Manston, elections, and money

Dennis Franklin is a regular contributor to the IoT Gazette letters page, and sent us this letter to publish in full, just in case the Gazette doesn't...

---

I know what follows is lengthy, but I am trying to make some important points about Manston, forthcoming elections, and the use of public money. Also, I feel there have been more pro Manston letters published than against, so I hope space can be found for the following:

Astute readers of the Thanet Gazette letters page will realise I am opposed to Manston airport for 2 reasons, one is I am against social injustice. There are 60,000 households in Thanet, and perhaps 10,000 including some who are not in Thanet, who are effected by low flying aircraft creating air and noise pollution, asthma, pulmonary disease, stress and lower life expectancy.

I do not understand why those in favour of the airport, most of whom are not affected this way, think they can bully those who are, into sacrificing their quality of life, and devaluation of their homes, for what? Most of any new jobs will go to outside experts, and its misguided to think it will increase tourism, it won't, not if 50 to 100 aircraft a day fly low over Ramsgate Harbour, which an economist in the Thanet Gazette predicted it will be needed to make Manston viable!

My second objection is that I do not agree public funds i.e. Income and Council Tax money should be used to subsidise private enterprise! I have been in correspondence with UKIP KCC Councillor Roger Latchford on this, because KCC UKIP Councillor Trevor Shonk tried to conceal from me that there was a proposal to build another railway station 1 mile from one at Minster, and one and a half miles from Ramsgate station, purely for the use of Ann Gloag the owner of Manston Airport, at a cost to the public of £10.5 million! I suggested there are more worthy ways to spend £10.5 million of our money, like redeveloping the disused gas works site in Ramsgate for hundreds of social/affordable homes for a start!

Shamefully more or less every local politician from Laura Sandys to Green (sic) Party councillor Ian Driver, want to use public money to subsidise Manston, why? Because they are electioneering for the forthcoming elections, that’s why! Don't be duped, they intend to cynically abandon and sell out the people who live under the flight paths, who will have their lives ruined by low flying aircraft. And would those people involved with Why Not Manston, please note, every attempt to make Manston profitable has failed, even when EU Jet tried bussing people in from Medway!

I agree with Mike Pearce in his article in last week’s Thanet Gazette, it will stick in the craw of those people who lost their jobs due to KCC cut backs, which also reduced funding for road repairs, schools, libraries, social services for young and old etc, only instead to see millions of pounds of public money being poured into private pockets to try and shore up this obsolete airport! If UKIP have their way and bully KCC into coming up with £200 millions of tax payers money to subsidise Manston airport, just to get elected, it will be a travesty!

Finally, will people stop banging on about Manston's glorious military past? The Cold War ended 25 years ago, and I don't remember seeing a single National Serviceman who didn't loathe every wasted minute of it!

Dennis Franklin, Ramsgate

Life under the flight path: 2

A reader writes:

I recently was speaking with a woman and we got on to the topic of the airport, not from a political anti-airport point of view, just mums chatting at a toddler group. She told me about her washing!

Funny little burn holes in her washing whilst it hangs on the line and she asked if we thought it could be aviation fuel?

The woman who runs the toddler group who lives in Cliffsend also said she gets tiny burn holes but only if the wind is in the direction of the airport. I wonder if this is a common phenomenon or coincidence?

---

Any thoughts?

Campaigners anger at bid to introduce night flights

Airport owners have been accused of trying to "pull a fast one" after revealing new plans for night flights over Herne Bay. Controversy has boiled for the past two years over the policy, with Manston Airport owners Infratil keen to boost the number of night flights at the Thanet airport.

Under the current agreement the airport is not allowed any scheduled flights between 11pm and 7am. But in a new revised proposal submitted on Friday, Infratil says it will limit any flights between 11.30pm and 6am to less than two a night and will comply with a strict noise quota.

But the policy leaves them free to fly as many planes as they want - unrestricted by noise limits - between 11pm and 11.30pm and 6am and 7am. Phil Rose, who runs the website HerneBayMatters and has fiercely campaigned against the night flights, said:

"The airport owners are trying to pull a fast one. They are proposing to place an upper limit on the total amount of noise nuisance from planes, but they'll only be measuring the noise between 11.30pm and 6am. Who are they trying to kid?"

Airport chiefs have forecast an average 6.4 flights between 11pm and 11.30pm and 6am and 7am, but just 1.8 between 11.30pm and 6am. Mr Rose said:

"They call this less than two flights a night, but it's actually more than one an hour throughout the night. You also have to bear in mind that these are average numbers - when there are no planes one night, there'll probably be 16 the next night. So an 'average' night could be a Boeing 747-400 cargo plane landing, or taking off, at 11.05pm, 11.15pm, 11.25pm, 1.55am, 3.40am, 6.05am, 6.25am and 6.55am - and they're presenting that as a couple of flights a night."

Planes landing at Manston fly straight over Herne Bay if there is an easterly wind and skim Reculver when they take off into a westerly wind. Mr Rose said:

"Sometimes, like last summer, we can have several weeks of non-stop easterly winds. So the people of Herne Bay can look forward to sleepless nights from noise pollution, ill health from the resulting stress, ill health from the air pollution from cargo planes and HGVs, and the rapid destruction of our tourist industry."

---

Rejection "could threaten airport"

Manston boss Charles Buchanan says allowing night flights would create 3,000 jobs by 2018 and is vital for the long-term future of the airport. He said:

"For the airport to be commercially viable in the longer term and deliver for Kent what other airports have done for their regions, it is vital that we are allowed to compete in terms of the operating hours."

The submission also includes a Night Noise Assessment Report after previous plans sparked fears about noise. Mr Buchanan said:

"Rejecting the submission by prohibiting all commercial traffic between 11pm and 7am would severely hinder the airport's ability to attract passenger and freight airlines. It would cost the local economy an estimated £30 million per year and some 1,450 jobs at a time when the area needs them more than ever. It could even threaten the continuation of the airport as a viable business."

The plans will go out to public consultation after Thanet council has had an independent assessment carried out.

HB Gazette 3rd Nov 2011 joewalker@thekmgroup.co.uk

Blimey! A politician talking sense!

Don't get your hopes up, though - she's not in Kent...

This is Mary Macleod, MP for Brentford and Isleworth, who is lucky enough to have Heathrow Airport in her constituency. She is concerned about the health effects of night flights, and advocates phasing them out. How sensible! (By way of contrast, my MP is Roger Gale.)

---

Night Flights at Heathrow Airport 25th May 2011

In a debate in Parliament yesterday, during Noise Action Week, I challenged the Government to ban night flights at Heathrow airport on the grounds of health and quality of life factors for local residents.

New research from Warwick University published in the European Heart Journal in February this year studied the impact of hormones and chemicals caused by chronic lack of sleep in the body. They concluded that:

"If you sleep less than six hours per night and have disturbed sleep, you stand a 48% greater chance of developing or dying from heart disease and a 15% greater chance of developing or dying from a stroke."

The World Health Organisation and the HYENA report from Imperial College London also found that, even if people don't wake up, there is evidence that noise from night flights causes immediate increases in blood pressure.

The impact of night flights on the lives of those living under the flightpaths of Heathrow airport is something we must take seriously. Stronger enforcement of current quotas is required, together with higher fines for consistent offenders. As we prepare to set new night flight agreements for 2012/17, we must also give full consideration to reducing or eliminating night flights, especially between the critical 11.30pm and 6.00am period.

I also urge the Government to work with BAA and the airlines to ensure effective noise mitigation, such as insulation and double glazing, for those who are worst affected by the noise of aircraft at Heathrow.

I hope that the Government's current consultation on the future UK aviation strategy marks a positive step forward in relations between the Government and the aviation industry. I want us to ensure that Heathrow airport continues to thrive and, at the same time, takes into account the quality of life of those who live around the airport.

See more on: Health

Protesters claim research is misleading

Campaigners against proposals for regular night flights at Manston airport have questioned research claiming growth would provide 3,000 jobs. Last week York Aviation's study, on behalf of airport owners Infratil, claimed Manston would contribute nearly £65 million a year to the local economy by 2018 if expansion was allowed. Using industry standard figures, the aviation consultants found Manston would provide direct employment for 2,070 people and more in indirect employment.

Campaigners from the No To Night Flights group questioned the basis for the figures. They claim Bournemouth airport handles 1 million passengers with 247 jobs and Stansted estimated its jobs total will soon fall to 330 per 1 million passengers. At London City airport, where Manston airport chief executive Charles Buchanan worked before joining Infratil, the group says Mr Buchanan "promised" 3,135 jobs for an extra 36,000 flights but only 726 jobs were created.

Susan Kennedy from No Night Flights said:

"These 3,000 jobs rely on the airport's entire Master Plan being achieved. Night flights will not bring 3,000 jobs. They might not bring any new jobs."

The group also raised doubts over the possibility of realising the aims in the master plan. Ms Kennedy said:

"If the predictions in the master plan were correct, Manston would now have 1.3 million passengers per year. It actually has just 32,000. Last year, the master plan said 2.4 million passengers will create 600 direct jobs. However, Manston is now saying that 2.4 million passengers will create 2,070 direct jobs. What an extraordinary drop in productivity! Mr Buchanan is an experienced PR operator. He knows local people and some politicians fall for the idea of thousands of jobs because we're in an area hard hit by unemployment. Night flights will not bring jobs, but will lose existing tourism-based jobs."

The group's view was backed by Thanet council's Labour group which, in a statement, said the master plan was "an expression of Infratil's hopes for the future". Thanet Labour deputy leader Alan Poole said:

"Master Plans are at best guesses and should be treated with appropriate scepticism. Manston is operating nowhere near capacity during the day and the introduction of night flights from 11pm to 7am simply cannot be justified. Night flights could bring untold misery to Thanet's residents. The health and quality of life for Thanet's residents must surely remain paramount considerations."

Isle of Thanet Gazette 3rd June 2011

See more on: Health

Our Children Speak...

To whom it may concern,

I am writing to you to discuss the potential night flights over Ramsgate, speaking on the behalf of all the children in Ramsgate (and other towns that will be affected by night flights). Although it may not seem like a major issue to some people, it is a concern to the locals, in particular the children.

If you were at the meeting at Chatham House, you will have heard all the points against night flights (from locals such as Sue Kennedy), and seen the huge crowd gathered to protest against Manston going ahead with their plans. I was surprised that there were five councillors missing, since this is a major debate.

Anyway, on to the points against night flights. Many of these were brought up during the course of the evening. Firstly, the harm that the noise can do to children. It has been scientifically proven that loud noises are not good for anyone, especially young children and babies. No one should be exposed to more than 50 decibels of noise (according to studies carried out by scientists) and young children and babies shouldn’t be exposed to more than 40 decibels. Yet 747’s sent from Manston can make 60-80 decibels of noise heard from Ramsgate and St. Peters. This is bad enough during the day, but the night time? It would be like sleeping through a tornado. It would be practically impossible.

According to research done by Cornell University, night flights will result in a drop in achievement of children at school. As everyone knows, children are the seeds of the future, and underachievement at school could result in disaster in 20-30 years’ time. Also, night flights will result in increasing health problems in the Isle of Thanet (source of information; World Health Organisation or WHO).

The people running the airport would argue that they could give people jobs. But would all of those jobs go to locals? No. In fact, an estimate of 16 local jobs has been predicted. Besides, Labour (who has recently sided against night flights) claimed that the promise of jobs ‘was merely an aspiration’.

Thank you for reading my letter on night flights.

Yours sincerely, Hal, aged 10. Ramsgate.

See more on: Health

Video snippets from RTC 25th October

Many thanks to our Multimedia Department (Outside Broadcast Unit) for the following video snippets from the Ramsgate Town Council meeting at Chatham House School on 25th October...

Jobs Promised 8½ mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnO5DsICoyE

Noise & Health 6½ mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MHpIoO7KBq0&feature=mfu_in_order&playnext=1&videos=LR2iZqla9B0

Worse health and education services? 2 mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jnv8oPVFJU0&feature=mfu_in_order&playnext=1&videos=RVhdl8aOSCc

Follow the money 1½ mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ku6kz1R_AuM&feature=mfu_in_order&playnext=1&videos=OWNuQQMOXI4

Impossible to land planes safely until NEXT November 2½ mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wr0L_OztAFQ&feature=mfu_in_order&playnext=1&videos=mvoiutz5fvU

Living Next to Noisy neighbours 2 mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mr1ot2rUVs&feature=mfu_in_order&playnext=1&videos=DLkM3c2aOk0

WRIT of MANDAMUS (A writ issued by a superior court ordering a public official or body or a lower court to perform a specified duty)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADv4cQCqAAA&feature=mfu_in_order&playnext=1&videos=VtFfWkM3B7c

Our MPs’ views on Night Flights 1½ mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXSi-c0vmsI&feature=mfu_in_order&playnext=1&videos=JjxdtkaY-Xk

Development & Public Safety Zones 3 mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-I7_RJUshM

Previous Court Judgement about Planning Permission 5 mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udVzcN0daCg&feature=mfu_in_order&playnext=1&videos=CFSY-wwg1i0

It makes all the difference, remembering to press the start button. Ahem.

See more on: Health

Night flights may not be answer for jobs

Maurice Byford

Clipping: thisiskent

IN THE letters page of the Isle of Thanet Gazette over recent weeks there have been passionate letters supporting the proposal by Infratil for night flights over Thanet as a means to expand the airport services at Manston. While I support the proposal of expansion and the attempts by the airport to attract an airline to operate out of Thanet it is clear to me that the proposals set out for the night flights option are extremely misguided.

One of your contributors, Wendy Fry, had the temerity to call detractors "moaners" and suggested that if you purchased a property on the flight path then you should 'put up with the consequence of noise'. As someone who has lived here for over 26 years, when I moved into the area the airport was still operated by the MoD and night flights were extremely rare.

When it became a commercial airport it was on the firm understanding that night flights would not occur. So I am afraid I find it very objectionable that supporters of the proposal would condemn and denigrate the likes of myself for finding argument against the expansion when clearly the objection against me and others like me is wholly inaccurate.

Currently I reside in the Palm Bay area which is technically outside of the "flight path" and "noise contour". During the day we can hear planes taking off and landing at Manston, indeed when modern jets were in situ we could regularly hear them testing the engines. So the absurd notion by Infratil that only a few thousand homes are going to be affected by this night flying is wrong. The fact is that the majority of Thanet will be affected by this decision.

A 737 at one mile out and 4,000 feet generates 78db noise on the ground. A plane at take-off generates 140db which is 10db louder than a pneumatic drill heard from 10 paces away (figures courtesy of Environmental Protection UK). The University of Bern produced a comprehensive research paper conclusively linking heart stress problems and psychological impairment to people living within the vicinity of an airport that operated night flights.

Additionally research carried out by the University of Southampton proved that night flights consistently affected sleep patterns in adults and that the acceptable number of decibels for disturbing was far lower than originally claimed by airports in their "acceptable flight contour readings".

In fact as proved by London University in a research document conducted on behalf of the DoH it was proved that noise levels of 40db were sufficient to disturb the sleep of children and 40 to 45db in adults. The noise levels predicted for those in the flight path will be at least 57db, more likely 70-80db. For the furthest reaches of Thanet it will be between 40 to 60db. Depending on house insulation, it is likely that at least half the residents of Thanet will be affected by this proposal.

It was also conclusively proved that with 15 per cent of subjects there was a noticeable deterioration in cognitive function, in particular it was noticed that most affected children suffered greatly from listlessness and attention deficit at school as a direct result of night-time flying.

So, maybe I am a "moaner". Personally I think I am just "concerned" and with good reason. Do I want to see Manston a vibrant and growing airport recruiting huge numbers of people from within the local area? Yes I do. But there is a problem.

If you take time to read the business plan submitted by Infratil there is no guarantee or commitment to growth in the right areas, instead it is "assumed" that by allowing night flights that the airport would then be able to attract airlines to the area. There is absolutely no prior agreement or commitment that this would happen by a third party and no guarantee that additional investment would be forthcoming. In fact as evidenced by other small airfields that have completed this process they have systematically failed to encourage airlines or external travel companies to use their airfields over the traditional London or city-based airports.

In an industry that is currently in contraction it is pure wishful thinking to assume that just by the precedence of being able to offer night flights that travel operators and airlines would flock to Thanet. The airport at Bournemouth was able to attract airlines and travel operators first and then moved to night flying later as the airport grew. In fact the only airports to move to night flights before they had operators remain dedicated cargo airports like Southend and Doncaster. Manston, it appears, is to be the exception to the rule.

So where do the 6,000 jobs come from as evidenced from the business plan? Interestingly, the jobs will come from external, related and subsidiary providers. NOT from Infratil. In fact Infratil only commit to 110 new jobs, which makes perfect sense for a small-scale cargo airport. The other 400-plus jobs only come into being after Infratil have attracted this elusive tour operator and airline.

Then what happens if Infratil fail to attract additional business to Manston, do the night flights stop? No, because a precedent has been set and Infratil now have a reasonable income from the cargo services and have planning permission for night flights. The benefit for Thanet is negligible at best, horrific at worst. We have already seen from the debacle of the banking bailout the cost of incompetent officials in their inability to apply restrictions and conditions to a business gift to aid or assist.

Yet again we are faced with the prospect of poor planning and no accountability for the sake of promises that will in all likelihood, given the current economic state, fail to deliver. What is worse the children and the health of the population of Thanet are to suffer because of a vague promise and "it could happen" attitude by the airport owners. Once more we bear the brunt of dubious decisions by our elected and paid officials.

See more on: Health

Sleepless in Thanet

Steve Dawe

Clipping: thisiskent

MANSTON airport proposes to have more night flights. To do this ignores the known health impacts of aircraft noise. Research shows exposure to aircraft noise is damaging to health and even impairs learning in children.

How productive will people in Thanet be if their sleep is disturbed, perhaps by noisy freight-carrying aircraft at night? The health evidence collected by researchers throughout the world is that there is a strong association between aviation noise at night and blood pressure problems.

There are also associations with increasing stress and anxiety. Some studies show increases in allergies – especially amongst children.

But more worrying is evidence that the learning ability of children is appreciably reduced if they live near busy airports. Near major airports, elderly people are more prone to die at earlier ages from heart and circulation problems.

Manston may opt for more air freight, bringing in higher-value lightweight items that are passed on to the China Gateway for distribution. Since employment in warehousing is low density (perhaps as little as 13 jobs an acre) and airports similarly use large areas of land for very little employment, we should all look sceptically at claims of significant jobs from Manston's expansion – or the China Gateway for that matter. We are still very much in recession and no regional airport in the UK is doing well at present. If successful, Manston and the China Gateway could potentially generate a lot more local air pollution from increased traffic. But oil prices are rising again as we head rapidly to the global peak of cheap, recoverable oil supplies, so success from these initiatives seems very unlikely.

Any perceived gain in jobs for Thanet at Manston has to be set against the losses of productivity and skills which are created by ill-health from noise and associated air pollution. What about the alternative of a combination of Pleasurama in Ramsgate, a revived Dreamland and Margate sea front and the creation of all-weather leisure facilities at Manston instead of airport expansion? Couple this with the Turner Contemporary and the possibility of a creative quarter in Margate copying Folkestone's and you might have an overall economic strategy that is more sustainable than more warehouses and more aircraft. Promotion of the No Use Empty approach to empty commercial properties – renting them at low rents rather than keeping them empty – to local arts groups and other locally-based organisations could help fill up long-term empty properties. Thanet's tourism has been day tripper-based for too long: more leisure and cultural facilities could change this.

It is a practical impossibility for the UK to cut greenhouse gas emissions if aviation use is not constrained. If aviation emissions are averaged across households, then each UK household is making about one third of its carbon emissions by the flights its members take. This is accomplished by a small proportion of households making a lot of flights and accounting for a lot of emissions in consequence. Even more surprising, the UK is top in the world for aviation emissions per adult – far ahead of the USA and other rich countries. Currently, each UK adult averages about 603 kg of carbon emissions from aviation use per year whilst the US average is only 275 kg per adult per year.

Journeys to Europe can be made by rail. This alone would cut emissions from aviation significantly. Domestic tourism and rail travel to the continent can substitute for flights, helping to boost UK tourism revenues. Kent Green Party wants all of Kent's airports converted to other leisure uses to support domestic tourism, not international flights. Wake up to this Thanet, or be woken up by night flights!

See more on: Health

Manston: healthy and safe?

Brian Urwin (of the Ramsgate Alliance) spells it out, and tells the world. Public safety zones, fuel dumps, fireworks factory, flaky airlines, bird strike, radar interference from the windfarm, and NOISE... all this and more points to Manston not being particularly healthy or safe.

---

Text of Letter to Health and Safety Exec

24th August, 2010

Judith Hackett CBE

Health and Safety Executive

Redgrave Court

Merton Road

Bootle

Merseyside

L20 7HS

Dear Ms Hackett

Many of the residents of Ramsgate have queries concerning safety at Kent International Airport located on the outskirts of town at Manston. It is less than two miles from the centre of Ramsgate and many of the planes come into land very low over our heads. The airport is operated by Infratil which is now looking to expand the hours of daylight flying from 6am to 11:30pm and have a further quota of night flights.

In its Masterplan, Infratil acknowledge that the Public Safety Zones for the airport should have been done in 2006 and were not. We are aware there is a fireworks manufacturer at the airport, situated near the end of the runway and, according to the Masterplan, it is close to one of the airport’s two fuel dumps.

Ramsgate is a town of approximately 40,000. We have looked at the Public Safety Zones at other airports and believe that there are primary schools, a secondary school, a main road, a caravan park and a hotel all situated within what should be the public safety zones for Kent International.

The airport is used primarily by cargo planes. In its July 2010, operational report Infratil states that, "Freight traffic through Manston rose 12% against the previous year for the same month, with the rolling 3 month total up 5%. The recent demise of MK Airlines is beginning to be compensated by Egypt Air and Meridian who have increased capacity."

MK Airlines was banned from flying within the EU and Meridian has within the last few weeks been banned from flying within both the UK and Belgium. That leaves Egypt Air. We understand that last year the EU flagged up serious safety concerns about the safety of Egypt Air.

“EgyptAir has been warned that it risks inclusion on the European Commission's blacklist of banned airlines unless it addresses serious concerns in several areas of its operation. In a detailed assessment of its recent blacklist revision, the Commission states that 75 inspections since January last year turned up 240 individual safety findings, including 69 in the highest of the three classifying categories.The Commission expressed "serious concern" to the Egyptian civil aviation authority in May, regarding "systemic safety deficiencies" at the flag-carrier.”[1]

These cargo planes regularly approach Manston by coming in very low across Ramsgate harbour and across the most densely populated section of the town, passing over schools and homes. As the runway is so close to the town centre, the cargo planes seem to be below 1500 feet which is the height to which sea gulls can soar. Ramsgate’s gulls are very large indeed and very numerous. We fear that a bird strike to one of these old planes could have very serious consequences for the local population. This is doubly worrying because we understand that the Rescue Fire Fighting (RFF) category is 3-9 but 24 hours notice is required depending on the category required.

This part of the coast is often subject to violent storms and particularly high winds which is why Europe’s largest operational wind farm is less than 20km off shore and London Array is about to start building another. Infratil acknowledge that wind farms cause ‘clutter’ on aircraft radar up to a radius of 30km. As the aircraft line up with Ramsgate harbour, they come well within 30km of the Vattenfall wind farm.

To summarise the safety issue, we are worried about a combination of no public safety zones, high winds, radar interference, airlines with poor safety records, aged cargo planes flying very low over densely populated areas, the marked potential for bird strike, a fireworks factory and fuel dump located close to each other and to the runway; all this and 24 hours notice required depending on the RFF category. Sooner or later, all or some of these ingredients will coalesce and there will be a disaster and it should be noted that Manston’s administrative data states that airlines using the airport are only required to carry £500,000 third party insurance.

There is also the issue of health. Our local district council concedes there has been no noise monitoring of aircraft over the town because as a local councillor put it ‘no one realised the monitor needed to be connected to an analogue line not a digital’. Many residents are also concerned about air quality and the quality of the drinking water. Infratil acknowledge that the airport is over the town’s aquifer but they do not state what steps they are taking to ensure that it is not further contaminated.

We are not asking for the airport to be shut but there are a significant number of residents who are concerned about the safety of the airport and we feel that it is only right that their worries are addressed. We believe that, given the grave nature of their concerns, the HSE is the correct body to do this although we are aware that there may well be some overlap with other bodies.

Yours faithfully

Brian Urwin

Kim Gibson

On behalf of the Ramsgate Alliance of Residents Associations.

CC. Bob Bayford, TDC

Paul Twyman, Chair of KIACC

Laura Sandys, MP

Paul Carter, KCC

David Green, Ramsgate Town Council

Liz Green, KCC

Sir Terence Farrell

Philip Hammond, Secretary of State for Transport

Theresa Villiers, Shadow Secretary of State for Transport

Geoffrey Podger, Chief Executive, Health and Safety Executive

Gordon MacDonald, Director, Hazardous Installations, Health and Safety Executive

Gretchen Burrett, Group Director Safety Regulation, CAA Board

Dame Deirdre Hutton, Chair, CAA board

Captain Roger Whitefield, CAA Board

Patrick Goudou, European Aviation Safety Agency

Ms K Riensema, Aerodrome Standards, SRG, Civil Aviation Authority

Mr T Williams, Health Safety & Environment, SRG, Civil Aviation Authority

John Allan, Chair, International Bird Strike Committee

Eric Pickles, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

[1] David Kaminski-Morrow, Deputy Editor, Air Transport Intelligence, 17th July 2009.

See more on: Health