Yes - £80,000! Think how many public loos and other local amenities the council could keep open for that!!! And what other business employing a mere 80 people would the council be prepared to spend £80,000 of our money on to bail out? Certainly not mine. It's a disgrace, especially as the result is a forgone conclusion as far as Ramsgate is concerned - they can stick their night flights!Click here to read full story in Thanet Gazette
Click here to sign the No Night Flights petition
Sxx
32 comments:
I agree, they shouldn't waste all this money consulting people when it can be spent elsewhere, and all because of half a dozen NIMBYs in Ramsgate! Hope SMEG is proud of itself now.
'Half a dozen NIMBYs in Ramsgate'.
Around 1000 signatures on the No Night Flights petition so far, f*ck-knuckle. And the consultation process has not even begun.
Oh, and it is Infratil that has triggered this £80,000 cost to Thanet council taxpayers by putting in the request for night flights, not SMEG.
If Infratil had not asked for night flights, the money would not be being spent, as the council are duty bound to consult when such a request is received. Again, nothing to do with SMEG. All to do with Infratil. £80,000 from us for some Kiwi pensioners to enjoy the good life on the other side of the world. Money well spent, eh?
The earlier comment is correct, in that the council is obliged to carry out a proper consultation process in matters such as this.
It's not a question of choice or indeed policy.
Hardly NIMBYs - surely we all have a right to sleep between 11pm and 7am? Why do they want to fly at night anyway when there are loads of daytime slots to fill first? We do not just want to be a staging post for ageing heavily loaded cargo planes who have to stopover somewhere while waiting for Heathrow or Gatwick to open in the morning. Why was Matt Clarke too scared to come and meet with Ramsgate Town Council? If he is so keen to fly here at night why shouldn't Infratil pay some of the £80,000 cost of the so-called consultation process.
Mmmm; so if one reads the latest APW document where they state that the costs cannot be divulged until the chosen consultants are errr...chosen? What a stitch up!!!
So we have yet another poll and expensive consultation on the consultation that we where consulted on before - only in Thanet could this charade continue.
I feel sympathy for TDC here: they are obliged to consult (thankfully) and have to spend money to do the job properly.
I just hope they do do the job properly.
Oh anyone miss the bit in the APW where they insist that Infratil pay for this consultation under the polluter pays principle...no thought not.
Dr M care to comment?
I have the perfect solution!
Move the runway so planes fly over Westgate, Birchington and if possible Cecil Square.
Simples
I thought night flying had started when a plane taking off woke me at midnight last night.If our gutless councilors stuck to the original agreement instead of doing "U" turns they could make Infratill stick to the 106 and no consultation would be needed.
Stargazer
I run a guest house in Ramsgate and am shocked that my rates are subsidising a foreign company in order that they can put me out of business. Who will want to stay when there are planes flying over all night? Sign the petition now people.
anon 10:29.
You can't be seriously suggesting moving the flight path over Westgate? I'm certain it can't be done, there must be laws preventing this happening. It would an outrage, think of the house prices?
Utter nonsense, you'll see. My local councillor certainly wouldn't allow it.
fly over Westgate? It will drown out my groovy sounds!
After you have got flightpath residents to sign up you'll lose interest of locals. A thousand or so Ramsgatonians signing will not not make enough noise(?) to prevent progress of the airport.
Also:
Planes wont "stop off" to wait for London airports to open...not economical.
Most freighters are "ageing" as they are converted former passenger jets. Not many airlines can afford brand new freighters. Age makes no difference to how safe the aircrft is!
I've been told that Boeing won't certify some of the older planes because they can't be sure the maintenance has been carried out correctly on them. Is that right? Can anyone clarify that?
"Age makes no difference to how safe the aircrft is!"
Surely the law of averages disproves this statement. There being more aged planes about than new ones.
What about metal fatigue, that can strike without warning?
Not just Ramsgatonians 6:22. Herne Bayians, Thanet Villagians, Canterburians. This petition is snowballing and nothing is going to stop it. If that does not persuade the council to reconsider, then perhaps a very expensive legal challenge will. In which case, if they think this consultation is only going to cost them £80,000, they had better think again.
The council and Infratil have seriously underestimated the fight they are going to get over this. I have been told that when a public meeting was held over EUJet's plans for night flying a few years ago there was uproar. That will pale into insignificance compared to what they are facing now.
I might also add, since when was an airport flying 747s over a town of 40,000 people all night 'progress'? Not even Heathrow is allowed to do that. Night flights will actually cost Thanet's economy millions due to the people and businesses who will move out if they go ahead.
If the campaign against the airport is doing so well then why has the main blog against it (SMEG) been closed & the other blog (Planes Over Herne Bay) gone silent? Give up now you losers, MOST of the people around here want it & that's a FACT!!!
What a load of rot. I have been out getting signatures against the night flights and have had people literally lining up to sign. The campaign is much wider than SMEG and Herne Bay now and is growing every day, which I presume is why they have gone quiet. They started it, others are taking it forward.
A petition with thousands of names and addresses on it will be more of a FACT than ONE anonymous twerp like you mouthing off on a blog.
Well done with getting the signatures mr / mrs / ms Anonymous!
Tell you what, Mr/Ms/Mrs Anonymous Twerp, why don't you get out on the streets of East Kent and start collecting signatures FOR night flights? Then, at the end, we can see who has the most.
My betting is that it will be you and a couple of grannies from Westgate on yours.
Go on then. There's nothing to stop you trying to get them
Remember to duck.
All the airport wants is a level playing field, i.e. the same terms as any other airport in the SE. I'm sure that the council will support changing the S106 from its current ludicrous penalty regime. A successful airport is a key element in the regeneration of Thanet, and East Kent in general.
You're crackers, Mr Jacobs.
"All the airport wants is a level playing field, i.e. the same terms as any other airport in the SE."
WRONG! Not even Heathrow is allowed to fly jumbos in all night long. They are only allowed up to QC2. Manston want QC4 (747s). Sign the No Night Flights petition now:
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/nonightflights/
There is a lot of scaremongering in the public domain at the moment-all the requirement under discussions is the same requirements of other Regional Airports in the Country - no more- no less - petitions and blog sites do not give a true representation of the Public view of this and the silent majority were it to speak up i am sure would be supportive of the attempts by Infratil to become a major player in the local economy of Thanet.
We hear a lot about the 'silent majority' but as yet no one has offered any proof that they exist.
The only people I have heard supporting night flights are a couple of anonymous commentators on this blog, and one or two of our elderly population who still think the airport is an RAF base and that we're still fighting WW2. Compare that with:
- Ramsgate Town Council against night flights. Nothing 'silent' about them, they are the elected representatives of the 40,000 people who live in Ramsgate, who Infratil don't even have the guts to meet up with
- Over 1,000 signatures (including names and addresses) on the petition. Many from Ramsgate, many from Broadstairs, many from Herne Bay and many from other parts of East Kent.
Those who are for night flights keep quoting this 'silent majority' but where's the proof? There is none. The truth of the matter is that, when the full impact of the proposal is explained to people, most cannot wait to sign the petition against it.
As for this being the same flying hours and QC as any other regional airport, no other regional airport has a town of 40,000 people, a beautiful beach and harbour, and 900+ listed buildings at the end of its runway.
And not even Heathrow is allowed QC4 (747s) through the night.
"A successful airport is a key element in the regeneration of Thanet, and East Kent in general."
What year do you think this is?
about 1915
The silent "majority" are presumably those who can sleep through anything so were asleep when you called to ask them to sign the petition. As to the other point it is precisely because the planes can't land at Heathrow till 6.30 or so that they want to use Manston as they will have run out of fuel just circling round waiting for Heathrow to open. If we used the existing runway the other way round - ie. flew in round the land side and out over the sea who would be affected then? EUjets were so much quieter.
A lot of this is misintepreting the wording. The airport wants the option to be able to fly during the night if required, not necessarily planning flights to do this.I have health insurance to cover death, I have no intention of dying in the short term.
Why would I buy 'insurance' that, when it pays out, will mean 747s flying rotten bananas over my house at less than 1000ft all through the night?
Post a Comment