A crowdfunder has been launched in a bid to apply for a Judicial Review over the decision to approve a Development Consent Order for Manston airport.
Chair of Ramsgate Coastal Community Team Jenny Dawes – who says she is acting alone but with a groundswell of community support – has a £12,000 target in a bid to launch the legal challenge.
Solicitors Kate Harrison and Susan Ring of Harrison Grant have agreed to act and to instruct barristers Richard Wald QC and Gethin Thomas in the action.
A Judicial Review will look at whether the Government followed correct procedure in reaching the decision to approve the DCO for RiverOak Strategic Partners.
The decision on a development consent order for the Manston airport site was announced on July 9 after delays in January and May.
The Department of Transport approved the application to create an air freight hub at the site despite the Examining Authority panel of Martin Broderick, Jonathan Hockley, Kelvin MacDonald and Jonathan Manning recommending to the Secretary of State that development consent should not be granted.
The approval makes Manston the first ever site to gain a DCO for an airport.
The application was accepted for examination in August 2018 and it was completed on 9 July 2019.
RSP says it will reopen the airport in a £300m project to create an air freight hub with passenger services and business aviation. Plans for construction will be phased over 15 years and will include freight stands and four passenger stands for aircraft as well as warehousing and fuel storage to meet the forecast demand.
There are also plans for education and training, flight training school, business aviation and passenger services.
But Jenny Dawes says her action is being launched due to the decision being made against the examining panel’s advice.
She says she fears for the impact locally – particularly Ramsgate – and on the climate.
She says: “With the support of those affected, I’m launching an application for a Judicial Review of the Secretary of State’s decision.
“The legal team is in place but at least £12,000 is needed to start the process, with a call for more if the application is accepted.”
Laying out her reasons for opposition to the airport plan she writes: “This is against the advice of the Government’s own planning experts, which sets a worrying precedent in the face of air pollution and climate change.
“According to the Government’s own experts, re-opening the airport will damage the local economy and impact negatively on the UK’s carbon budget and our commitments to the Paris climate agreement.
“The cargo-first development at Manston will handle the noisiest and most polluting type of aircraft, planes not even allowed at Heathrow. These are also the most expensive way of moving freight.
“The opening of a dedicated cargo hub will cause irreparable harm to the people, the natural environment and the economy of East Kent. Residents in the seaside towns of Ramsgate and Herne Bay, and in surrounding villages, will be living under low-flying, heavy-duty, highly-polluting aircraft. Some will be a mere 500ft below the flight path.
“It will ruin our health and well-being as well as blighting the tourist industry on which so many depend. This will not only be a disaster for local people and our towns and villages, but also for the climate change obligations of the UK.”
A spokesperson for the No Night Flights campaign said: “No Night Flights is delighted to note that a Ramsgate resident is prepared to question the decision to allow the DCO for Manston Airport. When the news was announced a week ago, against the very clear guidance from the Examining Authority that weighed up evidence of the proposal and the effects it would have over Ramsgate, Herne Bay and surrounding areas there was an air of disbelief.
“With an amount of evidence that outweighed any other DCO the four appointed Planning Inspectors came to the decision this was not a viable proposal on various grounds, such as health, pollution, need amongst other reasons. Therefore we support a challenge of that decision very much and can only get behind this chance to highlight exactly why the decision was made.
“There has been a lot of unfounded publicity that the majority in the area want an airport, but NNF has always held the line that there is little support for a cargo hub, that will not have passenger flights until far off in the future and will technically have night flights. The threat to our towns and health is real.
“It has been uplifting to see so much local support, and so quick. The crowdfunder passed its first target of £12,000 within two hours and is still going strong. There are people out there that have been quiet and waiting for a chance to show that they do not want a cargo hub. They can’t be ignored any longer it seems.
“People are beginning to realise the amount of air traffic that will be allowed over the area, holding patterns blighting Birchington, Margate, Broadstairs and beyond, this is not a proposal for small passenger airport it once was. We are very excited to see what happens next.”
Panel and SoS
The panel conclusion was that the socio-economic benefits of the development were overstated, and that the development would have an adverse effect on tourism in Ramsgate. The panel said that the Applicant’s education, training and skills commitments would benefit Thanet and East Kent. When taken together the ExA considered the Development would still generate a socio-economic benefit to Thanet and East Kent, but such benefits were substantially lower than that forecast by the Applicant.
However, the letter on behalf of the Secretary of State for Transport disagreed with that conclusion, saying: “The Secretary of State disagrees and concludes that there is a clear case of need for the Development which existing airports (Heathrow, Stansted, EMA and others able to handle freight) would not bring about to the same extent or at all.
“The Secretary of State concludes that significant economic and socioeconomic benefits would flow from the Development to Thanet and East Kent as well as more widely including employment creation, education and training, leisure and tourism, benefits to general aviation and regeneration benefits.
“In conclusion, the Secretary of State considers that the public benefits significantly outweigh the harm caused by the Development due to noise and vibration impacts, taking into account the restrictions to be imposed by him, and also acknowledging that the airport has operated lawfully without restrictions in the past.”
Tony Freudmann, director of RSP, said it is not unusual for government not to follow an examining panel recommendation.
He said: “The decision had always been with the Secretary of State and he said he did not agree with the recommendation, especially the assessment that there was not a shortage of capacity.”
Mr Freudmann says there are a number of restrictions put in place as part of the order – including a ban on night flights, noise control quotas and caps on the annual air traffic movements for cargo, passenger and general aviation at 18,000 cargo movements and 7,000 passenger movements annually.
He said plans include ‘carbon neutral’ measures to meet the Paris Accord and RSP is ‘comfortable’ with the ability to reach those.
He said measures would include: “using electric and hydrogen powered vehicles, keeping the number of road users to a minimum (with the use of local employees) and hopefully being able to take cargo to Port Ramsgate.”
Construction work at the site is expected to begin next year – when the Department of Transport’s deal for lorry parking at the site has expired, with opening predicted for early 2023.
Restrictions imposed by the Secretary of State include:
- A ban on night flights – restricting scheduled flights between 23:00 and 06:00 and a restriction on noisier aircraft between 06:00 to 07:00
- Noise Quota Counts (“QCs”) to control noise impacts – setting a QC for aircraft in the 06:00 to 07:00 period and restricting noisier aircraft with QC 4, 8 or 16 to mitigate noise in the late part of the night-time quota period
- Contour to limit annual noise emissions – the contour area and relevant noise contours are secured in the DCO and the contour area cap is considered a reasonable approach to mitigate and minimise the population exposed to aircraft noise above the day and night-time Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (“LOAEL” – the level above which adverse effects on health and quality of life can be detected)
- Residential properties –with habitable rooms within the 60dB LAeq (16 hour) day time contour will be eligible for noise insulation and ventilation detailed in the noise mitigation plan
- Schools – the restrictions on passenger air transport departures is, with the funding commitments for insulation and ventilation in the UU in favour of Kent County Council, considered adequate to avoid significant adverse noise effects
- Caps on the annual air traffic movements for cargo, passenger and general aviation to the worst-case assessment in the Environmental Statement
- The establishment of a robust monitoring, auditing and reporting scheme not just for noise, but covering monitoring in all aspects of potential effects
More to come on RSP plans shortly.
Wow !….A lot of money, to give away, some may consider it an investment, dare I suggest it’s more of a gamble , with not much of a return on your money….
Consider too, it’s not RiverOak you are hoping to take to Court, it’s the Government, very deep pockets….
I shall observe with interest …..
Would I predict an outcome …I could, but one certainty, you will NOT get your money back …
Only the lawyers will benefit financially…..
I personally couldn’t care less about getting my money back. The whole decision is corrupt IMO. No thought to Ramsgate at all, indeed Grant Shapps has acknowledged the CARGO hub will be a detriment to Ramsgate. 40000 residents will suffer just to appease the small mindedness of (yes I will say it) the older generation who are afraid to let go of the past and who cannot acknowledge this DCO will be highly damaging to Ramsgate, especially with regard to tourism and the environment. There will not be the amount of jobs these people think there will be… And RSP have been evasive in the number of jobs the proposal will create. But then again those who are pro Manston mostly don’t live here. NO to Manston CARGO hub!!!!
.l think it’s good that Manston will become an airport again, it should never have closed. Good for Thanet and Jobs in the area.
Well said, the airport is in a perfect position and as I have flown into the airport it’s main approach path is over sea and as night flights will not be happening to cause noise pollution and taking cargo flights from Heathrow and Gatwick and some other airports the cargo can be transported to the docks and by river Thames and drop off points on way to London, this would reduce the lorries on the motorways and roads to London also, it always was an airport it was good enough for the RAF it should stay open because it’s right in the north east corner of Kent, less flights to Heathrow and Gatwick etc,
You get much more pollution from old aircraft that will be flown than vehicles. According the plan they will fly every 14 minutes between 6:00 and 23:00. I’ve made huge sacrifices restoring a property as my home and just moved in. The proposed flight path goes over my house. To simply say “why don’t you move house” would be a selfish comment, and I would sacrifice a job for me at Manston for it not to go ahead as I wait to be redundant. If you want jobs at any cost then I turn the table and say why don’t you move instead? The new airport will be much busier than before and it will be devastating for an area of natural beauty. Don’t let it go ahead. Worth every penny to crowd fund this.
Audrey, my guess is you don’t live in the Postal Code CT11 do you! This is the area that will be totally devastated by low flying aircraft flying in over Ramsgate Harbour at less than 300 meters, up the High Street at 250 meters, 200n meters just behind ASDA, and 150 meters over St Lawrence, and just 100 meters over Nethercourt! There are 13,202 households in the CT11 area, and 29,228 people at the last census who will have their quality of life destroyed! And for what, so an American Hedged Fund company can get richer at our expense! None of us in CT11 were asked if we wanted Manston to open, so isn’t time we had a plebiscite to decide if it should be, with only the people in CT11 allowed to vote!
I am assuming that most of the people who want to stop the reopening of Manston are relatively new to the area and did not live here when the Americans were based at the airfield. I lived on the Newington estate in the 1950’s from the age of 9 to 16 and am now in my 70’s. It didn’t worry people then. It didn’t stop people coming to Ramsgate on holiday, in fact Ramsgate was a very popular place for visitors. At the moment Ramsgate is dead and has been for years. It could be a thriving town again if only people with a negative attitude could see beyond their noses.
Move somewhere else then!
We had a general election where the two sitting MPs made no secret of there support for a Manston cargo hub. The two very same MPs were re elected with an increased share of the vote so the fact that’s obvious,is the majority of people living in Ramsgate want the airport, or they would surely of voted for a candidate that was against it.
Devastated? Like when the Luftwaffe used to visit?
How could you say that residents in CT11 were not consulted about Manston? UKIP councillors were elected in 2015 due to the party’s promise to support the airport’s return.
It annoys us when people speak FOR us! We live in CT11 and have done since the RAF and USAF were here. We long for the return of our airport; 35 mins from AMSTERDAM and indoors putting the kettle on 30 mins later; BLISS!!!(To travel to LGW or LHR from here (and return) via M20/M25 or M3 is polluting and adds time and pounds to our journey; plus hotel fees and parking charges can add to costs, never mind taxi fares!) REMEMBER, planes can bring tourists, visitors AND business people to THANET, as well as taking them home. We welcome the prospect of employment too, and especially much needed training and apprenticeships for our young people. Oh yes – & we took part in consultations, attended most presentations, completed questionnaires and voted in favour of RSP’s plans and the retention/reopening of our airport – which should NEVER have been sold for £1 in he firs place!!
Jen Small, Tony Wise, Mark Harper have you all ever thought of getting help? If you all got together you could probably get a good discount from a shrink to treat cretinism, worth a try! How many attempts were there trying to get a passenger air service from Manston, 4 was it or 5! They all failed for one good reason, lack of demand! The idea of a passenger air carrier is just an “Aspiration”, it will never fly, so bad news for Jane Wenham-Jones, who only wants it opened so she can fly to her holiday home in France without going to Gatwick!
‘Dumpton’ throwing insults at people does you no favours. Your behaviour is reprehensible & will earn you no supporters.
At least the lawyers pay taxes in the UK, unlike some cargo-airport owners!
The numbers simple don’t stack up, the planning inspectorate know it, aviation experts know it, those that don’t fall under RSPs spell know it, so why did DCO get approved….
What a load of patronising rubbish. The older generation wont let go of the past. The vast majority of Thanet residents want the the airport, the minority don’t that’s democracy get over it.l
What older generation ?
We have had elections when the candidates have stated that they stood for Manston Airport Reopening. Both our MPs were voted in with a majority, THAT is democracy like it or not. Those who try to undermine it will pay a heavy price in more ways than one.
The vast majority of U.K. voters are sick and tired of the legal system being used to undermine democracy.
Labour does not want any investment in any jobs. They want poverty and struggle so they can make out they are “ helping the poor” who Labour want to stay poor. Labour hate anyone who has the funds to invest.
“All the names of those who want to stop our young and others gaining employment at Manston Airport both in the short term and long term by objecting to the DCO need to be identified and should be published”
Bit like the RSP backers
Silly me I thought the important issue was Brexit!
Silly you, correct!
The usual personal insults from airport supporters.
Totally correct … Thanet needs the development and the transport improvement that the airport can bring
Transport, you mean CARGO transport. The DCO was for a CARGO not for you to go on a jolly to Benidorm.
Routes to Alicante be brilliant was one of the busiest routes with EUjet and people of Thanet love going to Benidorm.
EU jet went bankrupt
Not anymore, once they try to get travel insurance and they are rejected! Brexit around the corner, no more popping to Malaga on MAMA Airlines
Ann, the candidates for the opposition parties in both constituencies also expressed support for the reopening of the airport with the exception of one or two minor parties. So your claim that the last general election was some sort of referendum on the airport doesn’t really stand up.
Stick to the failed past deary, dont look to the future and better options, just carry on with the same repeated mistakes. You and yours are all which is wrong with Thanet and holding it back.
Interesting to note that the £12,000 has almost already been raised, just 2 hours after the appeal was set up.
Yes, Liam, it’s grossly unfair that ordinary people should have to stump up the cash to fight this action. But it needs to be done. It’s the first time a DCO for a private airport has been applied for, and given that the ExA’s rejection of the application was overturned by the SoS, it needs testing.
The Government might have deep pockets, but it didn’t help them when they illegally tried to proroge Parliament.
Well there’s clearly a lot of support, £12,000 passed already after 2 hours, stretch target already up. It seems there’s a lot of support for NOT having a noisy, dirty cargo hub in Thanet despite what our local MPs say. Shame on them for not representing their constituencies. Well done everyone and hoping for many more donations.
Join the crowdfunder here: https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/support-judicial-review-of-man/?utm_source=case_page_social&utm_medium=Facebook&utm_content=case_page_below_amounts&utm_campaign=support-judicial-review-of-man
Ah the naivety of youth
I’m in my late sixties and I’m totally against the idea of an airport at Manston.
Gru, i’m touched that you feel that 60+ is young. What does that make you, 90-odd? Another out of touch oldie? This planet is dying on its feet with ever increasing CO2 emissions. The last thing it needs is a freight airport. Wake up and smell the coffee.
Ramsgate lover, why are you hiding your name your comments are worthless if you don’t let people see who you are. If you have something to say be proud of your comment. otherwise saying nothing would be better
I’m with Ramsgate Lover for not leaving their name. I feel very deeply about not having noisey, dirty, polluted cargo planes flying 100 metres above my head but, to be honest I’m scared because of the abuse that gets thrown around by the pro Manston lobby, but II will do all I can to stop this travesty of reopening Manston. I’ve lived on Nethercourt for over 40 years. I don’t hold on to the past, we should progress, but this is not the way
So ‘Ramsgate Lover’ I love coffee and while not quite 90 but am familiar with ‘sticks and stones’. Also, whilst I am an oldie I am fully in au fait with the emissions agenda. Manston has been and will be a significant asset to Thanet going forward. NB Having lived on Rydal Ave while the USAF were at Manston and having had their military Thunderbolts flying overhead to land, I really cannot understand the noise issue.
The vast majority of Ramsgate residents that I know are against the airport reopening. The added noise, pollution and traffic will adversely effect Ramsgate and bring Little to no gain. Once again Ramsgate gets the short straw.
The people saying that modern planes aren’t noisy and polluting are deluded. All aircraft are noisy and polluting. It’s 2020 and air pollution is one of the biggest threats to the planet. More planes spewing out more emissions is the last thing this planet needs.
More kids are going to develop asthma and other breathing difficulties because of this insane decision to press ahead with an airport that the experts have concluded won’t work.
Will The people celebrating the decision to reopen Manston still be celebrating when the lifespans of their children and grandchildren are shortened by the pollution the airport brings?
Yes Thanet needs to create jobs and wealth but it should be in green technologies NOT industries that are killing the planet .
ANOTHER NAMELESS GOB ON A STICK
What do you want airport supporters to do to the people who have donated money for a judicial review, Ann?
Democracy does not prevent people from trying to reverse decisions they think are wrong.
Once again panic button pushed regarding Aircraft to be used. Modern cargo aircraft are not old noisy converted pax planes and I am sure the major cargo carriers would take to task those spreading such gossip about their fleets. All A/C subject to CAA inspection etc. B747 800, B777 to name but two are quiet as is possible and very modern. As Liam said,Govt gave approval..
Correct FedupB !!
FEDUPB, “Quiet as possible and very modern “ still equates to extremely noisy and polluting.
A Boeing 747 uses 4 litres of fuel per second (11 tonnes of fuel per hour) when on cruise and can hold 238,604 litres of fuel with 10% of the fuel being used in take off and 5% being used on its descent. Thousands of litres of fuel per aircraft will be burnt over Ramsgate which is definitely NOT environmentally friendly and definitely IS extremely damaging to human health and the local wildlife.
The decision to reopen Manston is an environmental catastrophe and the damage to local health as a consequence of this idiotic shortsighted decision will be felt for years to come.
At this current time any money spent fighting the government could be better spent. As well as this Money there is in fact the tax payers money that will be spent in defending this. There are not many companies willing to invest in Thanet and there will be even fewer if this is the way they are treated. We need to be positive and get things moving not fighting old costly battles. Anybody who gives money to this needs to ask themselves are there not more deserving causes for your spare money.
Tax payers’ money should not have been wasted in the first place by permitting the DCO application.
Exactly, another thing we can thank Chris Grayling for.
Sean Doherty- do you not know that there was a company which wanted to develop a mixed-use plan for the ex-airport? But the council was so in thrall to the idea of an airport resurrection at Manston that it put obstacle after obstacle in SHP’s way. So SHP sold the land to RSP. And thousands of houses/flats will now be built on greenfield sites whereas they could have been built on a big brownfield site.
You are some years out of date Ramsgate lover! The noisy and dirty aircraft you mention have not been allowed in Europe, so far as I am aware, for some years. I assume you are talking about the Russian IL76 freighters. Definitely not allowed anywhere in Europe
We are no longer in ‘Europe’. I think there was something in the news at the time – Brexity something.
Mark my words are you that thick we are part of Europe and always have been and always will be. You need to go back to school and learn some geography sunshine.
All aircraft no matter how modern are dirty, loud and polluting, to think otherwise is delusional.
Approximately 10% of an aircraft’s fuel is spent on take off and 5 percent on descent, that’s thousands of litres of TOXIC aviation fuel per plane that will be burnt over Ramsgate poisoning everything in its path (A B747 plane can hold over 238 thousand litres of toxic aviation fuel)
The damaging health implications for the residents of not just Ramsgate but the whole of Thanet will be felt for decades to come.
Marva well said 20,000 plus houses and it is the government who wants them.
20000 houses 30000 car and of course no pollution, 20000 gas boiler
and no pollution. I think some people think huge number of new residents will not pollute our environment. lets just support the airport and at least get less unemployment. The decision has been made lets just get Thanet prosperous instead of being the back side of Kent.
It’s about time that bus and tram lanes were designed in to new developments.
I rather think SHP did RSP up like a kipper. In May 2019 United Nations upgraded toxicity threat of persistent organic pollutant “PFOA” Game changer for developing Manston for any use.
A predictable game changer. SHP sold a negative value site to RSP for 16 mill! And walked away laughing.
People need to understand that Manston is toxic The Drinking Water aquifer was not protected from that persistent toxicity. TDC admitted this to National Planning.
All power to the Judicial Review and holding this DCO decision to account.
I support the inspectors. They are the experts, they made an evidence based decision.
They carried out a thorough, objective and forensic process of examination.
They arrived at a unanimous outcome.
Yes but the cause they describe has little chance. There is a jugular they are missing.
Maybe they need to do some thinking independent of ubiquitous Cllr Karen Constantine and list her as an interested party to shut off her economy with the truth. Also list Roger Gale.
The Government may have deep pockets but that didn’t stop them being forced into a humiliating u turn with their plans for a third runway at Heathrow. That is now dead in the water thanks to a legal challenge.
Looks like they have the same legal team from Heathrow 3rd runway challenging this DCO too. So money well spent by the looks of it.
I see the abuse has started on Dan Lights Facebook group, SMA.
And yet you’re a troll who hides under a fake name fishing for a sympathy vote,
No I’m not a troll. I live in Ramsgate and will not use my real name because of the abuse you get on Social media.
Don’t blame you, remember the posts of people going around reporting cars and number-plates of people that may be associated with the owners?
Then why post comments at all, if you haven’t the courage to put a name to your posts it just makes you a gob on a stick, shameless.
For all we know, Mark Harper could be a pseudonym (you know what that is, dont you?
So, another gob on a stick.
What a waste of money! £12,000 could be better to donate that to Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother Hospital.
Fingers crossed it fails ??
I wouldn’t give a penny. Let them waste there money. Will take a lot more than £12000. That’s just a start. Will be 6 figures maybe more by the end.
This is good news. Let’s see whether the government have acted within the law in overturning the recommendation of the Planning Inspectorate to refuse this DCO on multiple grounds.
I think the money rolling in is a sign that more people are for a cargo-hub-free Thanet than against. What better cause is there to fight than looking after the health of both people and planet?
£12,000 now hardly a ringing endorsement is it. You know what they say fools & there money. How much have you donated then.
We have just had a recent general election the residents had the chance to vote then and indeed they did voted for Manston Airport supporting the REOPENING it is not a new development.
Ramsgate voted overwhelmingly against the Cargo Hub in the Local elections. It is disingenuous to state otherwise
No it didn’t. You’re full of rubbish.
Get to bed “god help us”. It’s past your bed time.
“God help us” – you are talking rubbish, you are making things up to suit your agenda, you are not reporting any truths.
Why don’t you try substantiating that statement that most of Ramsgate opposes re-opening Manston.?
You cannot, can you?, and talking to friends is not most of Ramsgate!, where I live and am glad the DCO has been granted. JOBS, Yippee!
Well said Ton!!
Ramsgate is at the eye of the current storm and in the local elections for Ramsgate Town Council Labour and the Green party fought on a No to a Cargo Hub all but 3 seats fell to Labour and the Greens.
At the same time TDC elections 75% of Wards in Ramsgate also became Labour & Greens.
Maybe before you hit the enter button do your reasearch
I don’t see your point about the GE. It doesn’t matter what people voted for, nor what was on candidates’ manifestos.
If the DCO application was all above board, then fine and dandy for Mr Freudmann and Co. If not, are you really saying that you support an illegal operation at Manston?
Then why did the DCO team of Riveroak spend a lot of the EX A hearing explaining that it was new development?
Can’t say I noticed “Manston Airport” being a big issue in the general election.
Could not agree more. The general election had nothing to do with Manston opening as a cargo hub. We fortunately live in a parliamentary democracy. Parliament make laws and the judiciary uphold them. We will see if the recent DCO decision by the SOS was lawful or not and that is true democracy and has nothing to do with the left or the right.
£14,000 raised in a few hours makes a mockery of the Save Manston groups with their cake sales and a few people chipping in to buy ribbon !
Maybe RSP ought to up their subs to ensure a level playing field
Ann that is such a illogical conclusion to reach. Gale has been an MP for a million years. He gets voted in every time due to the demographic and socio economic make up of his constituency. Basically, wealthier older people who tend to actually vote. Mackinlay got voted in during the 2015 General election. Was that on a pro airport ticket? Of course it wasn’t. Their support of Manston would have been a tiny part of people’s considerations of where to put their vote and would have very probably followed how people viewed the national party manifestos.
To say their re-election is evidence of some sort of fervent area-based support of their stance in the airport is frankly mind boggling.
Our son is a solicitor he tells me fighting the government on this matter would be in the range of £300.000 / £400,000 depending on the amount of experts who could be called.
The question that would be before the court if it went that far is. Does the secretary of State for transport have the right to grant permission for a DCO. The answer to that is yes. It’s the same as when everyday planning applications that councils object to and are overruled. Regardless of what the inspector concluded the SOS has the final say, therefore I feel the objectors are on a expensive hiding to nothing.
I’m afraid your son, the solicitor, has given you very bad advice, or maybe you didn’t understand him.
Part of the PA2008 allows a six week period for a JR to be instigated. This would be completely unnecessary if the word if the SoS were unassailable.
An opinion very similar to yours was being peddled round the pro-Manston fb pages a few days ago.
The experts and their evidence is already there. It’s in the Examining Authority’s report. The one that recommened the airport should not open. All paid for by RSP. Thanks RSP
interesting that Gov gave the go ahead for Heathrow 3. How did that go remind me
There’s a very useful website to which you might direct your son: it explains all about the JR process.
Yes. BUT. If the JR changes tack towards Wednesbury …. I think they will win.
For those that cheer about no houses on Manston, how is this comment that appears on a pro-Manston forum ??
“Sir Roger said that he was trying to get TDC to accept that the MoD site of the fire school and the buildings used by PWRR and the associated land should be earmarked for housing, as this would take away the need to build in Westgate and Birchington and on agricultural land and also provide homes for airport workers.”
Perhaps I don’t quite understand something.
We collectively were asked to take part in an impartial exercise to determine if the DCO was viable, reasonable, environmental and socially and economically beneficial. A vast amount of evidence on both sides were submitted and after 6/7 months of taking evidence the EXa, sat down and considered the matter most carefully. The panel was made up of persons with no stake in either camp and was by all measures, impartial.
They came to a conclusion, which was not ambiguous or undecided, it was clear and well thought out. In the meantime the DFT indulged in jiggery-pokery, aided and abetted by our MP’s and the result was was a ‘Putinesque’ decision which appears to have been rigged from the start; it must have been to come out with the result that it did.
Dreadful Ann in her fortress over in Broadstairs then says oh well! Its alright the GE result means that Shapps is quite entitled to game the system.
Ann complains that it is wrong to pull down statues and to complain about the police, but no one has dug up Manston or taken selfies of themselves ruining the place; we all followed due process.
Due process is what Magna Carta, Coke’s Petition of Right, the 1688 Bill of Rights and the Human Rights Act 1998 is all about.
In the PRC and Hong Kong those rights are non existent or fast eroding, Ann.
Perhaps you might be more grateful of an independent judiciary if RSP decided your house had got to come down.
The Crowd funders are perfectly entitled to contribute and even if they don’t win they are defending the rights of the ordinary person to be heard when faced with the arbitrary use of power
“arbitrary ABUSE of power”, surely?
Well said George Nokes
The save manston campaign was a non event. A few crack pots and those with stake in the money to be made. The EX-UKIP Tory pushing for this. It’s a joke. The people have not spoken they do not want this. They didn’t use the airport and they knew it failed time and time again. They didn’t want 10,000 houses either. There should have been a third option.
The amount raised in a few hours proves people don’t want this.
Tourist MPs not living in Thanet in the issue here.
Tony. I could not care less what the pros and cons are I fully understand what my son has told me. He lives in York so has no interest and I never fly.
I suspect the moaners and groaners are shaking their piggy banks like there is no tomorrow. Oh the noise of all those pennies slamming against the side of their little piggies must be above the permitted decibels levels. Pathetic.
As usual, you have no answer to any points anyone raises so you throw the insults !
After a lengthy examination of the Manston DCO proposal a team of well qualified experts recommended that the scheme be rejected. This has been reversed by Andrew Stephenson who is a Transport Minister and also a Tory politician. I think that due to Sir Roger MP for Riveroak threatening to resign the Minister has allowed politics to obscure his opinion. The Tories would not want a by election given their woeful handling of Coronavirus (Stephenson is MP for Pendle which has had a spike in infection). Locally, the consequences of no deal Brexit with lorry parks in Ashford don’t seem to be popular either.
Brexit all over again. When will loosers accept a result.
Only when every stone has been turned.
Brexit all over again. The ‘winners’ getting really cross when you start pointing out that things aren’t quite going to be as promised.
What some on here do not seem to realise is the “experts” recommendations is just that recommendation. It is was not set in stone otherwise there would be no need to have secretary of State. The “experts” were looking at this before Brexit was implemented and before Covid 19. So the SOS has looked at it in a totally different light and in the National interest.
Death of Expertise and the rise of Politicians with no expertise.
thanks for confirming it was a political decision
I wonder how other airports are viewing this.
Donations to the Tory party perhaps
Ann, there was a section in the application about the effects of Brexit. The experts weren’t convinced by RSP on that either. The Minister did not mention Covid19 in his reasoning because, if anything, the slump in aviation actually means a lot more capacity for freight in established airprts – where it might help protect valuable jobs.
mmm Ann it is also their duty to put matters of Fact to SoS such as a police inquiry and United Nations Stockolm Convention and Drinking Water Inspectorate action and expert inquiry Maternity Tragedies.
Ironically, the pro airport group are the older voters who also voted brexit.
Manston could be a lorry park for many years to come.
“So the SOS has looked at it in a totally different light and in the National interest.”
And so the JR will decide whether the SoS actually had the right to do that or not.
The DCO Application (which must be a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project) was not about Brexit nor CV. It was about whether there was an overwhelming need for a dedicated cargo airport in the SE of England.
Some of us think that the SoS can’t just make it up as he goes along, changing the goal posts to suit some political agenda. Otherwise it makes a farce of the whole PA2008 DCO process. What’s the point? Just let the SoS toss a coin, or whatever he does to decode the merits of the case.
It’s excellent news that this decision will be going to Judicial Review. I applaud Jenny Dawes for putting her head above the parapet to ensure the people of Ramsgate’s voice is listened to. No doubt the pro-airport campaigners will now start hurling abuse at her as they have done to anyone who dared to challenge the need to attempt to reopen the airport. Now we will find out who actually made the decision and they will have to explain why they did not accept the recommendation of the Planning Inspectorate, which found that the case for this being a National Infrastructure Project had not been made. I imagine Mr. Webber and his cronies will be getting very worried when they see that the money needed to lodge the review had been raised within a few hours of the appeal being launched; a clear sign that there are many, many people out there who are fed up with this ridiculous farce, and self-appointed bigots who have spent the last six years falsely claiming that nobody was opposed to the plans to reopen the airport. It’s been twenty wasted years since the airport was transferred to civilian use. Twenty years in which thousands of jobs were promised and never delivered. Twenty years of Mr. Freudmann and Mr. Gale ignoring clear and unequivocal evidence that this development does nothing to improve quality of life for those living in the flight paths. The DCO process failed to deliver an equitable outcome based on the evidence. Let’s hope the justice system can do better.
The Airport was there long before you moved near it and us part of our history and holds great potential to improve the Economic situation of this area which is currently appalling and just propping up a gaping benefits system and an area of high unemployment. We do nit need more houses and congestion and more strain on our hospitals, Drs and dentists, this area needs jobs. If you don’t like living near an airport and do not like hearing planes overhead, then surely you need to choose to live somewhere that doesn’t have an airport. Surely you have something better to do with your time than working against the prospects of this area and the improvement of society and the people’s lives who live here.
Oh my god. Rebecca do you not read anything? The houses are coming. Read again, THE HOUSES ARE COMING. It doesn’t matter whether there’s an airport or not, the houses will be built. Better on the disused Manston site than around all the villages in Thanet. I don’t know why I bother repeating this fact because the SMA’s seem to be completely immune to any fact.
Anyone want to join me, and start up a ‘CrowdFund Me’ to challenge this single womans’ Judicial Review (also known as a challenge)?
Set up a crowd funding page then Robster. Also, the volume of money so far raised suggests that this ‘woman’ is not alone.
I mean to challenge her challenge!
Oh get a grip Robster. Suck it up, as you plane enthusiasts are so fond of saying.
Markmywords. The JR will not pick over all what the “experts” said that is clear. The court will only focus on can the secretary of State overrule the experts, its not going to be a re- run. Of course its a political decision the SOS is a politician.
No, the Minister is acting in a statutory quasi judicial role. The Planning Act 2008 does give a SoS power to overrule a recommendation however, the decision has to be based on the merits of the case which turn on the economic benefits.
So Ann and Robster are my learned friends.I think not.As for the claim that it will cost over £300,000 for the case,is probably exaggerated.The Heathrow case was expensive , but then that was a major piece of infrastructure;whereas this is a backyard scheme not worthy of the Airports commission investigation.
The SOS is given certain powers by parliament,but they are limited and not designed to overthrow any case without reasonable cause.
The JR may well fail, if so, what have Ann and Robster to worry about? Its not their money!
Jenny Dawes JW?
Robster. The government will win the day I’ve no doubt about that and the objective mob will be liable for the enormous legal fees of both sides. If in the unlikely event that the objective mob won I pledge to put £100.000 into a fund to take the matter to a higher court. I also feel strongly that this is much more than Manston Airport. I voted to stay in the EU however the referendum was lost and we are out. I never tried to obstruct that decision. I used to be daft enough to vote Labour until they put Corbyn in as their leader, however looking at the local labour reps I’m so pleased I have left the shower of them behind me. I suspect they are cosy with some Russians.
“The government will win the day “?
As they did with Heathrow 3 and proroging Parliament?
Just what do the people of Ramsgate want to see at Manston, a great sprawling housing estate maybe, lovely for all that London overspill with no jobs to go to after the building is completed. I do feel the insults in the comments are very childish and belittle what people feel. The reason Manston failed when it was sold for a pound, was because it was never intended to be a success, asset stripping comes to mind. It should of been brought back by the Council by order and for a pound. Designated open space that is protected, would that make everyone happy. If private money is supporting this scheme, what are you all frightened of if you believe it will fail, if it Fail’s then you will get your housing estate just a little latter, If it is a success then job’s, training and education for our youth, and with the tunnel that already exists to the port for transport no real damage to Ramsgate.
The JR has nothing to do with houses. It’s about the legality of the SoS granting permission for an airport, when the Planning Inspectorate declined it.
As for Manston failing because it was set up for asset stripping, you could be right. Tony Freudmann, a director of RSP, was at one time a director of Manston Airport.
What a complete and utter utter waste of money. The solicitors/lawyers will ill advise you and get nowhere. Farcical. Still, at least all the legal people involved should be able to keep the new range rover on order
We need Manston to become an airport, to make employment for this area. If people don’t like what is going to happen move out of Thanet.
What an elegant, eloquent, erudite response. You must have thought long and hard before fingering your keyboard with those immortal words “If people don’t like what is going to happen move out of Thanet”.
Do you think this sentiment will be brought up as evidence at the JR, or perhaps it has absolutely no relevance to the issue of whether the SoS acted lawfully?
Are you unemployed? Anyone you know is unemployed? Are they looking for jobs? Thanet has got a 6% unemployment rate, same as rest of the UK. There are lots of jobs around, but the employers are not going to come knocking on the door. If you cannot find a job now, then your skill set is so low that you wont be able to get a job unloading crates from the cargo planes. Have you asked ‘the youth’ whether they’d like to work in a dead end place, full of noise and fuel mist?
Dear ann i think you will find its the torys in bed with the russians not jeremy Corbin
I understand that Mr Freudmann has overseen the demise of about a dozen airports (so far).
Due to the ‘passionate’ comments, I am turning commenting off tonight and will turn it back on in the morning as I can’t moderate in my sleep
Lol, Sir Roger up there in his spitfire would send those cheeky Ruskies packing.
Desperation has arrived
Nearly £28K in less than 24 hours
So funny, the airport fan pages are getting so riled up by this possible legal challenge – if RSPs proposals are so good why are they so worried 🙂
Again, can’t argue a case so throw in some insults !
In 2017 Dawes was saying to the local press how she intends to improve Ramsgate, hello…..hello……. Jen can you hear me? It’s now 2020 can you tell us what you have improved????? Thought so NOTHING. I Shop in Waitrose do you mean they have clean the windows more??? Or do you like to peep behind the curtains.
This makes no sense?
If you don’t want to live by an airport then why did you move next to it? I live on Nethercourt and have done since the days of Concorde having test flights and repairs done at Manston.
If you don’t like the decision suck it up and show respect for the area that desperately needs job and money
Then Jeff, if you love planes and love the smell of aviation fuel in the morning, why dont you move to Heathrow? Its definitely open.
This is great new and very positive news for the youth of Thanet, the opportunity to gain further education in worthwhile jobs, and for the long term unemployed people of Thanet.
The usual naysayer’s are out in force as usual, and those who are seeking a Judicial Review to try and scupper good jobs for all in Thanet especially the youth, like the Lush champagne Labour Cllr Constantine stumping up her own money (or is it) to try and stop Jobs.
This is a once in a lifetime opportunity for Thanet, its residents cannot miss out on, and those trying their best to scupper this, will be remembered for the way they tried and failed to get good jobs, training and wages enough to pull the poor out of poor housing.
The leadership (or lack off) of Thanet District Council should embrace this vast amount of investment in our Isle yet it shuns it, does TDC want jobs and inward investment as I cannot see them promoting inward investment , quite the opposite.
Thanet Labour party should be ashamed of themselves, turning their backs on their core values here in Thanet, for this reason I have cancelled my membership of theLabour party and encourage anyone else who is a member to cancel their membership.
Yes, it’s definitely the KGB. Don’t tell anyone.
Here we go again! So much misinformation. A great deal of international cargo actually is carried on passenger flights. That has diminished at the moment and the move to smaller planes has affected that trade. A cargo hub at Manston would create a whole new range of jobs, both directly and indirectly which Thanet desperately needs. It also makes East Kent a good option for a free trade zone, with Dover and Ramsgate ports, a rail link right there and a large unemployed community ready to train.
Just building houses is counter productive if there are no jobs to attract new residents. Modern aircraft are quieter, lift off quicker and are minimally disruptive. The flight paths can avoid going over the built up areas straight out over the sea.
The elderly who are concerned about the noise are mostly fairly deaf. All the hype against Manston is basically uninformed anti progress.
If we want good infrastructure and services in the community we have to have the industry to support it.
Burying ones head in the sand to keep the poor status quo will commit the area to continuing decline.
Colin you really need to do your research or failing that look at a map.
“The flight paths can avoid going over the built up areas straight out over the sea.”
Seriously let us hope you never want to be a pilot
Planes land and take off in straight lines however at 7000 feet they can alter their direction.
Nethercourt in 1.4km from the runway and the harbour is 4km. On an easterly take off or a westerly landing at the harbour a plane in 800-1000 feet and at Nethercourt between 300-500 feet.
You obviously haven’t flown out of Manston either as a pilot or passenger. I have done both.
I have lived fairly close to both ends of the runway, and planes seldom flew over the house except heavy military bombers 30 plus years back.
Pilots can engage the autopilot as low as 400 ft and often by 1000ft, which on many planes and with long runways (like Manston) is reached before they are even over the end of the runway. Watch the planes from Gatwick and Heathrow taking off to the west but going to Eastern destinations They turn very quickly and very low. Flights from Manston to Yugoslavia would turn way before they reached St. Nicholas, and in the other direction would turn and head out over Pegwell Bay, well before they reached the main part of Ramsgate. Modern planes are even more maneuverable.
Were the Stone Hill plans not enough for progress? Leisure trails. Huge pool. Heritage aviation. GP. Schools. Library. All funded by the developer and all to support the housing development and roads. All on brownfield. All protecting the green belt.
There are better ways to regenerate Thanet than some knackered old boiler cargo planes lumbering over our town. Hardly progress, when global aviation goes the other way. The only planes interested in Manston are the ones other airports turn down. On account of noise. And pollution. Does Ramsgate really deserve to be the dumping ground of aviation scraps? We deserve better.
All these supposed facilities but no jobs for the people who would buy the houses and reduce the unemployed.Thanet has plenty of open space, footpaths and bicycle tracks- it needs good jobs.
Are people from outside Ramsgate not allowed to buy the houses? Are houses on each town in the UK only for people from those towns? Can people not live in Ramsgate and work in London, or Canterbury, or Ashford? If people buy the houses, would they not need to have a job already? Can people not come to Ramsgate because its a fantastic place to live? Can people not work from home, as we have seen during Corona? Why are you not complaining about the government’s lack of employment incentives for Ramsgate? Are jobs in aviation a good idea, considering its an industry in decline?
SHP’s plans were included areas of work space- they weren’t just for housing. As Emmeline says, they offered community buildings and public parks. But shouty plane enthusiasts overruled common sense. I don’t know what has overruled the Secretary for State’s common sense. He’s obviously forgotten all about the climate crisis.
Correction – delete “were”
So you don’t want the airport to re-open, how many of you who are against it use Gatwick or Heathrow when you go on holiday. Both flight paths are over residential areas but I suppose that’s ok because its not on your door step.
Well, Chris, I have not flown since 1980 or 1981. About 40 years, anyway. I don’t go abroad.
This sounds like a classic case of ‘not in my backyard’
I do hope this woman only eats local produce, isn’t one who lives on imported foods. Also she doesn’t seem to realise that cargo ships and alike chuck more pollution in to the sea than a plane., but she probably doesn’t see that when she catches a ferry. Hope she doesn’t fly off on holidays. And also our increasing use of lithium, dug up from the ocean sea bed is damaging our planet, but her and greta thumberg seem to be naive to it or is it ‘out of sight, out of mind’
Could be our current government stepped in at the lastminute to give go ahead of the dco.
Future votes matter,boris wants our future votes and throwing all other airport expansion under the bus can be a vote winner.
Safeguarding boris from being thrown into the bucket of a heathrow 3rd runway bulldozer,opinions vary.
For many reasons Island & coastal airports are favoured.
Not favoured all that much in this case, otherwise the planning inspectorate would have recommended acceptance of RSP’s DCO.
Such a shame that the people who can understand the fact that manston is in the wrong place have to raise money to show this government up for what it is. Just like at the public schools they all went to, they just look after their mates hence over riding the planning inspector. No one with even a small about of intelligent knows manston will go bust again.
BA stops running some of its fleet, lots of spare capacity at Gatwick and lots of other airports.
Simple facts are
Lack of demand
Lack of infrastructure no fuel grid, no decent roads, no railway.
Lack of housing for the skilled staff to move into
It really is a farcical decision to give it a go a head. It just means ramsgate will stand still for a few years again until its realised that the funding cant be raised to turn manston into an airport let alone a profitable one. The numbers simple dont add up.
I guess we are back to the old school tie again.
Good luck with the fund raising
38 grand in less than 3 days. Just shows what the silent majority really thinks. Good luck to Jenny, keep going and going and going, we’re all right behind you.
No we are NOT all behind you Jenny.. if we were daft enough to follow your logic nothing would ever be built or developed. I remember the protest to try and stop the tunnel to the Harbour, it was delayed so long with all the huffing and puffing that when it did eventually open the Sally line had already stopped sailing. The protest about the building Westwood Cross being. The protest and moaning about the Turner Centre being built. The protesters about Weatherspoon opening at the royal pavilion and recently about the Parkway Station.
I don care what the so called “experts” said about Manston Airport they were rubbish in my view they had their own agenda I have my suspicions about them they were anti from day one, I wonder why???? Manston Airport was there before the so-called “experts” were heard of.
It’s simply a case of Manston Airport REOPENING. It is NOT a new development It’s been an airport longer than you have been on this earth. If a ferry service restarted from the PORT RAMSGATE, I would not expect “”experts” being called in to say if they recommend the service start or not. in addition the Secretary of State is under NO Legal obligation to follow the “expert” advice. if we had a referendum in Thanet it would blow the snow flakes out of the water with a vote 90% yes for Airport. We have in fact voted for the Airport already by voting for the two conservatives MPs
who made it very clear in the run- up to the General Election that they supported the REOPENING of MANSTON AIRPORT.
Silent majority Emmeline …?
Thanet population just shy of 150 ,000 …Donators to date 429. …and not all local..
The call for non refundable donations has gone out globally, including requests to all the National Media …
So sorry your perception of majority is somewhat wrong ….
It’s everyone’s right to do what they wish with their own money …
If they choose to throw it away, there will always be someone ready to scoop it up ..
I’m not throwing any ….
Having read the comments on here , I’m just saddened at the views of some people..
There is so much abuse being bandied about , and it’s far from one sided …
I know that passions are again running high , but there is no need for name calling, and other abuses ….We all have our opinions in regards to Manston,
What will be will be….
Should a Judicial Review be granted , and that is not a given, and the resulting Review finds against the Secretary of State , So be it ..
RSP will still own the Airport, and it can still be upgraded, to their plans …it will just take a bit longer…..The investors are prepared for that, The Development was never going to be a quick profit and run exercise….
So JR or no, the Development will still happen ….
The 429 ( majority ) of Thanets anti Airport donators are going to be disappointed regardless..
Food for thought….
Remember too that those arch Antis the Jones -Halls , beloved of all things Anti, lost their application for their fees incurred in all the many submissions to the Planning Inspectorate ..
On the PINS website if you wish to verify…
So, I for one am not fretting over the issues..
I’m also not at all bothered to be referred to as a crony of Dr Webber …
A truly good man of integrity….
Just a small point to note the Save Manston Airport association is not connected to the other group SMA run by Dan Light/ Skeedale …
He runs his group entirely differently to SMAa…
Dr Webber is a selfish ignoramus who completely ignores the researcn which shows that aviation damages human and environmental health.
I agree, abuse of any type is totally unacceptable. It goes without saying, and we can only be responsible for ourselves, and our dignity.
Democracy however, is our way of life, and so we shall have a view.
I feel proud that our view is back up by the evidence.
And by the planning inspectors. The experts.
You can bet among that 429 there will be a number of taxi drivers who charge £90 / £100 to take and collect THANET residents to Gatwick and Heathrow, they no need to worry because there will be passengers coming into Manston who will want taxis to take them to destinations afar. Jenny Dawes and the few others who have wasted their money on this have completely underestimated the local very strong feeling on the wish to see Manston Airport reopening and lifting THANET out of the doom and gloom clouds that these sad oddballs seem to dwell in. If Jenny Dawes was hoping to be seen as the local hero then her delusional hopes will be well and truly dashed.
Ann, if you could offer an example of a journey made by one of those passengers landing at Manston (remembering first, of course, that Manston is presented as a FREIGHT airfield), your point would make a lot more sense.
You are saying that someone would land in Ramsgate and then go by taxi….where? To London? To Brighton? Sorry, it makes no sense. As usual, sadly.
The proBrexit proManston pensioners with not much to do besides burning through their pensions without a care in the world about the planet they leave behind may look forward to flying to Malaga without having to go to London, which they find tiring and a faff, all those stairs up and down. The rest of us and our children will have to pick up the pieces.
Jenny Dawes is being supported by a lot of people. For all I know a judicial review has to be requested by a single named individual.
Dont be saddened by some comments on here, I guess mind would sadden you !
Manston has never been a success as a stand alone airport
Manston has no fuel grid
Manston has no decent roads
Manston has no railway
Manston is miles from anywhere
Manston doesnt have the skills set in the community
Gatwick or Midlands airport have all of the above plus lots of spare capacity. These airports will be able to uncut manston with ease as just by bring in aviation fuel by tanker will put manston out of reach of any freight company and haulage company.
Freight is all about speed and cost that is some manston cant compete on. Any freight/ haulage company is going to want it’s good landed near its market which is why it makes sence to land in the middle of the country.
Do I land at Gatwick which is 10 minute flying time from manston unload straight onto the M25 or say 10 minutes flying time land at manston pay more to refuel, load onto HGV drive down to ramsgate harbour load onto a electric barge, sale up to the times , unload onto another HGV and than get onto the M25 put hours and hours and upping the cost.
Wake up and smell the coffee manston along with its hair brain scheme is in the wrong place !
I think you’re confused, Confused.
Planes will land at Manston, cargo will be fork-lifted (by 3000 strong teams of highly trained and expert fork lifters) onto trucks, driven (by 3000 strong etc) to our harbour, fork-lifted (possibly by an extra 3000 etc) onto waiting electric barges, where (possibly 3000) skippers will navigate their craft to a jetty in London, where (yet another) 3000 fork-lifters will load another 3000 (or possibly the same) trucks to forward to their destination.
Brilliant! 9000-12000 jobs!
What’s not to like about it?
Andrew: That’s 6,000 to 9,000 salaries that a haulage company would not have to pay towards if they flew their cargo into Gatwick for example.
i am not confused i guess you
all these 3000 strong teams you mention for fork-lifts teams, 3000 HGV teams, 3000 barge skippers, and another 3000 fork-lift to unload at london docks making as you say 9,000 to 12,000 jobs. I am not sure if you are taking the p*ss or being serious ?
The cost of employing all these people plus the fact there is the built in cost of expansive aviation fuel being brought in by HGV tankers or is that also going by barge ? thats why Manston doesnt stack up. The cost are ridicules. No way can Manston compete with a up and running airport in the right place like gatwick or midlands or luton etc we all know its makes financial sense to fly to one of those as does the aviation industry. i really cant believe that people think manston is a go’er when all the numbers and infrastructure say it will fail.
Confused and all the others who are confused let’s make things clearer. 1. Manston Airport will be reopening. 2. It’s totally irrelevant where the airport is situated. 3. It’s totally irrelevant if the airport made millions of pounds profit before or millions of loss. Confused needs to go to spec savers.
1 – the airport hasn’t got a licence to fly anything
2 – it will make a huge difference if they are expecting to steal businesses away from their well established facilities central airports in the centre of the country to the far corner, to a site not on the fuel network so will have to be brought it at a higher cost by road
3 – it’s highly relevant, investors wanting a profit will see aviation as a major risk, they may have eventually made a profit from Manston but hell might freeze over before a profit is made now from aviation. Eventual housing that is another matter….
Which spec savers do you recommend ?
“How on earth can it be totally irrelevant where the airport is situated”?
how can it be irrelevant , its common sense that’s its very relevant
I would have thought that the ability to turn a profit, or at least cover costs, would be a fundamental to any business, never mind a failed airport in the back end of Kent.
Given the examiners were as convinced of Tony’s maths as we all are, I’m somewhat surprised the finances are considered irrelevant.
I think you’ll also find location is very important. In fact, it is so important it is the other reason why it never made any money.
£300m from secretive overseas investors will get em to about Christmas. At best.
I’m sorry that my confused Confused contribution has confused so many. I’ll apply for a job with RSP as a copywriter in their PR department- except they don’t actually have an office. (Nor a phone, nor an email).
For the record, I think that the DCO application is appalling, on so many grounds.
Oops … I take that back: they do have both phone and email. 🙁
having read your previous post i could see it was a micky take 😉
£43000 is a lot of money. You could have run Manston Airport for 4 and a half days the last time it was open for that.
I’m against the airport and have pledged to the JR.
I’m quite pessimistic though unfortunately.
There are two reasons for my initial pessimism. 1. The most likely applicable legal threshold to succeed
(on grounds of irrationality)* is very high ( has to be almost bat shit crazy in lay persons’ terms but hey hi this one might just be that)
2. Neither the High Court on this JR nor the Court of Appeal are going to categorically rule out Manston Airport being reopened so even if we win – RiverOak and the crony capitalists can come back with more bites at the cherry – the Secretary of State can be simply asked to re take his decision with the benefit of the court decision to tell him where he went wrong.
This is the guinea pig for other airport DCO decisions – it’s the first so there is precedent to be fought for including re Heathrow so I suppose that whoever wins in the High Court it will go up on appeal to the Court of Appeal.
*”If a decision on a competent matter is so unreasonable that no reasonable authority could ever have come to it, then the courts can interfere… but to prove a case of that kind would require something overwhelming…” Lord Greene Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation  1 KB 223, HL.