Representation by Jenny Dawes
- Date submitted
- 7 October 2018
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
1 RSP’s submission appears riddled with contradictions, mis-representations and inaccuracies: among other things, it ignores the realities of location, road infrastructure, and demographics and downplays the impact the return of aviation would have on Ramsgate by mis-representing the distance of the runway from the town and averaging out ATM’s and noise levels so that they become meaningless. RSP’s submission includes plans for night flights, again averaging out ATM’s and noise levels, but RSP’s principals and supporters, including at least on local MP, continue to assert that there will be no night flights.
I would ask PINS to consider what part the involvement of, or interference by, elected politicians may have played in:
i) encouraging and shaping RSP’s proposals; ii) promoting support for RSP’s proposals; and iii) disseminating misleading information in support of the application.
2 Manston was a redundant military airfield that went on to experience serial failures as a civilian airport. RSP’s business plan is based on an Azimuth report, discredited by other aviation experts, that echoes proposals for Manston when it was under the ownership of first Wiggins, then Planestation. Both incarnations were ultimately unsuccessful: businesses in Thanet have a lower chance of survival than in other parts of the UK. Although the funding and ultimate ownership of RSP is unclear, it resembles a venture capital funded start-up. [Redacted], a senior lecturer at Harvard, has found that 95% of venture capital funded enterprises fail to reach their targets. RSP’s submission assumes profitability based on phased development over a twenty-year period, there is no evidence of modelling best and worst case scenarios.
I would ask PINS to evaluate RSP’s business plan, to consider its viability, and to examine the likely consequences if a DCO was granted and
i) RSP failed to deliver the project, or ii) RSP delivered the project in full or in part and the project subsequently failed.