Permission has been granted for a legal challenge over the government’s decision process in granting permission for the development of Manston airport.
The review would look at whether the Government followed correct procedure in reaching the decision to approve the DCO for landowners 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. The Examining Authority panel of Martin Broderick, Jonathan Hockley, Kelvin MacDonald and Jonathan Manning had recommended that development consent should not be granted.
The JR bid was launched by Ramsgate Coastal Community Team chairperson Jenny Dawes with a crowfunder raising some £80,000 in pledges to date.
Ramsgate Town Council is one of the backers of the cause with the majority of councillors agreeing to donate £5,000 – and up to £10,000 if needed – of council funds to the cause.
In an update from Jenny Dawes today it says: “The Honourable Mrs Justice Lang DBE has granted permission for Judicial Review and agreed a costs cap.”
The costs cap means if the case falls Ms Dawes will only be expected to pay a limited amount of incurred expenditure.
RSP says it will reopen the airport in a £300m project to create an air freight hub with passenger services and business aviation.
Tony Freudmann, of RSP, said: “We have received notification from the court and are meeting our lawyers this afternoon. We will be issuing a statement later today or tomorrow morning.”
Ms Dawes says her action was launched due to fears for the impact locally – particularly Ramsgate – and on the climate.
Manston airport closed in 2014 shortly after Stagecoach tycoon Ann Gloag bought the site from Infratil.
Thanet Green Party says it strongly welcomes the judge’s decision that the Judicial Review can go ahead.
Leader of the Green Group on Thanet District Council, Cllr Mike Garner, said: “The Planning Inspectorate’s examination of the DCO was thorough and comprehensive, and concluded that it should not be granted. Their reasons included the simple fact that there is no need for a new cargo hub at Manston, with spare capacity at many other airports, as well as the threat it poses to the Government achieving its climate commitments.
“The Government’s irrational decision to overturn the Planning Inspectorate’s recommendations in the face of all the evidence was completely baffling.”
Norman Thomas, chair of South Thanet Labour Party, said: “The minister’s decision was totally wrong and we can only hope this judicial review will overturn it. The case for another airport was not accepted by the Planning Inspectorate — and we see no good reason to challenge their judgement.
“The terms of reference for such an airport had to satisfy national strategic importance. Even before Covid 19, that case was not made simply because there is already sufficient capacity in the south east.
“Local residents have done us all service by challenging the minister’s decision and we hope the judicial review produces a good result.”
Update: An RSP spokesperson said: “RSP is disappointed that this will result in further delay to our project to revive Manston Airport, which has the potential to create hundreds of construction jobs locally by the second part of next year. We have mobilised a full legal team and will be responding, in full, to the terms of the direction handed down by the High Court yesterday.
“We and our investors remain fully committed to the Manston project, which will be needed more than ever to support UK global trade, both following the completion of the Brexit transition period on 31 December and as we seek to rebuild the economy following COVID-19.”
The farce continues (whatever side you’re on)…
Yes and now at Thanet taxpayers expense when cash could be used for more urgent issues elsewhere within the borough
Thanet taxpayers? You mean Ramsgate tax payers and only if needed? Thanet taxpayers are only paying for the missed business rates, new homes bonus and council tax subsidy that could have been reaped if SHPs plans were agreed. Alas, we are stuck with a local council stuck in the past and who shut down any talks of the airfield being anything other than an airfield. It’s status as an airfield has strangled Ramsgate for years.
I agree our Town should not have taken sides and spent what was tax payers money when we have so little. The Council have still not managed to get traffic stoppers for our pedestrian zone – Canterbury has – Ashford has but no we will spend our resources continuing the years long airport fiasco- lets just sit here and rot away allowing no change
traffic stoppers is down to KCC Highways not RTC
don’t let the facts get in the way of a good story
So when did you just pay your council tax to Ramsgate Town council
Good question! K
so what miss realistic would you want the airfield to be seeing as you realistically believe it hsas strangled Ramsgate for years. How has it done that?
Please kindly explain exactly which account the money is being taken from and from which budget heading. Could the Council Treasurerplease explain exactly where the
money came from.
Thanking some responsible person in anticipation of being posted answers to the above queries. This will assist me in understanding the financial situation.
Exactly. What a farce it is too.
I want to know if the legal cost for this JR exceeds the cost cap I want to know where does the additional money come from to cover that additional cost . If it is the taxpayers money that is used to bridge the gap. Then I will seek a judicial review as to how can it be fair or right to cap Jenny Dawes expenditure on requesting this JR then expect the taxpayers to cover any extra cost incurred beyond the cap.
Totally agree. Also, how about a JR into Ramsgate Town council stealing our money to help pay for it?
Sue, it’s RTC money to be used in the best way for Ramsgate residents. Resisting the 24/7 freight hub is in the best interests of the residents of Ramsgate.
Well, this was expected, so when the review is held in open Court, and the Judges decision made, will that be the end of the debacle ?..
Somehow I doubt it….
when you have Pritchard telling everyone to not worry because most JR’s are refused.
The facts are the facts, “God Help Us”: being granted leave to APPLY for judicial review only means that the permission stage has been granted. A rolled up hearing will occur, and the High Court’s decision can be expected to occur at the end of that hearing. No such judicial review of a consented DCO has EVER succeeded at such a hearing, and while there have been a number of appeals to the Civil Court of Appeal following such judgments, NONE of thos appeals has been successful. Those FACTS are beyond dispute. The odds against this judicial review succeeding are EXCEEDINGLY remote. Perhaps now we will see the FULL TEXT of the Application seeking Leave for Judicial Review — and the responses of the Government Legal Service on behalf of the Department for Transport, and RiverOak as Interested Party. It would be good, too, to see the full text of the decision by the High Court Judge who decided to grant Leave to Apply for the Judicial Review that will now take place.
Does the OUTCOME of a JR depend upon the roll of a dice, or FACTS? If THE latter, then IT really doesn’t matter HOW many previous JR’s succeeded or NOT.
But even if the JR fails, it’s most unlikely that aircraft will ever fly from Manston.
Well, that’s what the EXPERTS think.
That would depend on the verdict, and whether the airport zealots will FINALLY accept defeat Liam Coyle
In a court each case is decided on its merits. So the outcomes of previous cases are irrelevant. In any event, I doubt there have been many cases where the Secretary of State has not accepted the recommendation of his team of inspectors.
Whatever the outcome of this. It will still be an airport. It will still re-open as an airport. This legal battle will, in the end, have been pointless.
Totally agree, Derm. RSP own the airport and intend to reopen it. This JR is money and time-wasting!
Remember the DCO removes the local authority from the planning process for a development and places it with a Secretary of State. There is little chance of in overturning that permission at any point in the future. A JR on a decision by an inexperienced Minister would, if successful, put the planning issue back with the local authority. This would ensure that local residents would have a say on operational matters such as night flights rather than the blank cheque that the DCO represents.
The DCO states NO NIGHT FLIGHTS!
As a resident of Ramsgate I strongly recommend you read the DCO in detail. The DCO states there are no SCHEDULED night flights. Virtually all freight flights are not ‘scheduled’. The Examining Authority (made up of professional planners) at the public hearing determined that the outcome for Manston would be seven flights a night on average during the night time period.
It states no SCHEDULED night flights.
It will never open in any meaningful way as an airport Derm, never ever going to happen.
I agree with Ann, if Dawes and Ramsgate Town Council lose the case as I am sure they will, then they should carry the cost, If they can’t then it should ruin them as they are trying to ruin the hopes and wishes of others who are trying to seek meaningful employment and worthwhile income in this area by trying to stop the reopening of Manston Airport. RTC have already used taxpayers money towards this JR that in itself should be examined by a court as to was the correct process used by the council to use that money. ??? According to one of its own councillors ( piper) the council did not use the correct notifications of meetings and incorrect use of procedure.
surly dont the tax payers have a say on how our money is being spent by the council crooks, i for one would not allow my money to spent on this farse.OPEN THE AIRPORT YOU BUNCH OF MINDLESS IDIOTS.
We do by not voting for them next time round
Perhaps it’s time for a SINGLE SUBJECT VOTE too decide if the residents of THANET want MANSTON TO OPEN. We have ALL contributed to the cost so far. NOW ISV5HEVTIMEVTOMHAVE OUR SAY, I SAY!!!
The tax payers vote for their councillors. At the last election, a number of councillors made it clear they would not support an airport. They were voted in to office.
It’s hardly surprising that the elected councillors are doing what they said they’d do!
As for the JR: it hugely transcends arguments about how many jobs the airport (were it ever to happen) might or might not produce, nor about where the overall costs will be paid from.
It’s a legal challenge to the principle that the SoS can completely ignore and override the conclusions of his Planning Inspectorate on a political whim, disregarding the government’s own environmental policies.
That the Court has accepting the JR application, and capped costs, shows that the independent judiciary (and long may it be so) thinks this case is sufficiently important to not only be heard, but to be supported.
I wonder what’s happend about the challenges mounted (we are told) by Rev Stuart Piper and others to RTC’s financial support for the JR?
And if you want to launch a JR into the JR or whatever, all you have to do is consult with a solicitor. If they think you’re in with a chance, then launch a crowd funding page; the solicitors will brief a QC or two; papers will be out before the Court, and if the challenge is considered meritorious, it will be allowed to proceed.
They were not voted into office though were they? They took over in a vote of no confidence they have no legitimate mandate to do anything.
Think you are confused between TDC and RTC
Be glad when we can vote them out- they seem to want Ramsgate to slowly rot away stopping any change lets just remain a poor under developed sea side town- take a leaf from Folkstone their council cares and is doing something
The airport used to be open. But it failed and failed and failed (at least once under the failed solicitor Tony Freudmann, director of RSP)
It failed (and failed, etc) because not enough Thant or East Kent people flew from it to make it viable?
What’s changed since 2014?
Not a lot, in the opinion of the experts and the PI.
unless people are going to be flying out of manston standing on pallets, as they will as it is a cargo hub that is going to open, saying not enough people using it means it will fail is nonsense. If people actually read the proposal for the airport then perhaps they wouldn’t get confused with what they write about.
People just don’t read a article, or lack common sense . Just like RTC when they said about Ramsgate residence overwhelmingly voted they did not want the airport at there open meetings RTC had only one public meeting in 2019 at a hall that held 150 people including the council members , on my last count i believe there is more than 150 Ramsgate residence .
Why did it fail? It failed again and again because no one put serious money to develop the infrastructure. Its quite simple.
You mean like when it was under the ownership of Wiggins and Planestation? mmm wonder who was in charge then?
At the Examination, RSP made it clear that there will be NO scheduled, charter or any other type of flights at night. It is in the DCO, so is law.
The freight side never failed, which is why RSP and investors know that Manston has great potential as a dedicated freight hub. Also, with only 1-2 stands, the passenger side never stood a chance without serious investment, which it never received from KCC or anyone else. With 23 stands, it will be a very different proposition for freight and passengers alike.
It failed because it’s in completely the wrong place, people didn’t want to use it, and it’s in possibly the worst place in the UK to function as a freight hub.
Graham Bull- I take it you are referring to Grant Shapps and his mates in thelast two words? Any idea why Shapps would completely ignore the recommendations of the planning inspectorate?
Unfortunately, Ramsgate people voted for Labour councillors, as they were canvassing to save the QEQM Stroke Unit. If people asked them about Manston, they wouldn’t say whether they supported it or not, as they knew they were onto a loser if they were honest and said no! I speak from personal experience of having heard them for myself at my front door.
We live in a democracy or so we are told in the UK we are vote what government we want to win at the general election those parties that have the best manifesto and policies presumably are the ones that are more likely to be in power to govern the government should be allowed to govan, we hear people saying we don’t want to live under a dictatorship but we are in effect all living under a dictatorship, A dictatorship from the courts a judge sits in a court makes a decision on a judicial review and because it’s comes from the court we all expected to abide by that decision it is purely dictatorship of the worse kind because judges are not even voted in. JRs should be abolished they are just being used by agitators subversives to undermine democracy.
Pat, a judge weighs up all the evidence and makes a decision. To abolish JRs you are effectively embracing fascism. Don’t worry, Dominic Cummings is putting the final nail in the coffin for democracy by moving to abolish JRs, so I hope you enjoy living under a dictatorship. Remind me why we went to war against a fascist?
They were not elected though! They took over the council in a vote of no confidence.
You’re confusing what happened at TDC with what happened at RTC. Two different entities.
actually every councillor was elected in May 2019 so far so good
Then Piper calls a vote of no confidence in the Tory administration forgetting that its the Tory element that wants an airport. So far so good
There was a vote and Pier’s lot voted against Bayford (who then retired) and the Labour (elected) councillors were asked to take over the reins.
Have you got that LLF? oh and that was TDC
This is fantastic news for Ramsgate, Thanet and the planet.
Manston is in the wrong place for an airport, as the evidence confirms, and for all those so obsessed when it was last open, it clearly wasn’t enough to stop it going bust over and over.
The decision to proceed was political and very fishy, mates with planes in high places looking out for their other mates with planes. End of.
Meanwhile, the local support is really only dressed up anti housing sentiment wilfully refusing to acknowledge the houses are coming anyway.
Thousands of us now have a voice and we are not going away.
In the meantime I’m looking forward to Roger Gales next offensive comment about “subversive incomers and Tony F and more made up spin about barges/fake jobs numbers/his green credentials/trees/electric planes/freeze fried shortage fish/longest/shortest/widest runway/unicorn services.
Delete as appropriate.
Thousands of us have a voice and not going away. Really?
Meanwhile, since the granting of a DCO back in July what movement has Riveroak taken to reopen the airport? What grand announcements? What fanfare of trumpets? They have been suspiciously quiet. Why is that? They still have a mountain to climb. Where are the backers? Where is the money? When will we be consulted of flight paths? It seems the only likely future for Manston is as a lorry park.
Read the facts about JR’s before spouting nonsense
The UK planning authority deliberated abut the facts produced by RSP and decided the case for Manston was unproven. Then a junior in the SoS’s office decided to ignore that. So a JR will have to be the final arbiter.
All you plane supporters who have never read RSP’s submissions ought to take a step back and think who made a mess of their submission. Not once but twice
Jenny Dawes is protected by the Cap, so as co-sponsor Ramsgate Town Council will pick up the overspend or should I say, Ramsgate residents will pick up the overspend. congratulations on wasting more money.
You are completely wrong. There are no “co sponsors”. There is Jenny Dawes, full stop. You’ve been taken in by the misinformation put about by Stuart Piper.
So says another FB expert. a cost cap is perfectly legal as the JR has been brought forward on environmental grounds
so many experts lol
Not a clue what you are talking about! It is only Ms Dawes and Ms Dawes alone. There are no co-sponsors.I suppose you get your legal knowledge from FB Law Society!
Those who oppose the airport are the left-wing nut jobs of the Labour-run Ramsgate Town Council they were NOT elected at all. They usurped the legitimately elected body in a ‘vote of no confidence’. No one voted for these Labour fanatics. No one voted to spend Ramsgate Taxpayers money to stop Ramsgate jobs. This is a disgraceful action by an unelectable fanatical minority who as always impose their views on the majority.
Are you saying that the Ramsgate Town Councillors were not elected to office in a recent democratic election?
I certainly marked a ballot paper with an ‘X” in a suitable box!
1% of the population hold the rest to ransom with legal challenges while picking fleas out of their dreadlocks and wafting the bong smoke from their eyes while playing Creedence Clearwater Revival’s “Bad Moon Rising” on a ratty acoustic guitar with 4 chords. Eh “Realistic” Girl ?
If this particular JR application was without merit, then not only would the judge not have capped Ms Dawes’ costs, she would have disallowed the application completely.
Nicely constructed sentence, though!
Ok, someone has a chip on their shoulder! Perhaps you should let that hatred go? What’s wrong with wanting to protect the environment and safeguard our future generations from the outfall of the climate crisis? Perhaps you should take a cue from the hippies and puff on a bong, it might make you see sense! Or if you want all your rights and protections taken from you under the guise of ‘reviewing the JR system’ carry on. P.S. you are confusing TDC and RTC.
What on earth are you talking about, “Loony Left”?
Bad moon rising only got three chords
I’m now waiting for the nasty comments to appear on the Pro groups but to be fair Beau Webber has forbidden any nasty comments on SMAA unlike Danny Skeedale, admin, on SMA and elsewhere. It’s okay Danny Skeedale the screenshot of “cutting an antis b******s off has been saved if needed.
One does not have to be Sherlock Holmes to know that the very persons who are in the clique of RTC and Ms sabotage Dawes are writing on here under false names trying to justify the unjustifiable. They need to be brought to account for their actions. I urge all those who are concerned by the actions of RTC and Dawes and had she was chosen for that role. To be like me to write to the attorney general and the ministry of housing, communities & local government- GOV.UK
It’s up the the judge, Mrs Justice Lang, to determine what’s justifiable and what’s not.
And I suspect, Bill, that the Judge has seen more of the inside of a courtroom than you. Though I could be wrong.
The Rabid Right, they don’t like it up ’em!
So many people still believe RSP’s pie in the sky promises of planes and job… they have their eye on housing as that is the only way they will make any profit from the site. The DCO is just about taking any decisions out of local hands and why people are excited about that I have no idea…. and for those that think there is some sort of covenant, that is meaningless when the old and new owners are in collaboration, why do you think they sold so quickly and easy?
“EgonSpengler”, whoever you are, were the directors of RSP to attempt to use the airport for anything other than what is set out in the DCO statutory instrument, that would be an imprisonable offence. If they just wanted to build housing, they could have acquired land dedicated for housing under the local plan for a fraction of what they have paid. That is not their agenda, never has been, never will be. The configuration of their corporate structure makes that very, very self-evident. They will be pouring in vast sums of money from their investors in the manner they have set out in the DCO as consented, once this farce of a DCO is laid to rest. There may well be some delays due to the Covid test centre and whatever the Government finds it must do in relation to HGVs after the end of the post-Brexit interim period, but none of that will deflect RiverOak from starting their plans within the months ahead and developing the infrastructure they are now required to complete as consented over the next few years.
I hope that you are wrong, R. John Pritchard. I simply cannot understand why people like you are so besotted by the idea of having a busy noisy polluting cargo airport near where they live. Have you read nothing about the damage caused by aviation?
“They will be pouring in vast sums of money from their investors”.
Which investors are those? During the the DCO examination it was abundantly clear that RSP had no investors prepared to stick in the > £350M needed to ressurect the airport. According to RSP’s responses to ExA questions, they hoped to raise the money through investment and bank loans.
If you know otherwise, please tell us.
“Phyllis Quot”, it is not for the likes of you or me to expose the identities of any of the investors other than those who have chosen to subject themselves to the social media character assassination attempts and harassment that was inflicted upon those who did so some years ago due to flagrant exposure of privileged information by certain TDC Councillors back in December 2014. The names of RiverOak Directors were published some time ago, and various other names may be revealed in due course, but that isn’t going to be relevant to the judicial review of this DCO. The single issue before the High Court Judge who will determine the outcome of this judicial review is whether the DCO, as approved, was consented unlawfully by the decisionmaker.
“Phyllis Quot” and other Pseudonymists: whether from ignorance or malevolence, perhaps, you complain that RiverOak has not provided particulars about their investors or the portfolios of their investors, yet you won’t reveal your own name on a local newspaper blog? Hmmm. Should we draw any conclusions about that?
Obviously, mea culpa: I should have made it clear that the farce is not the DCO. It is the Judicial Review of it.
The DCO being allowed is indubitably the farce, Mr. Pritchard. Why bother with a planning inspectorate if a well-reasoned recommendation can be overturned on a personal whim?
You’ve got me bang to rights, Dr Pritchard.
My name is actually “Peter Quincy” (don’t tell anyone) but I choose to use a non de nym or pseudoplume because of the unpleasant threats made by some airport supporters against those who would rather have quiet skies over Ramsgate.
Why would RSP be so coy about its investors? Is it true to say that there are huge tax advantages to having your business registered in, say, the British Virgin Islands, rather than Birchington, for example?
£82,500 for prime brown field building land John Pritchard, that’s a steal.
It will have houses on it by probably 2025, but the houses are coming, just like Freudman applied for on the NG 😉
Entertaining maneuvering to and many many words to say that RSP have no investors, and you have have no idea how they will raise the cash though. And as for your statement
” it is not for the likes of you or me to expose the identities of any of the investors other than those who have chosen to subject themselves to the social media character assassination attempts and harassment that was inflicted upon those who did so some years ago”
that is possibly the most ironic and hypocritical statement I have ever seen on the internet on any subject.
‘Tony Freudmann, of RSP, said: “We have received notification from the court and are meeting our lawyers this afternoon. We will be issuing a statement later today or tomorrow morning.” ‘
Good to see that Tony is on the ball and up to speed.
It must have occurred to the most blinkered sociopath that there was a possibility that the JR application would be granted, and to have an appropriate statement ready to release to the press.
Something involving words like “confident”, “robust” and “30,000 jobs”
So much for the airport supporters saying no way would a JR be awarded. As so few actually make it to a hearing there must be good reasons for the judge to agree to hear it. As for the person who said a JR is an affront to democracy what is an affront to democracy is the secretary of state overruling the DCO examiners recommendations to refuse the DCO after a long drawn-out examination period
“Ramsgate Resident” (btw, just how many other sobriquets do you use on here? All for one and one for all?), the JR has NOT been awarded: all that is happened is that a high court judge has determined that Jenny Dawes may APPLY for a Judicial Review. The judge will now have set out a timetable for exchanges of documents and position statements and then as soon as practicable proceed to hold a ‘rolled up hearing’ which will end with a judgment for or against the Government. As no such judgment has ever gone against a consented DCO, I’m quite relaxed about that, especially since, as I’ve pointed out repeatedly, it is now well-established that the Court of Appeal has upheld every attempt to appeal against any such decision that has been brought to them. In any case, it would be exceptionally unlikely that Jenny Dawes and those who are behind her will have the resources to take this particular matter up to the higher courts. As for the suggestion that following the procedure laid out by Parliament in the Planning Act 2008 as amended is an affront to democracy, that’s a pretty weird argument. The Planning Act 2008 is legislation that was enacted by Parliament under a Labour Government. After a couple of years, a Coalition Government of Liberal Democrats and Conservatives amended it through the Localism Act, and there have been a few other tweaks by Parliament over the years. But broadly speaking, the system is designed to enable nationally significant infrastructure projects to be consented without being blindsided by Nimbyism. The national interest must prevail. The DCO Examiners did not draw-out the examination period: they complied with it. It was never their function to DECIDE the matter: that has always been a power reserved to the almost completely unfettered discretion of the relevant Secretary of State (except that in this particular instance, the Secretary of State for Transport had to recuse himself due to his known record of support for the airport’s redevelopment, so in this one instance another Minister made the decision). None of that is unclear to anyone who has read the relevant legislation or examined previous caselaw or legal practitioner manuals on the subject. What does “almost completely unfettered discretion” mean? Well, it means that subject to the constraints laid out in the Planning Act (as amended) and any other laws that may apply, the decisionmaker must look at all relevant issues and decide how best to balance any merits and detriments that there may well be, and he can decide whether to follow or depart from the recommendations of the Examining Authority appointed by another Minister (the Minister for Housing, Communities and Local Government). He must also give reasons for his decision, and in this case those reasons were set out clearly and reasonably, taking into account a further public consultation that he called for on several relevant issues. Now how is that an affront to democracy? Parliament is sovereign, and the will of Parliament as ensrined in legislation and applied by Ministers who are responsible to Parliament is of paramount importance. Nothing could be clearer than that.
Try using paragraphs next time.
“Permission has been granted for a legal challenge over the government’s decision process in granting permission for the development of Manston airport.”
That’s what the piece says. Permission has been granted for a challenge.
BTW, Tony Freudmann said that following consultation with their lawyers, RSP would release a statement either yesterday afternoon or this morning. I haven’t seen one yet.
RSP statement has just been added
“Nothing could be clearer”?
Better explain that to the Judge, who will no doubt welcome your expertise and knowledge.
Try and use paragraphs when posted your overly verbose fairytales John Pritchard.
I see Tony Freudmann is already backpedaling on the number of jobs that will be available at Manston saying automation will reduce the number. Didn’t he say it was going to be fully automated all along ??
Manston Aurport is exactly what Thanet needs !! These protestors live over the flight path and moved here knowing it!! Usl locals who’ve lived here know it! And want it OPEN AGAIN!!
Over the flight path?
As for airport supporters saying the CAA have signed off on what RSP have done so far in their flight path application that is a lie. I have written to the CAA & they have replied. At this stage of the process the CAA have no control or interaction with RSP regarding their application. The CAA have not signed off on anything RSP have done so far.
So many experts so little knowledge
1. 4 Planning inspectors tore RSP’s submission to pieces. twice
2. Sally Fiction doesn’t know one end of a spreadsheet for the other. Neither does HMG
3. The office junior overturned the decision of 4 Planning Inspectors
4. Planespotters don’t have a clue about the Law
Ah yes, the pro airport supporters choose to forget about that RR because it suits them. Their form of democracy is when it works for them , when it goes against them its an affront!!
Shock Horror! Just waiting for all the rubbish to come from RSP, Roger Riveoak, and Mac The Knife. “Oh we expected this not surprising” And did Freuman say not long ago ‘ Their will be no JR”
The sole purpose of a JR is to check, in a court of law, that the decision process was legal. Nothing else. If the government has not broken the law, they will win. If they have, they will lose. Simples. Those who object to this are presumably against the rule of law and wish law breakers to go free. Be careful what you wish for.
Bill, I notice Piper never took any action or made any complaints regarding his assertions RTC never followed proper procedure. If they were so wrong you have to wonder why. As usual Piper was talking rubbish and just trying to sabotage the meeting.
I have been told by colleagues who I used to work with fear not “the pot is cooking” a lot is being looked out in the background and will see the light of day in due course. They are keeping their cards close to their chest for now. Re: RTC / Dawes.
I’ve been told by a bloke in the pub who had a man round to do his roof whose mother’s cat wormer’s child minder has it on good authority that [any made up nonsense you care to insert] so it must be true.
What is clear, like it or not, is that the JR will go ahead, and were Ms Dawes to fail in her bid, costs awarded against her (and they wouldn’t be awarded against anyone else) would be capped.
RSP hasn’t done anything since the DCO was granted because they haven’t gone any staff and they haven’t got any money.
All they’ve got is Tony F on his unicorn e-scooter, revving about up the Thanet Way to deliver Roger’s newspapers.
Nobody seems to have noticed on his last PR absurdity Tony mentioned new institutional investors were coming on board and the existing ones would take a back seat. What happened to the last lot of investors Tony? All. Made up.
For too long Ramsgate residents have suffered at the inept pet projects of a privileged few and now the people are speaking and we’ve had enough.
I would comment further but I need to dig out some fleas from my dreadlocks and put some lentil soup on for tea.
Let sleeping dogs ly
Bill, the only thing being cooked is RSP’s goose 😊
Wondering what playlist RSP and the pro-ecocide and Pro-Ramsgate-destruction commenters like “Labour Loony Left” might listen to whilst drinking the Kool Aid? I imagine it would be something like this …
I Fought The Law (and the law won) – The Clash
Airportman – R.E.M.
Waiting in Vain – Bob Marley
Pipe Dreams – Nelly Furtado
Fantasy – Mariah Carey
Pie In The Sky – Johnny Cash
… and – since we’re talking dreadlocks – who can forget Cllr Paul Messenger’s MOR reggae “classic”, “What Would We Do?” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNxsFAfEWTc
See you in court, music lovers!
I had to much to dream last night
By the electric prunes
I rather fancy Manston karaoke.
Roger n Tony sing Fantasy Island by Bucks Fizz while Craig plays the triangle.
Perhaps they could do this outside court when we get there?
I think RSP might need some help refreshing their banner on this site now. “Ready for takeoff 2023” doesn’t really seem to be a fair appraisal of their current situation. I think we should suggest some new ones for them. Maybe “RSP, desperately googling solicitors” or “RSP, Ready to park your lorries for the foreseeable.”
Bob, I thought they said “Ready for Rip Off”.
Freudmans Lawyers ought to sue RTC £1000 per day for each day this JR delays the Airport form opening!
Robster, that’s the funniest thing I have ever heard! So you are ok with people affected not being able to challenge a decision that affects them? Be careful what you wish for, your fascist utopia is just around the corner. Besides, nothing can happen whilst it’s a lorry park!
Robster, It was RSPs decision to continue with the DCO. They bought the site last summer and could have simply applied to TDC for planning permission. It is very interesting that RSP choose not to.
On what grounds Robster?
Another social media lawyer showing their ignorance
When the airport was open, it was losing £10,000 per day. So, the JR process might be saving RSP vast amounts of money. They should be paying Ms Dawes, not the other way round!
Robster: And RTC should countersue RSP who in turn should sue the SOS who in turn should sue their planning inspectorate, who in turn should sue SHP who in turn should sue TDC, who in turn should sue The National Trust… in short let’s sue everyone.
Will Tony also be suing the MOD and the trifling matter of their ongoing objections to the DCO too? I think you’ll find the high resolution detection finder might be an even bigger issue.
Let’s not blame throw towards RTC otherwise we’ll all have to do the same at TDC and then we’ll all have a big litigation party and a buffet drinks reception and disco to kick it all off.
Tony is running the raffle. First prize is an electric barge, 2nd prize is 10kgs of freeze fried fish.
Loving all the airfield nostalgics rant about the current laws being applied by a judge, has to br seen to be believed.
In the meantime, the struck off solicitor and his big investors (offshore based, of course) must be wondering what to do with a faragegarage.
Reality is, Ramsgate has been blighted by corruption and fascist-lovers lazy people. But now that its on Londoners’ radar thanks to covid, we will move here en masse and clean up the town, snap up the lovely houses and send the airfield lovers packing to Southend (closed), Stansted (closing), Gatwick (reduced), City (reduced)…
Toxic Thanet strikes again.
Why on earth do we not have a council in Cliftonville?
Why do we have charter trustees.
Why are Thanet Council under umpteen councils 2020.
Time we abolished councils.
Have one Council for all. Save money.
Have you seen anyone cleansing covid 19.. No.
Do you think a WHO SHOT JR is really going to bite the bullet?
This is great news. Why would you oppose the review? It will ensure a fair review of the final decision and transparency on the decision making. Ms Dawes has done a great job getting the JR to proceed and raised a fair amount of funds to support the cause. Why are the manston supporters so quick to sling insults and generalise who would be supporting a review. Many of them must be the sort of people who think shouting wins arguments, they are probably the types to not pick up their dog’s poop, and enjoy littering. Bet they voted brexit, don’t like wearing face masks as a precaution to prevent the spread of Covid… bet they don’t believe in climate change and have stupidly big TVs. Also… why do they think that living somewhere their whole life is such an achievement. Ha. Sorry if it doesn’t apply to you, I would hate to generalise and be insulting.
I wouldn’t be totally and utterly astonished if Tony Freudmann grasped this heaven sent opportunity with both hands and used it as an excuse to withdraw from the DCO.
No one with any sense thought that, in the best of times, Manston would succeed.
And now with CV having a huge negative impact on aviation globally, there’s not a snowball in hell’s chance of attracting more than £350M of investment.
The winners of this will be the ‘legal profession’
Good news. It will be interesting to see if the JR concludes that the decision to grant the DCO was legal or not given the government’s legally binding commitment to net zero emissions by 2050 and the acknowledged and significant contribution that Manston would make to UK emissions by this date. The project to reopen Manston as a cargo hub though is doomed to failure whatever the outcome of the JR. The impact of COVID on all airports and air transport is likely to be long lasting and the need for a new airport to handle cargo in England is even less now than it was just a year ago. The economic case simply does not add up. Couple that fact with Mr Freudmann’s astonishing track record of failure in business, particularly airports, then we can look forward to the next phase of this long running saga which almost certainly will involve redevelopment.
The Antis have nothing better to do. They sit at home and moan moan moan. As I have always said the airport has always been there but you still chose to live there. As I said before, if you don’t like it, Move on. Maybe to an island somewhere remote!
The usual ignorant nonsense from the pros. Always an airport? Nope, only for a short period in Ramsgate’s illustrious history. The people that built all the lovely houses didn’t have an airport, and there won’t be one in the future. You lot who claim to be ‘locals’ don’t know your own history. You’ve let Ramsgate rot for decades, and now people who care are making it great again with sustainable jobs. Get your feckless, lazy, drug-taking, graffiti-spraying kids to work for their gcses and they might get some decent jobs. The airport won’t employ them except maybe to scare the birds away. Take your pollution, I’ll manners and vitriol somewhere else. Ramsgate is on the up.
Wahahahahahaga, its the pros that have nothing better to do as they are mainly nostalgic pensioners thinking they are going to have an airport to pop to malaga, or miniGales who cant remember (toxic fumes?) the last time they went to work.
No, you move to Heathrow, still open last time I checked.
Get over it- I doubt if the many people who don’t want an airport at Manston “sit at home and moan moan moan”. The sacred cow of Manston Airport won’t be taking to the skies any time soon, so perhaps its supporters should be thinking of moving near an existing airport so that they can hear the music of the engines above them and smell the aviation fuel.
As I’ve seen, the airport went bust successively and Tony F hardly has the best record of aviation successes.
As is widely documented, the business case for Manston doesn’t add up, and viability is unproven.
As is widely observed, the vocal minority supporters do like to have their tantrums and make bullish comments.
As is well understood, in a democratic society all voices have a right to he heard.
Alternatively, keep moan moan moaning.
Let’s all moan together. How unifying.
You go first.
Research shows that “the most consistent predictor of decreased susceptibility to misinformation about Covid-19 was numerical literacy”. Basically the better educated you are the less likely are you to believe bollocks. Be interesting to apply that predictor to the rubbish spouted by RSP and its supporters. R John Pilchard, how’s your maths?
Still no statement from Tony Freudmann?
Yes, statement released by RSP today. It’s on Twitter @RSPManston and the BBC have it.
It is also in the article
Angela Stevens why as admin on SMAA are you allowing abusive comments about a certain anti on a post from Ray Ellis which occurred on Twitter. I have been following the tweets and there is no abusive comments from this anti.He is also being hypocritical about where this anti lives as he doesn’t live in Thanet either.
Dont let me down
I cant get no satisfaction
Somewhere over the rainbow
What a fool believes
7 rooms of gloom
The four tops
Tears of a clown
Back to black
Just seen the RSP comment. Hundreds of construction jobs will be created.
Like the construction jobs Stone Hill Park would have created?
Exactly Unicorn Bob, SHP would have created lots of jobs also but that got kicked in to touch by our illustrious MP’s saying it was all fiction. Yet they want us all to believe that RSP ‘s jobs claims are gospel. Yeah right!!
This is fantastic, nowunderhanded dealings of all tories local and Westminster can be exposed. The so called airport, RSP, and the MPs involved are a humiliation to this country.
How much tax payers money was spent in getting RSP, reports action groups such as sma, inside information from council to groups, so font mone about the review pro airport have cost the economy far more. Idiots
Some body please go and see Jenny Dawes and her d**k head mates and tell them this will create more jobs, bring new trade to a dying county on it’s knees! All she cares about is the noise. Using the green tag to justify her selfishness. Anyone who lives near the airport or who moved close to the airport knew that it was an airport! If you do not like it, move! Stop preventing Thanet from striving! If this get cancelled we will be seen as a county of inbreds as that will be all who are left here.
DwB I’m afraid you’re the d**k head. The airport never created many jobs and the automated cargo hub will create even fewer. The best use for the airport would be to host clean, green industries associated with the future low carbon world. How about factories producing turbine blades and solar panels, batteries for electric vehicles. This would employ thousands in sustainable jobs. If our blinkered and biased MPs had been pushing this then we could have a successful Thanet industry rather than a polluting, old-fashioned misty-eyed dream.
The more you hold up the airport the less likely we will have anything taking that space! Why can’t you try something before you automatically reject it! Narrow minded inbreds! Without an airport hub no industry will want to touch us! We rely on the roads to get things out! See the problem! We have one way out! Lorries that traffic your turbines pollute more than planes as air travel is becoming greener by the day! But hey, you hold up the airport. Leave the land to the rats and travellers.
The more you push the airport the longer Thanet will be held up by myopic, nostalgic nimbies who can’t imagine their precious airport being anything else. You dinosaurs are part of the past. Wake up to the future. Air travel becoming greener – only when conducted by flying pigs. Dream on.
Are you new to the area by chance? I moved here three years ago thinking the airport was still active! I am 35 years old so to call me a dinosaur is slightly silly. I want the county to be outward facing, world traveling! Not another factory! We have a world famous air strip on our door step and narrow minded ppl like you want to pave over it and create houses and shops! Perhaps you should move!
You call the anti, inbred abit rude if I may say.
Than you say you moved 3 years ago thinking the airport was open lol now who’s the silly one, thought the airport was open that’s funny lol. I wouldnt move anywhere without checking the area first.
“If you do not like it, move!” Well DwB, for someone who’s only been living here for 3 years you are certainly quick to pick up the airport supporters favourite lines. Perhaps you should do some research into the recent history of Manston Airport and its site.
DwB you obviously don’t have your finger on the pulse. 3 years ago the airport was marked permanently closed. It’s your attitude that’s dinosaur like. Haven’t you heard of climate change? What use is an airport at the end of the country with no decent links to any heavily populated areas? Not another factory? How many does Thanet have? Don’t you want proper jobs rather than unicorn ones promised by a disgraced solicitor who has failed to run airports multiple times?
If there was a like button I would have pressed it !
I have asked lots of times for the pro’s on here to answer a few simply questions, they havent answered one yet ! Simple questions, how is fuel going to be cheaper brought in by tanker than buying from the national grid ? Like how is it going to be cheaper to land in the bottom right hand corner of England without any decent road or rail etc. The pro’s never explained but just put their blind faith into a struck of solicitor, its bizarre !
In the update published at the end if the OP, Tony Freudmann is quoted as saying “We and our investors …”.
Has he found some?
I think we should be told.