Manston airport development approval ‘to be quashed’ with decision to be re-examined following challenge bid

Manston airport Photo Frank Leppard

A hearing set for the legal challenge over the government’s decision process in granting permission for the development of Manston airport into an air freight hub will not take place after the Department for Transport/ Secretary of State said the case would not be contested.

The substantive hearing was due to take place at the High Court on February 16-17 and was to look at whether the Government followed correct procedure in reaching the decision to approve the DCO for landowners RiverOak Strategic Partners.

But, the Department of Transport has now acknowledged that the decision approval letter issued from the Minister of State did not contain enough detail about why approval was given against the advice of the Planning Inspectorate.

It is understood this means the DCO approval for Manston airport will be quashed – a process expected within a three week timespan – and a new decision will need to be issued after a re-examination of the Planning Inspectorate evidence.

The JR bid challenging the approval decision was launched by Ramsgate  Coastal Community Team chairperson Jenny Dawes with a crowdfunder raising some £86,000 in pledges to pay the legal costs.

But today she has revealed that the JR will be disposed of after a letter from the Treasury said the case had been conceded.

Her update says: “Yesterday my solicitors received a letter from the Treasury Solicitor, acting on behalf of the Secretary of State for Transport, which said “my client has agreed to concede this claim on the basis of ground 1(b), namely that the Secretary of State did not give adequate reasons in his decision letter to enable the reader to understand why he disagreed with the Examining Authority Report on the issue of need for the development of Manston Airport”.

“We subsequently learned that the Interested Party, RiverOak Strategic Partners Ltd, will not be defending their claim.

“My lawyers set out three grounds of challenge to the decision to grant a Development Consent Order for the re-opening and development of Manston Airport:

Ground 1: Need

Ground 2: Breach of Procedural Requirement/Unfairness

Ground 3: Net Zero Duty

“The Treasury Solicitor will now draft an order disposing of the case.  The order will have to be approved by all parties and submitted to the Court to be sealed – this final step may take several weeks.

“This update is couched in very formal language but I’m enormously relieved to have got this far and bowled over by all the support I’ve received.  It’s been a joint effort!”

A statement from North Thanet MP Sir Roger Gale, who has backed the airport plan, says: ““=The future of Manston Airport has been subjected to further delay in the light of the application for Judicial Review.

“The Department of Transport has acknowledged that the Minister of State`s decision letter could have contained more information as to reasons.

“That being so the Department has conceded these grounds and will no doubt wish to afford all parties the opportunity to make further submissions before re-visiting the DCO and issuing a further and more detailed letter of determination in due course.”

It is understood that a fresh decision on the development order cannot be issued while the legal process of a JR is taking place.

A statement by RiverOak Strategic Partners says: “Naturally the Department for Transport’s decision not to contest the Judicial Review is disappointing, although it may in fact save time. It is a feature of the DCO process that, in order for more information to be provided by the Secretary of State on the reasons for his decision, the decision must be re-taken, and so the project is effectively back to the final decision stage.

“We faced a similar situation two years ago when we withdrew our DCO application, to provide additional information, before successfully resubmitting it for acceptance. It’s important that this is done correctly, in order that Manston can deliver on its full potential, and we welcome the Government’s decision being put on as robust a basis as possible.

“RSP remains confident in our proposals and of the increasing need for Manston to support the UK’s freight handling capabilities, post-Brexit and to aid the economic recovery from COVID-19. We will make additional representations, when invited to do so, with evidence from across the last 18 months (since the DCO examination stage closed) – and look forward to publication of the Secretary of State’s comprehensive assessment of the basis for granting the DCO, early in 2021, so that we may begin works to restore the airport to operational use.

“In the meantime, we continue the CAA airspace change process to determine the future flightpaths for Manston and we have, this week, also reached agreement for Manston to be used as a temporary Customs outpost, until July 2021.”

County Councillor Karen Constantine said: “First we had the Chris Grayling’s ferry fiasco at the Port of Ramsgate and now we have yet another U-turn by Conservatives. Grant Shapps the Transport Minister has been very much in favour of the Manston air freight hub even though the planning inspectors’ clear conclusions were ignored. The decision to disregard the planning inspectorate also ignored the Heathrow airport third-runway judgement where the Court of Appeal rejected an application for an extension on environmental grounds.

“Many of us have been of the opinion that this air freight project would never take off. We argued that the facts were clear, Manston is located in the wrong part of the UK, has too much competition from established air freight operators and that it would never be able to become a commercially viable  airfreight hub. Since Covid-19 aviation has massively declined meaning another nail in our RSP’s coffin. In addition a huge number of people objected to living under a flight path.

“Given the facts I think it is misleading of Sir Roger Gale MP to say that the judicial review has hampered the development of the airfreight hub, especially as to-date there’s been no sign of the necessary investment of £300m. It simply hasn’t materialised.

“It was utterly cynical of the government to impose a DCO and the cash strapped, hard-pressed people of Ramsgate have had to dig very deep to find  £88,000 to fund a Judicial Review. I do wonder if the government should now take full responsibility and refund all of those that contributed to the JR in good faith. Being as they know from outset this was the project was doomed to failure. It’s a high price for our community to pay for the Governments inept interference.”

Cllr Constantine the site should be used to drive economic regeneration through business and training and social housing if an application to develop is made in the future.

Full text of Ground 1(b): Failure to Give Reasons:

  1. S.116 of the 2008 Act and Regulation 30 of the EIA Regulations both impose a duty on the Defendant to give reasons for granting a DCO. In South Buckinghamshire DC v Porter [2004] UKHL 33, the House of Lords confirmed that any such reasons must be adequate and intelligible, and enable the reader to understand why the matter was decided as it was and what conclusions were reached on the principal important controversial issues.
  2. As to the quality of the reasons for disagreeing with the ExA on “need”, given that the Defendant asked himself entirely the wrong question, falsely eliding “need” with “benefit”, his reasons for disagreeing with the ExA on need are, inevitably, inadequate, improper and unintelligible. An informed reader of the DL is wholly unable to discern:
  3. Why the Defendant considered that there was a “clear case of need” for the development which existing airports (Heathrow, Stansted and EMA) could not meet.
  4. Upon what basis the quantum of anticipated need for freight had been assessed by him.
  5. Upon what basis the capacity of existing airports within the south east to accommodate that quantum of need had been assessed by him.
  6. Whether, and if so why, he considered those existing airports (Heathrow, Stansted and EMA) not to be preferred locations to meet that quantum of need.
  7. To what extent he considered need could not be met in the bellyhold of passenger flights to and from those existing airports.
  8. Whether, and if so why, he considered that facilities could not be constructed at those existing airports to meet that quantum of need.
  9. Upon what basis the Defendant disagreed with the expert evidence produced by York Aviation, and others, against the need case.
  10. These issues were all addressed in detail in the ExA’s report, but were not mentioned, let alone grappled with, in the Defendant’s perfunctory and dismissive DL.

153 Comments

  1. Excellent news and the first step to getting this cargo airport project, for which there is no economic or other need, scrapped once and for all. Clearly the government legal team knew they could not win the JR so have conceded. It will be interesting to see the conclusion when all the evidence is considered correctly- things have changed significantly since the decision and this can only further weaken the case for the DCO to be granted.

    • Great news time to flood manston airport with housing and grid lock the roads around thanet lets get it done soon.

      • The houses are coming regardless of the airport. At least if the airport is scrapped there might at least be a tiny section of our last remaining farmland saved from the developers.

        • Really Concerned.
          You really think that if the airport doesnt go ahead that the land will be left as it is.
          Get real. This is all about money and bringing more social housing to a struggling area. The same happens to lots of seaside towns around the country. Out of sight, out of mind. And the ones making the money have no care for the future prospects of our young.

    • As you say, there is clearly no “need” for Manston to reopen as there is plenty of other airports with spare cargo plane capacity and better located geographically, like the Midlands! RSP cannot prove Manston reopening is in the “national interest” which is what a DCO is supposed to do!

    • So you would prefer Thanet goes down into the mire? They lost Pfizer, to lose Manston airport would lose a big income to Thanet especially now we’re coming out of the EU, very sad…..

      • It was a real surprise to find originally that a Junior minister had made a decision to agree to the reopening of Manston Airport against the professional judgement of the Planning Inspectors who advised not to Reopen.

        I think that this withdrawal from the ministerial decision must be another huge blow to the credibility of the “Bojo government” showing up
        1. the failure of a process in ministerial decision making
        2. The ineptitude and incompetence of the junior ( ” infant?”)minister to whom the decision was delegated
        And
        3. also bulldozing of a decision against shown Civil Servants’ professional advice and
        4 contempt towards the professional judgement of the Planning Inspectors who advised not to Reopen.

        Exactly the same failures being shown thought Home Office and in the Brexit process as we teeter on a precipice to disaster

        StaffordDave

        • Most business’ fold within first two years of starting up. Does thus mean nobody should start a new business?
          Hmm the disaster of brexit? We don’t know. We have spent 4 and a half years waiting to find out. With the country slowly going down because of that. A democratic decision at that!

  2. I await Sir Roger Gales promised resignation marking a final end to the blight he and his chums have inflicted on Ramsgate and Herne Bay. Hopefully we can now move forward with the owners to create a mixed development offering sustainable employment whist protecting the environment.

      • Before he gies tonthe Lords for a tax fre income and expenses. That’s possibly why he abstains – to keep favour with Bozza!

    • David Green you donot have a clue to what has gone on or what is going to happen next, perhaps you should resign for giving false hope to the anti airport people , you should be ashamed of your inane and inept behaviour

      • Perhaps “Him” could tell us “what has gone on” and put us straight so that we do not indulge in false hope any more.

    • What sustainable employment and the housing which londoner’s will gobble up because the local population have already be priced out of the housing market by them

  3. This has been the plan of the Department of Transport since Dawes popped her head up on behalf of Ramsgate Town Council and pretending to be a protesting member of the public. Once these loose ends are tied up the other investigations into RTC and Dawes can begin.

    • What on earth are you talking about, Ann? The decision to overturn the Planning Inspectorate’s recommendation was clearly not based on facts.

      • The judgement was made on the basis of not enough information was provided to justify decision. Nothing to do with facts but pure sloppy process following.

        • No judgement has been made. The JR didn’t get that far.
          The SoS conceded that he’d failed to take into account a host of factors, including but not limited to:
          Showing there was insufficient capacity;
          That this shortfall (if any) could not be met by Heathrow, EMA or Stansted;
          That this shortfall (if any) could not be met by bellyhold in PAX;
          Why any additional capacity (were it needed) would best be provided at Manston;
          Why expert opinion of York Aviation and others was ignored.
          The shame of it is that this grudging concession by the SoS has cost quite a few people quite a bit of money

    • Ann so far the Crowd funding for the Judicial Review stands at over £88,000 and it grows by hundreds every week! This shows the support Jennie Dawes has fighting for all the people of Thanet, but especially those in the CT11 postal district not to have their lives ruined by low flying cargo aircraft two an hour, at less than 300 meters high over Ramsgate harbour, and at only 150 meters over Nethercourt!

  4. I think you will find failure to defend this will result in the DCO failing completely. The SOS can’t just can rehash his decision. He obviously couldn’t come up with a valid reason for passing the DCO this time so he never will

  5. This is excellent news. It’s time this ghastly cloud over Ramsgate was dispelled.
    I’m curious to know what RSP will now do with hundreds of acres of development land in the SE of England.

    • I wonder what possible use the US property development company RSP will do with 800 acres of prime brownfield building land Andrew 😉

  6. Good luck reexamining the case. The worst DCO case in history with zero evidence to support need or viability. You can’t just respray the car and hope nobody notices it isn’t a turd.

    Only the Wizard of Oz can help Roger and his merry crew now. Will he ever stop cheerleading? Go home Roger. Please.

    For too long the residents of Thanet suffered with this monstrous plan.

    Enough.

  7. “These issues were all addressed in detail in the ExA’s report, but were not mentioned, let alone grappled with, in the Defendant’s perfunctory and dismissive DL.”
    Brilliant.

  8. Stand by for RSP to state they don’t need the DCO and they will be applying for PP in the normal way through TDC.
    Piper will no doubt sanction a vote of no confidence in the Labour run TDC to get the Tories back in to sanction said planning decision

    • If they didn’t need the DCO (and once SHP had sold them the land, they didn’t), then why did RSP keep on, going through the motions?
      RSP will still need CPO, in respect of that pipeline, and the pesky HRDF aerial.

  9. Mark my Words. That’s exactly what I said and exactly what has happened. There are more interesting things that will pop up soon for the benefit of east Kent and to the dismay of the professional moaners in the area. You mark my words.

    • Except it hasn’t. The DfT have realised that the justification put forward by Andrew Stephenson MP of a vague benefit of ‘some jobs’ would not stand up to scrutiny in a judicial hearing and that is why they dropped it like a hot potato.

    • Wrong, wrong, wrong and wrong again Ann.Are you seeing a very large white rabbit at this moment and is he/she giving you all this inside information, because if so, take the medicine and he will go away.
      I presume you will not having the vaccine either?
      Covid has a lot to answer for, because the GP practices have gone to ground and this allows those with ‘white rabbit syndrome’ to round around and make false predictions.

    • Ann you sound like Trump with all his allegations of unsubstantiated fraud. Read the solicitors response, it is quite damning of the decision to ignore the planning inspectorate recommendation.
      The general public are fed up with these ridiculous decisions made by this government especially over the ppe scandals. I am glad Jenny and NNF held the SofS’s feet to the fire.
      Clearly the decision was poor and that is why we live in a democracy, so we can question these decisions that affect our lives. If you wish to live in a country that doesn’t have the right to a JR, I hear China and North Korea are quite nice this time of year.

    • Ann, any credibility you had has been torpedoed. You clearly don’t have anyone “in the know” and are just an armchair pundit like the rest of us. Am raising a glass to all the SMA gang crying into their dinner tonight.

  10. Oh dear. Looks like the brigade who have their pockets due to be lined by house builders have won the day.
    If mixed devolopement that created sustainable jobs was viable Gloag and her crooked bunch wouldnt have sold out. If companies wanted to bring sustainable jobs to the area they would have already had plans in place and probably used existing empty warehousing. Can anyone point to any plans?
    Happy days for construction workers but the rest? Come on…

    • If the council had not been so hostile and obstructive Stone Hill Park’s mixed-use plans might have actually been accepted.

      • No they wouldnt. There were no companies interested in moving down here. It was all a bluster by gloag and her cronies. Looked good on paper but that was it.
        A big park isnt what is needed down here. You need technical and high skilled jobs which then feeds on to training and support services. Housing and a leisure park isnt the way to go.

      • Yes, and because SHP sold out to RSP Thanet will not get the benefit of the mixed use plan now, which would have brought many jobs to the area along with homes not developed on our much needed growing fields. That has all been consigned to the rubbish dump now because of the rubbish Tory/UKIP council of the day being adamant they will not agree what is best for Thanet, but just for themselves. They should have accepted the mixed use option. This saga has blighted Thanet for too long and we have SRGale MP to blame for that. He promised to resign if it wasn’t accepted so watch him keep his promise now, I don’t think.
        If the airport does not take off we will end up with just houses which the government has been forcing on every area. We are screwed either way in Thanet.

        • Benefits of the mixed use plan???? Whats mixed use about, loads of houses and loads more houses. No concrete plans for job creation apart from construction jobs. Just pie in the sky ideas. Take your political specs off and start thinking about the future of our kids. We need technical jobs, not just retail and a nice little parkland. Those other BIG companies that were spoken about were pure speculation to try to get the plans through. Your right in mentioning benefits because that is what the area is turning in to. Benefit city..Because of people like you who just want more housing. Shame on you…..

          • Billy doesn’t seem to know what SHP’s mixed-use plan had in it. It wasn’t just housing, obviously, or it wouldn’t have been a mixed-use plan.

  11. THERE ARE NO PROFESSIONAL MOANERS! I don’t usually shout but Ann just takes the biscuit when it comes to absurd claims (apart from whoever mentioned electric barges as a viable way of transporting stuff quickly from London to Manston..).

  12. We have marked your words, Ann, and they score a 1 out of 10. Your ‘inside knowledge’ that the challenge would fail is just the latest example of you being wrong on just about everything.

  13. No one seems to be taking into account the number of jobs that would be created or indeed the benefits to the Kent economy. Frankly, Heathrow and Gatwick are a long way from Thanet, we need an airport here which will have a huge impact on Kent and it’s attractiveness as a place to live. Let’s get real here, we need real jobs

    • Andrew, the examining panel did exactly that. They took into account the number of claimed jobs and the ‘need’ for an airport. These professional planners decided that the need was not proven and the number of jobs grossly over estimated .

      • (I’m the real Andrew, BTW)
        The ExA went further than that. They concluded that on balance, jobs would be lost because the impact the airport would have on the leisure and tourism industry.
        No matter what your thoughts about housing or jobs, the facts are that the SoS (and RSP) concede that they failed, in many many ways, to take account of a number of key factors which the ExA had considered.
        The SoS (and RSP) are saying they were wrong, and the ExA (and NNF and Jenny Dawes and a whole bunch of other people) were right.
        Were I a shallower more trivial sort of chap, I would say “suck it up, snowflakes”. But I’m not that sort of chap. So I won’t say “suck it up, ssnowflakes”.

  14. Anybody else reading this while simultaneously seeing the flashing advertising for RSP Manston taking off in 2023 banner? More like RIP Manston dead & buried 2020.

  15. What will save Manston group say… What a mess

    David Green.. You tell RG off I applaud you for gross corruption over Ramsgate sea front.

  16. Tony F himself has said there is no Plan B. It is DCO or go home.

    Perhaps a sideways move into those electric barges he invented is on the cards as a career move? Import/export freeze dried fish? Glide the critters in on electric planes, unicorn trot them down to the port and load up those lekky boats.

    A sure winner.

  17. Ha Ha the moaners have seen nothing yet. They can put the bunting away they won’t be needing that. I know there are an odd selfish group who would love to see east Kent remain a deprived high unemployment area. Dream on moaners that is now coming to an end. Of course Covid has delayed many things but things have not stopped or given the sadOs any victory in any way whatsoever.

    • Ann, are you Donald Trump? Only you seem to be suffering from what he is suffering from notably delusional feelings.

      • I really believe she is related to SRG or TF.

        Will TF disappear again without paying his bills or will his unknown consortium of backers be paying up, or maybe even SRG!

    • Ever the misguided optimist Ann. Sorry but your continued efforts to clutch at straws is just making you look bitter and rather silly now. You’re egg covered face is there for all to see lol. The JR was too strong and the withdrawal happened so fast it made your head spin. The sos has not got an answer 🙂

    • What is that then? The 20 odd years back proposed China Gateway project that was going to turn the area around & never materialised? The airport nobody wanted in 2013-so Ann Gloag paid a quid for it, before suddenly these companies started paying millions for it, creating jobs & wealth-despite every airport at Manston since WW2 failing & now being mostly automated? The permanently KCC subsidised Turner Centre that was supposed to regenerate the area, but nearly 10 years on still hasn’t? Reopening Dreamland that was supposed to be the saviour, but instead was swamped with debt & incompetence?

      Or further afield the ridiculous 3.5 billion & rising Disney Park in Swanscombe-as soon as Paramount pulled out it should have been obvious it was another white elephant vanity project that wasn’t viable due to not only the cost of building & running it, but the cost of the legal battles from conservationists-again initial completion date from its conception in 2012 was for 2019 & here we are nearly in 2021 & nothing is happening.

      Have you ever thought that the ‘moaners’ might actually want the area to be prosperous-but are just tired of going back to the same old failed ideas like an airport in the ass end of nowhere & poor transport links to it over & over for decades on end & pie in the sky nonsense that is impractical & never happens & cost the taxpayer ridiculous sums of money in legal bills & planning fights?

  18. Well said Steve. The reality is Manston never worked commercially and never will. Tony and his merry band of mystery overseas investors have submitted a plan so monstrous it would require a plane ever 12 mins at less than 700 feet over Ramsgate, day and night.

    For too long, our community has suffered at the hands of a few plane spotting aviation obsessives who support the lost RSP cause because they think in doing so it will stop housing development coming to Thanet.

    Which is factually incorrect.

    For RSP to claim this decision might speed up their case shows how delusional they really are. Absurd.

    • Exactly-most people want to be able to relax & sleep without the constant noise of planes taking off & flying overhead day & night & not breathe in even more poisonous fumes that are speeding up the destruction of our planet.

  19. It seems to me the best thing to do with Thanet as a whole, is to submerge it into the English Channel. What job prospects are there their, especially now Debenhams has closed and, I daresay, a lot more outlets, (Arcadia) at WWX. No Airport, so why houses. No jobs, no infrastructure, no hope. TDC and Ramsgate Council, you have your wish, sell Thanet as ground full, or let it, which it has in my opinion, sink.

    • Hi Paul, sorry to hear that you have such a negative view about Thanet, and Ramsgate. It is a pity, many people are moving to Ramsgate because its beautiful, full of energy, and offers much potential. It’s not just DFLs, BTW. The country is in bad shape because we have had a good ol’ decade of Tory policies, and Thanet’s MPs have done very little to bring Westminster to account for their miserable treatment of Thanet.

      Why are the options offered by Tony, Roger and Craig MAMAckinley just ~120 zero-hours, unhealthy jobs? Why is this the best that they manage?

      Once Manston’s cargo monster goes to sleep forever, the area will flourish even more. Ann and her QC friends can move to Heathrow, or Schiphol, or LaGuardia, and enjoy the fumes.

    • You are forgetting the one thing Thanet has an advantage over everybody else-more dog crapola per square metre than anywhere else in England. This can be harvested & used to fuel cars like they do in Japan, to be used as a weedkiller etc. Kent is the Garden Of England but Thanet can be the Sewer Of Excrement.

  20. Submissions can be made to the new DCO decision process.

    The Environment Agency are anyway in touch with RSP. Re Firefighting foam toxic residue, testing, spread, access to aquifer and remediation.

    Those problems will remain for mixed use and/or housing development.

    If we examine the toxic fire fighting foam history, runway and Fire School, it had free rein to migrate from site for decades up until ban and DEFRA guidance 2007.

    PFOA, a highly persistent toxic component, migrates very quickly. The extent of contamination, of water supply, agricultural land and sea, is as yet undetermined.

    Under United Nations Stockholm Convention when should Manston confinement of the persistent organic pollutants started?

    The longer the failure to contain, particularly after 2007, was sustained the migration of toxins would tend to enhance Manston value. This includes sustaining public water supply abstraction untested for PFOA, from Manston aquifer.

    This must be a part of the police economic crime unit inquiry. The inquiry SoS previously ignored in reaching DCO decision.

    Those who virtue signal concern for unemployed ? Re direct your concern for those on incapacity benefits and those with cancer and those who suffered maternity tragedies. Thanet aberrant levels of disease correlate to PFOA toxic risks

    The Dr Kirkup expert inquiry maternity tragedies has scheduled PFOA research. Another inquiry SoS ignored in reaching his first DCO decision.

  21. What were you hoping for Paul? The 120 jobs from last time round?

    Plenty of better ways to regenerate Thanet than a monstrous cargo hub sending in knackered old boiler beasts low over our harbour every 10 minutes.

    As the inspectors concluded, the cargo hub would kill more jobs than it created. We have already seen a downturn in our housing market from the threat it generates.

    Facts.

  22. From what I have been told Manston Airport is due to be taken over by the RAF, they will not even need a DCO because it will for National security that takes president over all planning. I think Ann maybe hinting to that. There is more to this than meet the eye.

    • We don’t really have an RAF any more. They’re selling off airfields at a rate of knots.
      Why on Earth would the MOD want to re-purchase a chink of land they got rid of decades ago?
      I wouldn’t a actually give credence to anything Ann says

  23. Dfl lives matter. They are moving here because its cheap and they can still travel to their jobs in London.
    Paul is right. What is there here for our kids? Nothing except the certainty that most of them will have to move away if they want well paid highly skilled jobs.
    Its the council that have more say in jobs, not the MP’s. I wish people would nit look at this with their political glasses on.. The previous Gloag plan for mixed use fell flat because no companies wanted to comit. Why is that. Because tge skill base and transport links are not here yet. Youneed a spark and maybe, just maybe, a well run aviation project could have been that spark. All it seems now is that those with their noses in the housing trough including london boroughs who still want to send overflow housing cases down here, will get there way which is going to make the area even worse for jobs, roads, deprevation, crime etc. I know what i would prefer for my 12 year old and that is a glimmer of hope, rather than none.

    • Hi Billy,
      How do you know why we DFLs move down here? Do you actually know any DFLs? Have you actually spoken to any of them? Have you asked them why they are here?
      Why dont you ask your MPs why there is nothing here (in your opinion) Have you also heard of people moving around looking for jobs?

      Thing is, blame us DFLs. We are coming anyway, and even more so after the kick in the DCOs gut. We are going to take over, Ramsgate is going to be the new St Ives, Plaidstow. If you cannot afford it, tough, welcome to capitalism.

      Also, Which of the two DFLs are you talking about, the ones with a job in London AND a job here in Ramsgate, employing people in Ramsgate, caring for Ramsgate people and houses and shops, or the overflows? I assume also that you will be against your child moving anywhere to study, if they wish so…

      Are you not bothered about the health impact on your family of the cargo filth? For the sake of 100 c_ap jobs? Are you really saying that all you hope for your family’s future is a what a struck off solicitor can offer…?

  24. You all go on but let’s face fact. Water table now were enough for development and contamination. Plus not able to build in price range for us locals. My guess they will start at leased £800000 why???. Tunnels vast amount of them, been in a few years ago with grandfather who was base there for many years. So why not go green and just have a wood land and all those Londoners can bugger off plus most of Ramsgate who have only lived here a few decades and most probably came from London.

  25. The need is even less now, post COVID, when major national airport are brimming with capacity and cannot get any business

  26. Following 6 years of elected officials, and third party bodies trying to push this through at all costs, ask why and what’s in it for them. Any other business based on this airfields history of failure, would never be entertained for rescue. No other business, its a laughing stock as are the elected officials, investigate them all, name and shame then publish publicly the findings.

  27. Apparently an airport would not be viable. So let it happen and fail.
    Will become housing anyway.

    Oh no. It’s like brexit, doom and gloom that it won’t work without actually trying it.
    I bet you all fly on holiday. Have you all properly insulated your homes. LED bulbs? Solar panels? Solar water heating?
    Doubt it. Hot air and nimby’s

  28. I would rather see houses on Manston airfield than on green farming land at Westgate. Houses are coming whether you like it or not. In fact Manston houses would give a good reason to build that extra station that no one wants.

  29. Intervention by the Secretary of State for Transport,
    he is in the know of whats going on in the cryptic covert world of politics & business and maybe approved the Dco for what he privately knows.

    Upcoming Cabinet reshuffle may see a new transport secretary who may have other ideas.
    The airport will reopen, possibility of eventually ramping up to more night flights than in their current application.
    Kent international airport site is an aviation prime location ! Its all been mentioned before

    • What evidence do you have to support your claim?
      Every expert opinion (and actual experience) says that Manston won’t work as an airport.
      I’d be interested to see what evidence you’ve got.

    • Oh, indeed James it has all been mentioned before but only really by airport fantists. Also, if Manston indeed is a prime aviation site why has it failed every year under several different owners?

  30. Whenever there is a post about manston airport on this website, the anti airport people get really nasty and malicious. Talking down to people. Moderator needs to do a better job

  31. I say! When it comes to nasty and malicious, we can all take a lesson or two from those who support the airport.

  32. I’m not sure I understand what’s actually happening with the DCO. It’s a clearly set out process with statutory timescales and stages. The government has, in effect, admitted that they cannot justify the decision they made. The report from the Planning Inspectorate, which recommended the airport proposal should be rejected, identified numerous shortcomings with the proposal, and the government did not justify their decision to overrule the Planning Inspectorate. Why should the government get a second bite of the cherry? We are told there is no appeal with the DCO process. Surely that should work both ways. Surely the government’s failure to deal with this properly should mean that the proposal is rejected? I can see no good reason why they should be allowed to have another go. Will the minister, who made the decision on behalf of Grant Shapps, be resigning? If not, why not? Either he’s made a complete hash of it, or there is no way the decision to approve could be justified.

  33. I’m quite surprised that the hallowed pages of this Mighty Organ have not been graced (or do I mean “greased” ?) recently by R John Pritchard.
    I’m sure that he would be able to give the SoS, the QCs, the solicitors, RSP, SMAa(aaa) and NNF plenty (and I mean plenty) of advice.

  34. Amazing how some councillors in s deprived area can plot against jobs @ prosperity helping themselves to monies to fund it in a time when business are closing I would be interested what their real objective is It is certainly not to help Thanet job seekers s

    • If you read the ExA’s report (and you clearly haven’t) you will see that in the opinion of business analysts, the number of jobs gained by opening an airport would be more than outweighed by jobs lost in the hospitality and tourism industry.
      So I would say of these councillors: money well spent.

    • Well, apropos the previous incarnations of TDC and their concerted stymieing of SHP’s mixed-use plan for the ex-airport site- I don’t know that I’d call it a plot, more the naive assumption that a small group of noisy airport supporters (Literally noisy in some cases, eg that bloke with a stall in the market and a loud-hailer) were representing practically the whole of Thanet.

  35. Victory for Ramsgate and victory for evidence over sentiment.

    Fact over cronyism.

    Tony can find another ruse for his mystery overseas investors, his made up jobs numbers and his endless spin.

    Well done Ramsgate. We will not give up this fight. We believe in you.

  36. The people of Ramsgate need to realise that Ramsgate is not Thanet when thousands of houses are being built on your doorstep then it is time to complain but no only Margate and villages being destroyed Have any of you seen the devistation going on around Westwood An airport would be more preferable than another what10 thousand cars on our roads but then you live in Ramsgate so it is unlikely to affect you If any you are capable think of other Thanet residents for a change.

      • Marva Manston airport was around long before you and yes I have supported it, I am unable to object to work and jobs being brought to Thanet, unlike some. As I have previously said aircraft passing over are here and gone in the blink of an eye, cars are not Name callin Marva just not Ramsgate is it? If me being concerned for my health makes me rude and ignorant then Marva must be right Ramsgate resident says so NOT

        • I’m very concerned for my health too and so I really don’t want a busy , dirty noisy airport anywhere near my home.

          It just doesn’t matter when Manston was an airport or how long it was an airport for. It isn’t one now.

  37. You suggest that the people of Ramsgate should think of Margate and the villages, which are now to be destroyed by over-development. The simple answer is that we did. The legal owners of the site of the former, failed airport put forward plans to redevelop the site to provide both housing and employment. This development would have negated the need to build on green fields elsewhere. The people of Ramsgate gave these plans their backing. I regret to inform you that it was the pro-airport campaign which actively sought to have the houses put elsewhere. In their ranks they had councillors representing the very areas you now complain will be ruined. So, don’t blame the people of Ramsgate if your village is ruined. Blame the neanderthals who demanded a freight depot and demanded that the housing should be built on green fields elsewhere.

    • Exactly that Eggnog! The very people who supported the airport idea should shoulder the blame for the rest of Thanet getting clogged up with houses. The houses were coming whether there was an airport or not. We have now lost the opportunity to place a large proportion at the airport, which would have had better road links. Plus if the council had the gumption, could have demanded a good proportion be for those on the waiting list.

      • Realistic girl do you actually believe that those on the waiting list in Thanet will be given a house by TDC? Dream on gir land do you for one minute think there are 17000families in Thanet waiting for a house?again dream on or are people are hoping that future generations will bag one as well? Outsiders have already been given them

        • Lesley there were 2k families on the waiting list last October, which will no doubt increase due to Covid and Brexit. When giving planning permission, the council can negotiate a percentage of houses for social housing.
          Ideally we would have a government with some clout who make it the law to ensure new builds have a good proportion offered for social housing, but alas we are stuck with a government entrenched in capitalism.
          A sane person would say, ok if we have to build all these homes we should build them on brownfield sites, but we have had successive cllrs and MPs obsessed with the idea of planes flying they didn’t allow that huge brownfield site to be used for the home allocation. So now we face the prospect of the little agricultural and greenland we have left being paved over.
          Remember, Thanet has one of the lowest levels of tree coverage in the country and the lockdown made people realise how important green spaces are for our mental health. The state of Thanet breaks my heart, that we have no care for the future generations and would rather subject them to a polluting cargo hub.

          • I do not need a lecture from any one one about the loss of trees or anything else to do with Thanet 2 000 on the waiting list who do you think the other 15000will be allocated to huh? before you go blaming councillors and mps for the downfall of thanet, Farmers and land owners are the the people to to blame for selling off the land to developers.If you bothered to look at TDC planning applications and look to see who owns the land it is companies from outside the area, not always local people in Thanet these companies could not give a damn about local people being covered in concrete all they can see is the money, Greed is a horrible thing Sixty years I have lived in Thanet so how do you think I feel? To be perfectly honest people living here today should be considered first people get what people want and if that means no trees stinking air and rabbit hutches to live in then so be it Gladly I will not be around to suffer it all for it will have killed me.

    • The people of Ramsgate gave theses plans their backing exactly !You must be in contact with moaning Marva for goodness sake grow up! and think on ,even neanderthals evolved something it seems is yet to happen in Ramsgate

      • Goodness! You’re incapable of spelling your own name!
        I know facts are a bit if a damper, but:
        After lengthy examination, including testimony from expert witnesses, the ExA roundly rejected the DCO application.
        For bizarre reasons, the SoS reversed this decision.
        A JR was launched.
        Before the hearing date, the SoS conceded, and RSP decided not to defend the case.

        I don’t see any mention of houses anywhere.

        • Has your finger never slipped on the keypad? why don’t you take a look at TDC planning applications there you will see more than a mention of houses to be built Let’s wait and see who from Ramsgate moans about the houses to be built at Clffsend along with railway station being built for the London workers who want to live in Little London still it will be built on some of the last remaining green fields left and lastly just to inform you land owners and farmers around Ramsgate have already sold off their land to developers so be careful what you wish for for other people

          • Lesley, I think you will find there are plenty of Ramsgate residents opposed to Thanet Parkway. We don’t need an 8th station in the space of a few square miles. If you voted for Manston then you voted for rabbit hutches on the fields. It’s common knowledge that had the airport been included in the local plan for houses, then it would have taken a large proportion and saved our fields. But alas, due to people’s lack of foresight, blindness by nostalgia and an unwillingness to read the evidence on the airports viability, we are in this position. Own it.

          • I don’t see any mention of houses in the DCO application, nor the SoS’s decision, nor the consequences of the JR, Ylesley

      • I am not “moaning”. That’s a word that many airport supporters love to use. But it is not an accurate description of the criticisms which people make about RSP’s alleged plans for a cargo hub airport.

  38. Brilliant news, smart way of avoiding any future Judicial Review, to get it sent back to the decision makers to amend a few sentences and phrases and then to be given the go ahead again with the DCO, very clever and a welcomed last twist. time to get Manston Airport re-built.

    • There’s always the option of a JR. The mechanism is there to protect us from absurd decisions by the authorities.
      I quite agree it’s time to rebuild on Manston.
      Houses, industry, leisure, recreation.

  39. A busy airport at Manston will cause environmental problems, health problems and the stopping of Ramsgate’s development as a reviving tourist resort. There won’t be many jobs in an automated cargo hub airport.

  40. Marva you really do live in a dream world there will not be many jobs in hospitality either There are already environmental problems in Thanet or perhaps like the human shite you never see, you are oblivious to the damage being caused to humans by ridiculous amounts of traffic on our roads spewing out killer toxic fumes and the loss of precious trees that help clean the air.

  41. People should put pressure on councils and MPs for improved public transport networks. I do not live in a dream world. I have never owned a car, I can’t drive, I hate the damage car use has done. I am not oblivious to this damage.

  42. I may well see human shit, but when I do see shit in public places I always assume it’s dogshit, because that’s much more likely.

  43. Oh for heavens sake! So the stupid people of Thanet who are against this project, who probably bought a house after the airport stopped knowing that this could happen are preventing Thanet from becoming a hub globally. Yes, let’s stay the “rubbish bin of Kent” described by national newspapers. Lets close Dover, ban all steam trains in this case. Planes are now much more green than they ever were. Noise pollution is going down. This would create jobs, carers and training for those aspiring pilots and air hostesses. To all who have rejected this plan, a curse on your futures! Little England is strong with these people!

    • I agree, lets bring back polio, it kept polio wards busy! Honestly, irs obvious some people did get affected by the fumes as their arguments are as thick as the file with the companies bankrupted by the struck off solicitor…
      Those of you supporting the airport- MOVE to Heathrow, it still open. Those of you supporting aviation jobs for the ‘youth’- ask them if they want crap jobs in a crap environment.
      Those of you supporting our health being damaged for the sake of your spitfire nostalgia- go live with Gale.

      Also, why has the moderator not stepped in when someone used ‘stupid woman’ to address someone directly?

  44. What does DwB’s last sentence mean? It is rather ambiguous.Why is he or she cursing the poor old Planning Inspectorate?

Comments are closed.