Representation by Peter White
- Date submitted
- 16 June 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
That the initial consultations were conducted using response documentation that did not give the public the opportunity to simply say they opposed the development. The questions were constructed that all replies would be in favour, and that any comments against could then be lost in the data collection. This was confirmed by both LLAL/LR employees would told me that this was not a referendum, the public had no choice in stopping it. I also asked the CEO of LBC on several occasions whether a simple question, do you support expansion, yes or no, should be the opening question on all response documents? His reply was eventually verbally given as no, so public negative responses could be screened out and ignored. That the Green Controlled Growth concept of this application is irrelevant, as it will controlled and written by the airport operator. It will be written in a way that puts growth of commercial income before environmental impacts, and the effects on quality of life for people effected by airport operations. The ESG group proposed to control expansion will have no powers, and will only act in retrospect.The growth that causes any infringements of levels will be allowed to continue, rather than stopped to ensure levels are met.