of Justice has already charged 18 airlines and several executives in its investigation of the cargo cartel and imposed more than $1.6bn (£997m) in fines.  The Commission's decision will have an impact on several pending legal actions by European companies against some of the airlines.  A group of firms, led by the Swedish telecoms group Ericsson and Dutch electronics giant Philips, are suing Air France-KLM and its Martinair subsidiary for 400m euros.

Bureau Veritas request

The clever people at Bureau Veritas have peer reviewed BAP's technical noise report that accompanied Infratil's recent application. Even though it's apparently only in draft form, this provided TDC with the courage and ammunition to reject Infratil's bid.

At the recent Ramsgate Town Council meeting, Charles Buchanan said that he had not (yet) seen the BV report. Earlier that same day, the local press had been quoting figures from the BV report. As we know from previous experience with the BAP report, even early drafts turn out to have a very close resemblance to the finished report.

If any of you lovely people have a draft (or final copy) of the Bureau Veritas report, do feel free to send it in. We're bursting with curiosity, and it will help us prepare for the next round. Email it in to us and please indicate whether you DO or DON'T want us to publish it.

Our Children Speak.........

To whom it may concern,

I am writing to you to discuss the potential night flights over Ramsgate, speaking on the behalf of all the children in Ramsgate (and other towns that will be affected by night flights).Although it may not seem like a major issue to some people, it is a concern to the locals, in particular the children.

If you were at the meeting at Chatham House, you will have heard all the points against night flights (from locals such as Sue Kennedy), and seen the huge crowd gathered to protest against Manston going ahead with their plans. I was surprised that there were five councillors missing, since this is a major debate.

Anyway, on to the points against night flights. Many of these were brought up during the course of the evening. Firstly, the harm that the noise can do to children. It has been scientifically proven that loud noises are not good for anyone, especially young children and babies. No one should be exposed to more than 50 decibels of noise (according to studies carried out by scientists) and young children and babies shouldn’t be exposed to more than 40 decibels. Yet 747’s sent from Manston can make 60-80 decibels of noise heard from Ramsgate and St. Peters. This is bad enough during the day, but the night time? It would be like sleeping through a tornado. It would be practically impossible.

According to research done by Cornell University, night flights will result in a drop in achievement of children at school. As everyone knows, children are the seeds of the future, and underachievement at school could result in disaster in 20-30 years’ time. Also, night flights will result in increasing health problems in the Isle of Thanet (source of information; World Health Organisation or WHO).

The people running the airport would argue that they could give people jobs. But would all of those jobs go to locals? No. In fact, an estimate of 16 local jobs has been predicted. Besides, Labour (who has recently sided against night flights) claimed that the promise of jobs ‘was merely an aspiration’.

Thank you for reading my letter on night flights.

Yours sincerely, Hal, aged 10. Ramsgate.

Planning permission needed for Manston

Comment from Cllr Clive Hart - Leader of Thanet Labour Group at TDC:

I'm pleased to see that the Conservative group at TDC agree with us that the current night flying application is unacceptable. I wish to make it absolutely clear that our Labour Group is supportive of the airport and maximising the employment opportunities it will create, but this must not be at any price for Thanet's residents.

We certainly do need to balance the economic benefits against environmental considerations. However the proposed night-time flying policy does not appear to do that and leaves far too many uncertainties, that is why we decided not to support the application.

We have not ruled ourselves out of any future debate because the current application is not being treated as a planning application and therefore the rules on predetermination simply do not apply. Indeed, one of the matters of concern in making our own decision was that we felt that any changes such as the those sought at present may well require planning permission.

Video snippets from the RTC public meeting 25th October

Many thanks to our Multimedia Department (Outside Broadcast Unit) for the following video snippets...

Jobs Promised 8½ mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnO5DsICoyE

Noise & Health 6½ mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MHpIoO7KBq0&feature=mfu_in_order&playnext=1&videos=LR2iZqla9B0

Worse health and education services? 2 mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jnv8oPVFJU0&feature=mfu_in_order&playnext=1&videos=RVhdl8aOSCc

Follow the money 1½ mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ku6kz1R_AuM&feature=mfu_in_order&playnext=1&videos=OWNuQQMOXI4

Impossible to land planes safely until NEXT November 2½ mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wr0L_OztAFQ&feature=mfu_in_order&playnext=1&videos=mvoiutz5fvU

Living Next to Noisy neighbours 2 mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mr1ot2rUVs&feature=mfu_in_order&playnext=1&videos=DLkM3c2aOk0

WRIT of MANDAMUS (A writ issued by a superior court ordering a public official or body or a lower court to perform a specified duty)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADv4cQCqAAA&feature=mfu_in_order&playnext=1&videos=VtFfWkM3B7c

Our MPs’ views on Night Flights 1½ mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXSi-c0vmsI&feature=mfu_in_order&playnext=1&videos=JjxdtkaY-Xk

Development & Public Safety Zones 3 mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-I7_RJUshM

Previous Court Judgement about Planning Permission 5 mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udVzcN0daCg&feature=mfu_in_order&playnext=1&videos=CFSY-wwg1i0

It makes all the difference, remembering to press the start button. Ahem.

Political Posturing on Night Flights

'Dr' Simon Moores started things this morning with the question "Thanet Labour Disqualified from Taking Part in Manston Night Flight Decision?"


Playing on the total confusion around the subject of predetermination rules, our Simes suggests that the airport night flight decision is a "planning-related matter". Labour councillors, by rejecting the "current" application just as Bob Bayford did yesterday, seem to have pre-judged a planning matter publicly.


"Utter b&ll$cks", said our political/legal/planning expert. "The airport has no planning permission, and Bob Bayford keeps reminding us that he is only consulting the public out of the kindness of his own heart."


Uncle Bob Bayford weighs in late on Tuesday with a "open letter" to the Labour leader Clive Hart to ask if his party is now one of ''total opposition to 'any' night time flying activity at Manston Airport".


As much as we would like Conservative or Labour to reject them outright, neither party has. You only have to read Labour's Press Release or the Council Press Release to understand that . May I suggest that all political parties put their dummies back in their mouths, put the teddies back in the pram and read everything again. Carefully.


Just to dwell on Bob Bayford's position - "I also believe that the proposed upper level of activity is too high and needs to be reconsidered. I am not prepared to start a public consultation until these issues have been resolved."


May we suggest, Uncle Bob, that this quite clearly states that you will pre-determine an acceptable level of night time flying activity - acceptable to you, that is - before allowing an Infratil night time flying policy to go to public consultation?


Answers on a postcard please as to what rules, laws, bodies Bob is putting himself in contradiction/conflict with.


One final point to all Councillors. No Night Flights is non-party political. Red, Blue, Yellow, Green - not fussed which party you come from. We support the right of a full night's sleep, every night, to East Kent's residents. We support a successful Manston which operates as much business as it can during more sociable hours - as many successful airport across the country do. Oh, and 24,000 people so far have shown an interest in where you live in relation to the flightpath. 


Sleep tight - while you can.

Consultation stops before it starts

Across east Kent, along the flightpath, all the boys and girls awoke with a thrill of anticipation. "Today's the day! Today's the day!" - they thought as they scrubbed their little faces clean, "Today's the day we finally get asked about what we want to happen to our sky". Their little eyes, once sparkling with excitement, are now bloodshot with tears of frustration and disappointment.

Yes folks, although it was once scheduled to start TODAY, the public consultation has been stopped in its tracks. Thanet District Council CEO Richard Samuel, and TDC Leader Cllr Bayford met Manston's CEO Charles Buchanan to break the bad news - his proposal doesn't merit consideration.

How did it come to this? TDC bent over backwards to accommodate Infratil's requests/demands during the British Airways World Cargo fiasco. Their embarrassment at the unseemly haste of it all (coupled with the need to bounce their neighbouring councils into agreeing at short notice to buy a pig in a poke) led them to press Infratil for a formal night flying request. Days, weeks and months passed. Which came as a surprise to anyone who had believed Infratil's talk of the pressing commercial urgency of having permission for scheduled night freight.

Eventually Infratil produced a remarkably shabby and utterly useless document that lacked a few vital ingredients - numbers, for instance. This was sent back to them, marked "must try harder". More time passed. Thanet's CEO Richard Samuel apparently prodded Infratil twice to get cracking and produce something worth looking at.

Hand on heart, I have to say I am taken aback at the rubbish Infratil have put out. To jog your memory - Infratil are a billion dollar multi-national, and they would have us believe that night freight will be the make-or-break factor for their strategic move into European aviation. It was clear, even to my untrained eye, that their proposal to TDC was riddled with unrealistic forecasts, unsupported assertions and manifestly unacceptable conditions. The "supporting" documents from BAP noise consultants are a mixed bag: the technical stuff is incomprehensible, the comprehensible stuff is laughable.

With a commendable display of common sense, and a degree of self-interest, TDC has thrown the latest tawdry offering back at Infratil. (See how TDC present the story further down the page.) As you will see, TDC have twigged that they are once again being given the runaround by the greedy kiwis. Infratil shot themselves in the feet by (i) asking for an absurdly high annual noise allowance, and then (ii) bodging the counting system so that nobody could understand what it would translate into in practice. It would appear the Bureau Veritas, employed by TDC to "peer review" the proposal, have warned them to steer clear.

A possible future problem arises from the wording of TDC's press release:

...before residents have their say, they need to know more detail and have a full understanding of exactly how many aircraft movements are being discussed. That information is difficult to gauge from the proposals that have been put to us, partly because of its technical nature and this needs further work. I also believe that the proposed upper level of activity is too high and needs to be reconsidered. I am not prepared to start a public consultation until these issues have been resolved.

To me, this carries the suggestion of an auction-style conversation between the airport owners and the council to determine what is "acceptable" long before Jo Public gets a look-in, which isn't my idea of a consultation.

---

From the TDC website

Plans for a public consultation on a new night-time flying policy for Manston Airport have been stopped by Thanet District Council.

The night-time flying plans were submitted by the airport to the council in late September 2010. When the plans were received, the council said it would carry out an independent review of the noise assessment report, produced by the airport as part of their application, before any consultation started. An initial draft of this report was received recently and the final report is expected soon, when it will be made public.

Following careful consideration of this draft report and taking account of the considerable public interest in the future direction of the airport, Council Leader Cllr. Bob Bayford and Chief Executive Richard Samuel met with the airport’s CEO Charles Buchanan on Monday 1 November. The airport agreed to revise the detail contained within the proposal. The council will not open any public consultation until this has been received.

The council indicated that elements of the night flying policy needed more clarification to ensure that the public could be provided with a better understanding of how it would be managed, how it would link to the business need for the plans, and examples of how many aircraft movements could potentially take place during the night. Cllr. Bayford said:

“I have met with Charles Buchanan to advise him that, after careful consideration over the last couple of weeks, the proposals that have been submitted have insufficient detail in some areas to be acceptable to the council. We’ve had an initial report through from our consultants, which has confirmed that there are areas of clarification that require further work before local residents are consulted. I believe that, before residents have their say, they need to know more detail and have a full understanding of exactly how many aircraft movements are being discussed. That information is difficult to gauge from the proposals that have been put to us, partly because of its technical nature and this needs further work. I also believe that the proposed upper level of activity is too high and needs to be reconsidered. I am not prepared to start a public consultation until these issues have been resolved. I am pleased to say that the airport has agreed to review these issues.

 “The council remains supportive of the airport and maximising the employment opportunities it can create and sustain, but this cannot be at any price for local residents. As a council, we need to balance the economic benefits carefully against environmental considerations. The proposed night-time flying policy doesn’t fully allow us to do that, as it leaves uncertainties that need to be clarified before we consult the public.

 “I have confirmed with the airport that they will receive a copy of our advisor’s report as soon as it’s finalised. From this, they have agreed to develop fuller information that we will consult on. I recognise, as does the airport, that this may take time, but it is important to get this right.”

Lovely Posters

Get your lovely posters here, ladies and gentlemen. Click them to download them. Print them and put them in your window, in your car, on your pets, wherever.

 

Thanet Labour Group Reject Infratil Night Flying Application

Excellent news from Thanet Labour - they've rejected the ridiculous night flying application from Manston owners Infratil at a Labour Group meeting last night.

They cite the "alluded to jobs figures", "quality of life issues for the thousands who would be adversely effected" and the current "section 106 ...needing to be properly enforced and renegotiated".

They also recognise that the airport does provide "opportunity for jobs in the Thanet area but there is much much more day time capacity which could be utilised".

"Concerns were raised about the environmental and health impacts on local residents, particularly sleep deprivation caused by aircraft noise."

Couldn't agree more!

No Night Flights is not a party political group, and will equally cheer from the rooftops when local Conservative Groups and Liberal Democrat Groups come to the same conclusions.

Lost business

A Ramsgate resident wrote to TDC:

---

I would like to protest regarding the proposed night flights between 11pm and 7am at Kent International airport. They would cause a great noise pollution to the town of Ramsgate and cause the town to lose jobs and investment far greater than night flights could create. Currently a large number of the population of Thanet tolerate the current large jets that use Kent International airport however simply some will not.

To promote Ramsgate as a seaside town with constant noise pollution would be to sign a warrant for the demise of the town altogether. The town is current benefiting from an influx of Londoners like myself and my brother and his family who moved here for quality of life. I still work in London and spend my wages in Ramsgate. I regularly employ locals for work on my property for work on investment properties I have purchased in Ramsgate, to maintain my vehicles, I spend my money in the local shops have my haircut here and the list could go on. To promote night flights would be to close the door for a lot of people who would wish to live in a seaside town such as this.

I would like to let you know of a personal experience on this subject. On 7th July 2007 myself, my brother’s family, my aunt and her friend spent the afternoon on the beach in Ramsgate. We watched as every 9 minutes a 747 jumbo jet flow low over the beach as it prepared to ‘bounce’, I believe is the term, as they practise their landing at Kent International airport.

My aunt and her friend, who where preparing to retire from London both with their own houses and no mortgage where so horrified at the noise that my aunt declared she could not live in a town that had this level of noise. She is currently purchasing a property in Broadstairs. In short on 7th July 2007 Ramsgate lost over million pounds of investment because two older ladies didn’t like the noise of the jets during the day. I would expect the repercussions of night flights would be further reaching. I would say now that if they did go ahead and they wake me when they pass over my property I would not consider staying in Ramsgate. I am all for the expansion of KIA but not at the cost of the local economy or a reduction of the quality of people’s lives.

Gale's betrayal exposed: part 1

East Kent is still reeling, caught in the giddying vortex of Roger Gale's about turn. "I have never supported night flights from Manston and do not propose to do so." But that was ten days before the May 2010 general election, when he would say anything to anyone to trick a vote out of them.

Now that the election is over, and Roger has been made to feel important and powerful by a charm offensive from Infratil, his tune has changed. Whole sections of his recent article in the local press could have been lifted from an Infratil brochure. The talk is no longer of "flights" but of "flexibility" (a weasel word cynically put into Roger's mouth by Infratil's spin doctors). For example "... the proposals now on the table represent a fair consideration of the airport's likely maximum night time flexibility through to 2018 and very possibly beyond."

So let's have a closer look at the Mr Flip-flop's words...

East Kent will, very shortly, have the opportunity to indicate clearly whether we want the airport at Manston, and the jobs and transport links that are dependent upon it, to have the opportunity to grow and prosper or to close.

Oooh, Roger, just a teensy bit one-sided, don't you think? No mention of East Kent deciding whether it wants the noise, sleeplessness, ill-health, early deaths, dirt, fumes, extra lorry traffic, lower educational achievement, falling house prices and collapsing tourist trade that the huge increase in night freight will inevitably bring.

We need, I think, to be very clear that the consultation relating to night time aircraft movements, due to be independently carried out for Thanet District Council in response to an application by the airport operators, Infratil, will affect the whole future of aviation at Manston and, very possibly, in the South East.

Yes, Roger, of course the consultation about night flights at Manston could affect the future of Manston - that's the point of it. Well, most of us probably assumed that what we say in the consultation will have some kind of impact, but Cllr Bayford has poured cold water on that. If the majority of us say "No" to night flights... it might make no difference.

Ask local people if they want to be able to fly to sunshine holiday destinations direct from Manston and the answer is an emphatic “yes”.  Ask the same people if they want to see more freight flights from the same airport and the response is, not surprisingly, very much more restrained.  We subscribe to development that benefits us personally and we are lukewarm about development, whether it be business, retail or even housing, that impacts adversely upon our lives.

To paraphrase: "People like nice things and don't like nasty things." I think we can all go along with that one, Roger. It's completely normal - why comment on it? Do you think it's in some way wrong to oppose, to speak out against, or even campaign against something that will "adversely affect" your life, and the lives of your nearest and dearest? What we're being offered is a force-fed diet of nasty things (night flights, forever) with only the vaguest, sometime, sort-of promise of 'jam tomorrow' somewhere in the hazy future, in the form of nice holiday flights.

---

Click here to email Roger Gale