TDC's Airport Working Party ditched

Even their harshest critics would accept that they were better than nothing, but now the AWP has been disbanded and air-brushed from history.

Why now?

I would have thought that this would be a particularly useful time to have a single, dedicated point of contact between the airport and the Council. Consider:

• the, ahem, burgeoning passenger traffic through the airport,
• British Airways pilots circling over Thanet as they get to grips with the some of the largest passenger aircraft in the world,
• Manston branching out into hosting large open-air events like the recent air show,
• the airport is STILL for sale - even if they're not involved in (or informed of) negotiations, surely TDC would want to be ready to welcome the new owners, because of...
• the need to renegotiate the S106 agreement.

How could this have happened?

Well, fingers are being pointed at Cllr John Worrow and Cllr Mike Harrison. Both went to the Overview & Scrutiny committee meeting on 28th May, when the various working parties for the coming year were set up. As Charles Hungwe (the officer in charge of the committee) wrote to me:

At the meeting of the Overview & Scrutiny Panel on 28 May 2013, Members set up 5 task & finish groups/working parties for 2013/14. Unfortunately the Airport Working Party was not one of the five. The five that were set up are as follows:

Community Safety Partnership Working Party; Corporate Improvement Working Party; Electoral Registration Process Review Task & Finish Group; Pleasurama Site Development Review Task & Finish Group; TDC Artefacts Management Review Task & Finish Group.

The AWP wasn't overlooked, far from it. It was considered and rejected, as it says in the minutes:

Some Members of the Panel said that they were still receiving complaints from residents in their wards about noise levels for aircraft landing outside permitted times. They said that the working party should be re-constituted to continue monitoring the activities at the Manston International Airport. Members expressed the view that the Airport Working Party could review the role of the airport in the proposed Thanet Economic Growth and Regeneration Strategy. Other Members however said that the Kent International Airport Consultative Committee (KIACC) had the formal role of monitoring compliance with policies on flight times.

Councillor Gibson proposed, Councillor Huxley seconded that the Airport Working Party be re-constituted.

When put to vote the motion was LOST.

Hang on a minute

The ruling Labour group has a majority (on paper, at least) on the committee, so how could they lose a vote proposed and seconded by Labour councillors?

Cllr John Worrow (multi-Independent) had stamped out of the meeting, disgusted at the company he was expected to keep, so he wasn't there to vote. And Cllr Mike Harrison (Lab) - who has been on the AWP for years, possibly from its inception - apparently did NOT vote to support the reconstitution of the AWP.

This has infuriated the Labour bigwigs, who are now desperately casting around for some means of re-running the vote and resurrecting the AWP. Given that they made manifesto pledges and ran on a platform of making the airport "resident-friendly", or at least "resident-considerate", many people would say this is the least they can do.

So where does all this leave us? As Charles Hungwe wrote to me, copying Madeline Homer:

You may wish to contact your Ward Councillor and/or Madeline Homer, Director of Community Services, if there are any issues of concern relating to the airport activities that you feel are urgent and require the attention of Council.

So I did. I replied to Charles and Madeline: 

View fullsize

but have received no reply.

Over to you

Dear Reader, perhaps you might be luckier. Drop Madeline a line - see if you can find out how TDC is proposing to manage its increasingly complex relationship with the airport during this time of uncertainty and transition.

You may also want to write to Cllr Jo Gideon to ask how she thinks TDC will manage without the committee she so ably chaired.

Airport Working Party: unprepared

The AWP may be prepared to shoot itself in the foot, but it's not preparing for much else.

In August this year - 5 months after the airport was put up for sale - the Airport Working Party had one of their games of musical chairs, when the membership and chairmanship changes. When the music stopped, Cllr Jo Gideon had become chair of the Group, the rest of the merry crew being Cllrs Alexandrou, Bruce, Gibson, Grove, Harrison, Marson and Worrow.

At that meeting in August, the AWP laid out its action plan and timetable for the foreseeable, starting with a review of the S106 and a good hard look at the results of a number of research trips to airports around Britain over the last few years.

Nothing like being prepared

The only members of the original cast to turn up for yesterday's meeting were Cllrs Alexandrou, Gideon and Marson, with Cllrs Campbell, King and Wise there as understudies, substituting for some of the absentees. It was one of those meetings where I found myself shaking my head in disbelief and growing horror, hoping that I might wake up.

The first stumbling block identified by Cllr Gideon was that none of them had the legal expertise necessary to make specific recommendations for a new S106. Fair enough. Cllr Gideon went on to say that they could instead look at why there had been so many concerns over the adequacy of the document. Good idea - identifying the flaws and short-comings of the current agreement would help when producing the next version.

However, Cllr Marson was concerned that they might just end up with a wish list of things they might like to talk about at some point in the future. Er, yes, that's the point - that "wish list" would be TDC's negotiating position, and that "point in the future" would be the negotiations.

Cllr Campbell pointed out that if the Council could come to a position on what it would want from a S106 agreement, then it would be ready to enter into negotiations with a new owner, should the opportunity arise. Thus the Council would be ready for negotiations if there is a quick sale, and it would be remiss of the Council not to have a starting position for negotiations. (EXACTLY!) Cllr Alexandrou agreed, saying that without an opening negotiating position, there is the risk that TDC will be seen as having an "anything goes" attitude, so there is a clear need for some ground rules.

The next stumbling block to be discovered was that the airport is up for sale. Er, we all knew that in August when the AWP's terms of reference were defined and the agenda for this meeting was set. Some of the AWP viewed the fact that airport is up for sale as a reason for not reviewing the S106 at all, but Cllr Alexandrou pointed out that there is currently someone to negotiate with - the current owners.

Nonetheless, Cllr Gideon concluded that the consensus was that this is the wrong time to review the S106 agreement, and that it should be revisited as and when the airport sale goes through, or a planning application is received. It would be marvellous if the AWP adopted the motto used by hundreds of thousands of scouts and guides across Britain - "Be Prepared".

It wouldn't be very difficult or time-consuming or expensive to produce an outline of TDC's ideal S106, with "must have" and "nice to have" elements listed in priority order.

• Right at the top of the list would have to be: the S106 must be attached to a planning permission - this would give TDC the leverage it is so woefully lacking at the moment.
• The new S106 must include an element of compulsion - it is absurd that the airport operator can choose whether or not to discuss the terms of its permission to operate on TDC's patch.
• The new S106 must be completely unambiguous - the current version has no clear definition of what counts as a scheduled night flight.

Do feel free to add your own ideas for what should be included in the new S106 in the comments section below.

Wasted Journeys

Our attention was then turned to the reports produced by earlier AWP outings to airports around the country. The intrepid councillors had been to Prestwick (Glasgow), Southend, Norwich, Bristol, Bournemouth and Luton. Cllr Gideon dismissed the papers as "reading a bit like someone's diary - not an incisive or meaty comparison document the AWP could do something with". Oh dear. Perhaps it was just as well that none of the councillors who spent all those days and nights away from their constituencies were present to see their work being rubbished.

Self-destruct

And things went from bad to worse. Having decided that there was no way they could force Infratil into a root-and-branch review of the S106, the AWP thought it might be a good idea to go to Infratil with the suggestion of making some "minimal amendments - bringing the agreement up to date, data compliance and so on".

This would be a disaster. The S106 stipulates re-negotiation every 3 years (although we all know this has not happened so far). Any negotiation with Infratil to make minor tweaks to the S106 would effectively reset the 3 year clock.

This would mean that the new owner of the airport (and Infratil for as long as they continue to own the airport) would then be completely within their rights to refuse to enter into any further S106 negotiations with TDC for the next 3 years.

---

---

Where the S106 renegotiation is concerned, the only thing worse than doing nothing is not doing enough.

Labour's red letter day at expense of Tories

Thanet Conservative party took a pounding in Thursday's district elections, leaving three independent councillors with the power to decide who will lead the council. The Tories were ousted from six seats in Thursday's poll – losing five to Labour and one to a new independent – meaning they forfeit overall control of Thanet council.

One of the greatest shocks was the loss of Ramsgate's Nethercourt ward by Tories Jill Kirby and Brenda Rogers to Labour rookies Kim Gibson and Steve Alexandrou. Mrs Gibson and Mr Alexandrou, who both live on the flight path to Manston Airport, took a tough stance against night flights during their election campaign. Both Labour candidates were also elected to the town council. Mrs Gibson said:

"I think the swinger was the night flights. When I was campaigning, residents also told me that they felt let down by them and that they didn't live on the ward. What you see is what you get and we will not put up with the nonsense that goes on at full council."

Conservative leader Bob Bayford took a positive stance on his party's performance. He said:

"I am satisfied at how well the Conservative share of the vote has held in this election. Far more people in Thanet voted for the Conservatives than for Labour. A marginal increase in the Labour vote of 5 per cent has given them a disproportionate increase in seats."

Labour's leader Clive Hart said:

"We have made huge gains and for that I am very happy. We were just two votes apart on one councillor in Beacon Road Ward. It was extremely close, just two votes out."

The picture was equally bad for the Tories on Ramsgate town council where they were all but wiped out – only Pat Doyle retained a seat for the Conservatives. Labour increased its seats on Ramsgate town council to 15 out of 16 places. Conservatives held on to control of Broadstairs Town Council. A spokesman at Thanet council stressed that Conservative, Labour and the independents must reach a deal by the council's annual meeting, saying:

"Decisions about which party will be running the council will be made at the annual council meeting that is due to take place on Thursday, May 19. At this meeting, the chairman and leader of the council will be elected. In the meantime, the council will continue to run its day-to-day business with the responsibility falling to the chief executive. He will consult with the main group leaders on any significant issues that need to be decided on."

IoT Gazette 13th May 2011

Night flights stance 'clinched seats'

One of the crunch seats in last Thursday's poll may have been lost over the issue of night flights from Manston airport. Residents living under the flight path ditched Conservative councillors Jill Kirby and Brenda Rogers for anti-night flight Labour rookies Kim Gibson and Steve Alexandrou. Miss Gibson believes her party's tough stance on night flights clinched the seats. She said:

"I think what swung it was the night flights. When I was campaigning, residents told me they felt let down by the Conservatives and that they didn't live on the ward. Night flights is an incredibly important issue for people living here and people want us to fight these plans."

Mrs Kirby, the wife of Kent county councillor John Kirby, admitted the airport was a huge issue for residents. Mrs Kirby, who said she will now quit politics, said:

"It was put about that we would vote for night flights, but the Conservatives have always promised a free vote. When we carried out a survey last year we asked residents if they were OK with extending the shoulder periods for flights but not night flights. I think the council needs younger councillors now."

Nethercourt ward saw the third highest turnout across the district election.  The owners of Manston airport have asked Thanet council to lift a ban on flights after 11pm and before 7am. Infratil says that the flexibility for having planes land and take-off between these times is crucial for the airport's development. 

Chief executive Charles Buchanan refused to be drawn on the consequences of last Thursday's poll, which could see Labour with its policy of no night flights, take control of the council.  Mr Buchanan said:

"The position is clear. We had an application for the management of night-time flying – that application outlined the need for the airlines to be able to fly at night. We proposed a schedule of night-time activity and we will work with the local authority to make sure this business can flourish. The ability to schedule night time activity is an important part of developing Thanet's economy."

thisiskent 13th May 2011