Representation by Frank Martin
- Date submitted
- 7 October 2018
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I have been a resident of Thanet since 2001 when I was appointed Chief Exedutive of Hornby Plc, a company listed on the London Stock Exchange. I held that post until my retirement in 2013. I am currently Chairman of Governors and Pro Chancellor Canterbury Christ Church University, Deputy Chairman Dover Harbour Board, Vice Chairman Royal British Legion Industries, Director Locomotive Storage Limited and a past Commodore of the Royal Temple Yacht Club Ramsgate. Most of the above appointments are self explanatory, with the exception of Locomotive Storage Ltd. (LSL) - this is a private company which now owns the industrial site sold by Hornby in 2017. I was invited to join the Board in early 2018 to assist with the creation of a major visitor attraction in Margate, centred around the storage and display of classic railway vehicles. The first exhibit "Bittern" arrived in June 2018. I mention the above appointments as evidence of my commitment to the prosperous regeneration of East Kent.
My view of the Riveroak bid for Manston is informed by 30+ years experience of running diverse substantial businesses, as Managing Director, Chief Executive and latterly in non Executive roles.
Having reviewed the Riveroak bid I find that the forecast traffic numbers are unsubstantiated and unjustifiably optimistic. The revenue and cost base analysis is similarly unjustified. For example, based on the latest forecast I have seen the numbers employed after 1 year are forecast at 850. This employee cost base would equate (conservatively) to a fixed overhead of c £35million per year. The same document talks about a year 1 investment of £25m - clearly insufficient to support 850 employyes let alone all the other overheads, unavoidable in a project of the nature.
I urge that the Planning Inspectorate carries out a detailed forensic analysis of the Riveroak bid in its entirety - its people, their experience , their forecasts, funding and motives and then asks the question - is this a realistic proposition for the re establishment of a successful commercial aviation business at Manston - where every other such project has failed, or is it a thinly disguised attempt to grab the land and eventually develop it in the same way that the current owners intend. The Inspectorate should not subject the people of Thanet to more years of uncertainty, false hopes and eventual disappointment and recrimination. I would welcome the opportunity to discuss the above with the Inspector.