Representation by Shem Booth-Spain
- Date submitted
- 26 September 2018
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
This is an opposition to the application by RSP for DCO on the Manston failed airport site.
There is no National interest and is not needed in this area.
My family and i live in Ramsgate under the proposed flight path having moved from London to be part of the blooming cultural/economy of this seaside/Marina resort. I chose to move here for health reasons.
Even [Redacted], who in his words has pronounced that he was the MP for Riveroak in the past, has spoken out vociferously against the Heathrow airport expansion citing the heath risks to residents (his own Grandso). He has failed to speak out to protect the residents of Ramsgate. He is elected for north Thanet, not South Thanet where The old airport is situated.
The MP covering The Manston site is silent as he has conflict of interest – Mama airline which is dormant but still listed with him as a director. This should ring alarm bells for the inspectorate. Neither MP is considering the interests of the residents by which they were elected. So this should be borne in mind when deciding the DCO as residents are already talking about how corrupt they feel the situation. The majority of pro airport supporters are not living in the affected areas.
According to the findings of the World Health Organisation (WHO), noise is the second largest environmental cause of health problems, just after the impact of air quality (particulate matter).
The pollution will affect the development of the young, elderly and those with long term illnesses and will cost the economy due to work absenteeism
RSPs proposal does not show the NEED for an airport. Based on the relentless failures to financially support both passenger and cargo flights in the past, one has to wonder what the continued persistence by RSP to gain access to this land. Cynically one must question their financial viability and true plans. It is a highly risky financial venture given proven history and contrary assessments?
RSP consulted and lied to us at their meeting. They said categorically that there would be no night flights. Their submission to the inspectorate clearly is in conflict to their consultation.
Ramsgate is a seaside resort which has already started to increase in prosperity since the last airline closure and continues to develop with plans for development of the Marina. This would be of National interest as it would draw sea going craft and businesses to the marina, hotels would be built and restaurants and cafés would also increase. Demand for skilled workers on the engineering, maintenance, tour and leisure industries would increase.
The current owners are seeking planning permission which will house locals as well as out of area. This will free up areas of executive development in London, thus in the National interest.
RSPs proposals do not guarantee well paid, skilled jobs for the local population.
I therefore object to this application