Representation by Julian Perry
- Date submitted
- 5 October 2018
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
As a former long-time resident, friend and relation to residents and regular visitor to Thanet, I wish to lodge my opposition to the current Development Consent Order applied for at the former Manston Airport site. Firstly, I cannot see the business need for such a facility. The dedicated air freight sector is not a growth market in the UK and has, in fact, been static for a number of years. Coupled with this is the fact that the existing airports that deal with freight all have capacity to cope with growth. Just East Midlands Airport and Stansted alone state they have the capacity to cope with an extra 1.1m tonnes of cargo each year. This makes the existing capacity fairly “future proof”. In addition to the significant capacity elsewhere is the geographical remoteness of Thanet. This makes it illogical as part of a cargo supply chain and makes other airports, much closer to good transport links, the logical choice. The fact that RSP claim that they can attract nearly 70% of the dedicated air cargo in this country is risible. Secondly, I am extremely concerned about the “consultation” that RSP conducted prior to submitting their DCO. They were very select in the areas they leafleted and very aggressive towards any members of the public who voiced an opinion that was contrary to theirs. They have not conducted a fair consultation and have been extremely selective in the information that they have given out. For example, they have constantly told people that their business model neither wanted nor needed night flights. Their DCO has made it clear that this is not the case. For example, in their submission to you (TR020002-002435-5.2-15 - Environmental Statement - Volume 15 - 2 of 2 - Transport Assesment – Part), they admit that a large proportion of their staff will be working overnight. This alone shows the contempt with which they conducted the consultation phase of this process. Thirdly, I am concerned about RSP’s funding for this project. They have publically stated that they have £476m available to invest in the project but cannot show enough funding to even secure the compulsory purchase of the site. There has been no interest from reputable carriers in the four and a half years since Kent International Airport closed. The airport was open as a commercial venture for approximately 20 years. Not once during that time did it make a profit and, in fact, lost £100m during that time. It would seem a massive financial risk, then to give consent to the DCO especially in light of the fact that it is one of the individuals responsible for the bankruptcy of the airport in control of RSP. My next concern is with public health. RSP’s own documentation admits that the effects on the population will be adverse and significant. This is of particular concern to a town the size of Ramsgate, especially given its reliance on tourism. Tourism is a large growth sector in Thanet and the growth of tourism is well above the national average. However, this is a fragile sector and the introduction of a cargo hub will reverse the fortunes of many flourishing businesses and will destroy tourism in the area. I am also concerned that Ramsgate, a heritage action zone and home to over 400 listed buildings will suffer a significant negative impact should the DCO be granted. The noise and vibration would be detrimental to the heritage zone, heritage buildings and a Royal harbour. Finally, I am concerned about the negative and permanent effects the proposal will have on conservation in the area. Pegwell Nature Reserve is Kent’s largest nature reserve and is a hugely important habitat for birdlife and breeding. An air cargo hub would have a significant negative impact on the reserve and would discourage many rare and nesting species.
I would therefore urge the inspectors to make a decision based on solid evidence. Granting consent would mean a permanent and negative change to people’s lives in an economic, social and environmental context.