Representation by Stuart Roy Spencer
- Date submitted
- 27 October 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I believe GAL has made the application over 2 stages (2021 and 2023) as a means to deliberately minimize public examination and understanding of the scheme, with a view to securing acceptance. If this is proved it is a serious miss-use of the planning system and something that needs to taken into account by the SoS. Firstly the 'consultation' in 2021 was not transparent or fair and did not conform to H M Government's Code of Practice for consultations. It did not as required provide clear easily accessible and interpretable information about costs/impacts and benefits. This prevented me from forming an opinion on the scheme. This is a matter of fact and not opinion as detailed in my written response to that consultation. Did GAL deliberately exclude from the 2021 consultation, information that would have given a more informed/ balanced view of the scheme's impacts? Was GAL cognisant that the majority of interested public parties might well make the effort to read the 2021 consultation documents but not the far less accessible updated and expanded documents in 2023 on the PINS portal. If GAL's approach to the consultation was a deliberate action to obfuscate then this practice amounts to a serious manipulation of information and process to suit a desired outcome by a private company, and national decision makers should be fully aware that this has potentially happened. An example of the limited disclosure of information was made during the 2021 consultation when inadequate information was supplied to enable any reasonable person to judge the noise and other impacts of the emissions from 100,000 extra aircraft movements - it was just impossible to form a balanced judgement. I will examine the latest submissions and look forward to responding accordingly.