Representation by UKIP and Independent Group Thanet District Council (UKIP and Independent Group Thanet District Council)
- Date submitted
- 2 October 2018
- Submitted by
- Local authorities
It is the contention of the UKIP and Independent group on Thanet District Council that the RSP application to PINS for a Development Consent Order for the Manston Airport site lacks the necessary coherence, evidence, and credibility to gain approval and create a genuinely functioning aviation operation which could be tolerated by the local community.
There is no credible independent evidence across the range of documents produced by RSP to underpin the business case. The public consultations undertaken have presented a very different picture to the details of operation contained in the application itself. As a result it is almost farcical to entertain the notion of effective consultation. Rather the public consultation undertaken has deliberately presented a very different picture to that which emerges throughout the application; particularly in terms of noise, vibration, pollution, and impact upon residents.
Furthermore, this ‘public relations’ aspect of what should be an honest appraisal of the proposal continues to mar the process. The local MP, [Redacted], known locally as the MP for Riveroak, constantly pumps out the message there will be only emergency night flights; the detail of the application tells a very different story. The current Leader of Thanet District Council,[Redacted], breached his powers when before becoming Leader he wrote undermining independent legal opinion and evidence about the consultation from his own Council Officers. This has been used by RSP to discount criticism of their consultation failings, and appears to have been accepted by PINS as real and substantive when it is at best a false interpretation of poor wording; at worst a bare faced lie.
PINS itself, in its acceptance for examination letter, demonstrates clear awareness of the paucity of the application as presented, yet has still passed the application on to the next stage of the DCO process. This appears to many to be an abuse of process, undermining the credibility of PINS approach to DCO examinations for the future. There must be a number of private companies across the U.K. who are following the application rules and processes properly and fully who will question why it is that PINS go ‘easy’ on the detail of this application, bringing the whole DCO process into disrepute.
In particular the lack of transparency and detail regarding funding and controlling influences; the flawed and incoherent public consultation processes; the ongoing dispute concerning the starting point to determine if this is a genuine NSIP or not; the suitability of the Directors track record for running airport operations; and a business case based on emotional and unsupported assumption about the current freight market, remain gaping flaws in the proposals before you. These flaws are flaws in the application itself, which should not take up Inspectors time at hearing, but should have been insisted upon as a form of completion for the application to be appropriate for submission at all. In this case PINS have clearly turned a blind eye to the sort of detail they ask for in other applications. Perhaps some of the PINS bureaucrats should be subject to questioning at public examination to explain their unusually lax view in applying their own rules and regulations.
This proposal is so flawed, independent commentators will be questioning how it has progressed at all for years to come. We urge PINS to wake up and treat this application as they would any other. The stench of special arrangements hangs heavy over this application, as will the noise, pollution, and devastation stemming from the reality of freight operations at this level will hang over Thanet and Herne Bay for years to come.