CPRE says night flights at Manston will not boost business

The campaign group says night flights could actually damage Thanet’s economic growth. Protect Kent, the Campaign to Protect Rural England’s county branch, says there is little evidence that night flights at Manston Airport will significantly help the local economy. Campaigns manager Andrew Ogden said:

“The fact that Flybe are pulling out in March because they cannot fill planes is damning proof of the lack of demand for flights out of Manston. We simply cannot see how allowing night flights will help Manston grow as a passenger airport, and therefore generate both jobs and economic sustainability for the area.”

Business leaders in Thanet, including the chamber of commerce, recently called for the night flight plans to be given the go ahead by Thanet council. They argued it would be the only way the airport has a commercial future after the low cost airline Flybe pulled out of running domestic passenger flights.

The charity says the plans could actually damage the area’s growing tourism industry. Mr Ogden added:

“We consider that the only reason for night flights is to bring in more freight. This is not the kind of business that Thanet needs, as it will not employ the inflated numbers of people that Infratil [the airport’s owners] and business leaders are claiming it will.”

“We ask that there be a full and unrestricted public consultation before any night flights are allowed. This should be open and transparent, with all the facts available. This will enable the people of East Kent to weigh up the benefits and disadvantages of night flights and lobby Thanet District Council accordingly. It is only right they be given this opportunity, as it is their communities and environment that will be significantly affected by the implementation of night flights.”

kentnews 11th Jan 2012

Foley's folly

I've never met David Foley, but I assume in my usual good-natured way that he is a decent guy. I have been interviewed with him on BBC Radio Kent, when he rather irritatingly talked across me, but that's hardly a hanging offence.

A quick search on the Internet reveals that Mr Foley is active in a number of local organisations ranging from the National War Memorial to the Royal Society of Arts, which is commendable – community involvement is "a good thing".

I assume that Mr Foley has experienced business head on his shoulders, which makes the apparent naivete of some of his comments in the press all the more surprising.

Flybe has been a very good user at Manston and has brought in a new dimension but it is not the only airline in the world. If we can get an international carrier in then that will dwarf the few domestic flights Flybe operated.

It is of course true that Flybe is not the only airline in the world, but it is one of the few that has been persuaded to use Manston airport. It has also stopped using Manston airport due to lack of passengers. If an international carrier could be "got", then it probably would have happened by now. I think it's a pretty safe bet that ever since Infratil bought Manston, they will have been trying their utmost to do just that.

The airport says it will deliver 3,000 jobs by 2018.

Absolutely true, Mr Foley. Manston's business plan makes the prediction that in the year 2018 the airport will employee 3000 people to handle 3 million passengers – a thousand jobs per million passengers. This is about four times the ratios that we see in comparable airports across the UK. For example, Glasgow Prestwick airport (which is owned by the same company that owns Manston) employs 250 people per million passengers. Infratil's sales pitch is that they will willingly over-staff Manston airport by 400%. And Mr Foley believes it.

Infratil is a very different company from EUjet. It has deeper pockets. It has pumped around £40m into Manston. It has been a benign investor in the best sense of the word. It is in the best position to plan its future strategy.

Infratil is an infrastructure investment company which promises its shareholders a 20% return on investment. There is nothing "benign" about Infratil's behaviour in any of its business dealings – its success in New Zealand, Australia and the Pacific is a result of hardheaded commercial decisions. Infratil is currently thinking of selling Prestwick airport (it's only other European airport) because of its poor performance. Prestwick's performance far outstrips Manston's performance, which doesn't bode well for Manston's future.

Inward investors with £40 million to spend on improving our infrastructure are in short supply. We must cherish Infratil and remind the doubters that Manston Airport has been in operation since 1915.

The £40 million the Infratil has poured in Manston, to the dismay of some of its investors, has not improved our infrastructure. This money has effectively disappeared, to cover the costs of the loss-making airport. We can cherish Infratil much as we like, but that will have no influence on what looks like an increasingly inevitable business decision to leave Manston.

I am continually surprised that people refer to Manston's venerable history as a military airport as if it has any bearing on the current situation. Instead, attention should focus on the airport's performance since 1999 when it passed into private hands. It has made a loss ever since.

David Foley is Chief Executive of Thanet and East Kent Chamber Ltd which is often referred to as a Chamber of Commerce. I don't know if it's standard practice to set up a Chamber of Commerce as a limited company, but Thanet and East Kent Chamber Ltd doesn't feature anywhere on the website of the British Chambers of Commerce. BCC is the national body for a Network of Accredited Chambers of Commerce across the UK.

It is David Foley's role in Thanet and East Kent Chamber Ltd that makes him the "go to guy" for the local press when it comes to local business issues. Having looked at their website I am none the wiser as to how many local businesses have paid for membership of Mr Foley's enterprise, or what kind of companies they might be. It seems likely that Manston airport has paid for membership.

I'll be pleased to hear from anyone who is a member of the Thanet and East Kent Chamber, particularly those in the tourism and hospitality industries. I'm also curious to know when and how Mr Foley canvassed the opinions of his members regarding night flights.

David Foley backs night flights

As part of the continuing PR offensive, Manston airport has roped in David Foley to bang the drum for night flights, as if they're not noisy enough already. The local papers are describing David Foley as "business leaders", despite the fact that there is very obviously just one of him. More of this in another post.

---

News that the airline operator Flybe is scrapping Edinburgh service sparks new demands for more flexible flight schedules. 

Business leaders in Thanet have demanded that night flights be given the go ahead at Manston airport in order to attract passenger airlines after Flybe confirmed it was to scrap its service to Edinburgh in March. The firm said the route was not proving financially viable – thus delivering the latest blow to the terminal as it looks to establish itself within the mass market.

David Foley from Thanet and East Kent Chamber of Commerce said:

“Flybe has been a very good user at Manston and has brought in a new dimension but it is not the only airline in the world. If we can get an international carrier in then that will dwarf the few domestic flights Flybe operated.”

Flybe also cancelled its Manchester service from the airport last year. In 2005, budget airline EUjet launched a host of services at Manston, but they collapsed due to a lack of demand.

The airport’s owner Infratil has put in an application to Thanet council for more flights between 11pm and 7am. It says by 2018 they would average around 3.2 flights per night, but campaign groups are opposed to the idea.

Mr Foley argued airport expansion should be given the go ahead because it offered Thanet the best employment opportunities in the medium term. He said:

“The airport says it will deliver 3,000 jobs by 2018. The increase in air passenger duty is not good for airlines but it does put a greater emphasis on airports that can serve northern European hub airports. Manston is in a wonderful position to do that. Infratil is a very different company from EUjet. It has deeper pockets. It has pumped around £40m into Manston. It has been a benign investor in the best sense of the word. It is in the best position to plan its future strategy.”

Manston airport chief executive Charles Buchanan said:

“The decision by Flybe reinforces the need for the airport’s proposals for limited and managed scheduled night-time flights to be agreed with Thanet District Council in order to compete with other national and regional airports.”

Thanet council leader Cllr Clive Hart, said:

“This is obviously disappointing news and will have an impact on the east Kent economy, but in the current economic climate, we can understand Flybe’s decision. As we have made clear, the council will be consulting local people on the issue of night flights in the New Year.”

kentnews.co.uk 1st Jan 2012

---

If we are to maintain our schools, emergency services, social services, defence commitments and all the heavy demands we place on government at all levels, it is essential that we support the businesses that fund the public sector. This is particularly true in Thanet which has the highest unemployment in Kent.

The airport at Manston represents our best bet to create sustainable, worthwhile jobs in Thanet in the medium and long term. Inward investors with £40 million to spend on improving our infrastructure are in short supply. We must cherish Infratil and remind the doubters that Manston Airport has been in operation since 1915.

David Foley, Thanet & East Kent Chamber.

thisiskent 17th Nov 2011

Threat to night time flights bid

Plans for night flights from Manston Airport could be under threat as the Labour takes control of the council. Airport director Charles Buchanan is looking to meet with the new administration which campaigned in May's election on the promise it would oppose night flights. Mr Buchanan said:

"We are looking to meet with the new administration at the earliest opportunity and discuss the proposals we have put forward."

Despite an anti-night flight stance in its manifesto the Labour group has yet to comment on the latest proposals by Manston Airport. One Labour councillor who has spoken out against night flights is Ramsgate Mayor David Green. He said:

"The position is being looked at more or less as we speak. I can not say what it will be, it is quite difficult. We are taking time to talk to everyone involved."

Since Manston Airport submitted its proposals for an average of eight flights a night (between 11pm and 7am), many Labour councillors have been reluctant to comment on the issue through fear that any pre-determination would preclude them from voting on night flights in any future debate.

thisiskent 23rd Dec 2012

Seasoned greetings...

A reader wrote (to the powers that be):

---

Dear All,

This morning at daft o'clock (21st Dec at 04:30) a noisy jet landed at Manston.

The pilot clearly had a mission to wake as many people (and the dead) as he could, as the noisy approach of this jet woke me up well before descending over Ramsgate/landing with the amount of throttling backwards and forward on approach, but his/her fun did not stop there no sireeee, they devoted their time to make as much use of reverse thrust as possible.

Well, at least they (the crew) and Infratil gave us the residents of Ramsgate a clear message - and that was screw you.

Merry Xmas

Flybe quit Manston

Flybe has said it will not be flying from Manston International Airport in Kent after March. The airline said it would cease operations there at the end of the winter season. Flybe launched its Manston to Edinburgh service in May 2010. Flybe spokesman Niall Duffy said:

"We tried different routes and the numbers simply weren't there. It's impossible to sustain routes without the passengers.

Unfortunately for the Manston services it was just impossible to look at those passenger numbers and think that we could sustain the kind of difficulties we were facing.

It is fair to say that Manston is one of the airports with the smaller catchment areas in the United Kingdom, and you have Gatwick not too far away."

The airline said passengers booked on flights after March would be contacted by Flybe and offered a full refund or tickets on alternative flights.

BBC online 22nd Dec 2011

---

Flybe is axing its services between Kent International Airport and Edinburgh. The shock move, which takes effect from the end of the winter season on March 25, has been blamed on the tough economic climate. The Edinburgh service was regarded as Manston's jewel in the crown.

The decision is a blow to Manston's reputation which also suffered when Flybe axed its Manchester service because of weak passenger demand. Senior Kent figures have been promoting expansion at Manston rather than back controversial proposals for a hub airport on or off the Kent coast.

kentonline 22nd Dec 2011

---

Flybe will end its flights at Manston airport on March 25 and passengers who have already booked a flight on the summer schedule will either be fully refunded or booked onto a flight departing from another airport, the IoT Gazette reports. In a statement, Simon Lilley, Flybe's director of marketing said:

"It is with regret that Flybe can confirm it will cease its operations from Manston International Airport with effect from the end of the winter season on March 25, 2012. Flybe carefully reviews the viability of all our 200-plus routes on a regular basis looking not only at passenger numbers but also at external cost pressures. This is done not only to monitor where we can offer increased regularity on a given route but also where passenger numbers make a flight uneconomic.

Our ongoing commitment to Manston has been reliant on the success of the Edinburgh service that we launched in May 2010.  Despite extensive marketing of this route both in Scotland and throughout SE England, the challenging economic environment with which we are all faced has meant passenger numbers remain at unsustainable levels, and are insufficient to financially justify its continued operation.

All passengers who have booked flights online for next summer will be contacted by Flybe and offered a full refund or re-accommodated on alternate flights; and in the interim we look forward to welcoming on board those passengers who continue to book and use our Edinburgh service from now through to the end of March."

The decision comes after Flybe axed flights from Manston to Manchester due to lack of passenger demand.

Airport bosses have urged Thanet council to support Manston's plans for night flights, on the grounds that it needs greater flexibility to compete with other airports. Charles Buchanan, Chief Executive of Manston Airport, said:

"While obviously disappointed, we understand that the decision has been taken as part of Flybe's ongoing review of its 200 routes. Launched in May 2010, the service initially performed well. However, like many other internal UK routes it suffered from the economic downturn. Inbound and outbound passenger numbers, although initially good have unfortunately tailed off as household budgets and discretionary spend has tightened.

The decision by Flybe reinforces the need for the airport's proposals for limited and managed scheduled night-time flights to be agreed with Thanet District Council in order to compete with other national and regional airports. Without the ability to compete it will be very difficult to secure a commitment from other airlines to base aircraft at Manston and deliver a truly sustainable regional airport which will underpin the future health of the East Kent economy."

Commenting on the decision, Sandra Matthews-Marsh, Chief Executive at Visit Kent, said:

"This is disappointing news for East Kent in a very challenging economic climate for the travel and tourism industry."

Flybe also runs a service between Manston and Belfast – which will also end, said a company spokesman.

thisiskent 22nd Dec 2011

Clive Hart, night flights and pre-election pledges

Here's a snippet from a recent interview with Clive Hart shortly after he managed to take leadership of the Council from Bob Bayford. The rest of the article, which you can read by clicking the link below, covers a wide range of topics of interest to Margate, Ramsgate and the rest of the Thanet.

This excerpt is about night flights, and is therefore of interest to a lot of North East Kent. I think Clive Hart is being overly cautious about the tricky question of predetermination, which is fine. What I am more concerned about is his apparent inability to deliver the whole of his party when it comes to a vote on night flights.

---

If Mr Hart is confident he can deliver all the pledges made by his group at May's elections, there is one important exception – night flights from Manston airport.

Labour's manifesto in May was clear. The party would oppose any scheduled flights after 11pm and before 7pm. This distinction to the Conservative's policy, which promised their councillors a free vote on the controversial issue, was credited by Labour for ousting the Tories from Ramsgate seats – the town most affected by night flights – helping to produce the hung council.

Mr Hart is a little coy on the subject of the airport owner's application for night flights, which has now been made to Thanet council.

He explains that to say his party will vote no to night flights could be construed as "prejudging" the issue if the application by Infratil becomes the subject of a planning application. This would disbar them from a vote.

"There is a caveat about the airport. There is the policy we stood on in May, but if the matter does become a planning application my members have to take every bit of evidence into account, like I do on all matters, I would have to weigh the pros of jobs, over cons of the environment."

In reality, Ramsgate's Labour councillors are highly unlikely to vote yes to night flights. Colleagues from parts of the district not under the flight paths could, however, if they felt that the airport's promises of jobs outweigh the impact of the flights.

Might some of the electorate feel that this line is something of a U-turn, or at least a backtrack on May's unequivocal "no to night flights" stance?

"They may," says Mr Hart, smiling awkwardly.

Mr Hart says that the matter of night flights may not become a matter of a planning application and the district council is seeking legal advice on whether regular flights between 11pm and 7am would constitute an "intensification of use" or not.

Maidline Homer, director of community services, should have the answer to this question by the new year.

thisiskent 16th Dec 2011

Quick question

A reader writes:

Have recently become more involved in NNF's campaign. Much to digest and eventually understand. Have emailed Manston, MP/councillors about recent flights - as per your website advice.

What I don't quite understand at the moment is - when flights do come over during the restricted hours - who/which organisation has responsibility to decide if they are operating outside of the current agreement/legislation and then who/what organisation then places fines etc onto Infratil?

Thank you for your time.

SM

Hmmm... good questions, which highlight the shortcomings of the current S106 agreement between the Council and the airport.

The agreement explicitly forbids scheduled night flights, using the following definition:

"regular night flying operations" means flight movements which are scheduled or programmed and which occur frequently or regularly to the same or similar pattern for the same operator during night-time.

The problem is that it is down to the airport to decide (or admit) whether a flight is scheduled or not, and self-regulation is a notoriously bad way to run anything.

Flights that are not scheduled, but arrive during the restricted hours, are only fined if they exceed a certain noise threshold. The flight arrived at 3:30 AM on 9 December, for example, was rated as QC2 and will not attract a fine. The next level up is QC4, which would also not attract a fine. The next level above that is QC8, which would attract a fine of £1000 for the first offence – and the fine doubles on each subsequent offence.

The airport is expected to confess to each and every breach of the agreement, and the Council is supposed to be monitoring the airport's performance. The Council has admitted that its monitoring of the airport has fallen short of what is expected and required, so we cannot be certain that the airport is confessing to every misdemeanour.

The result of all this is completely unsatisfactory for everyone who lives within earshot of the flight path. The S106 agreement is supposed to regulate the activity of the airport in order to protect the quality of life of those who live nearby. Clearly, it fails to do this. All too frequently, the residents of Ramsgate, Herne Bay and the Thanet Villages are woken from their sleep and the operators of the offending aircraft go unpunished.

On the bright side, there has been a recent change of leadership at TDC. The local elections in May this year resulted in a finely balanced Council which has recently flipped from Conservative to Labour leadership (the new Leader is Clive Hart). This may result in a fundamental change in the nature of the relationship between the Council and the airport. Until now, the Council seems to have been bending over backwards to give the airport whatever it wants. We may now be entering a phase when the well-being and wishes of the residents are also weighed in the balance. I hope so.

Being hung might be the best outcome

"May you live in interesting times" ran the old Chinese curse, and it appears that Thanet may be about to overdose on political "interest".

The local election in May left Thanet with a more-or-less hung council: 27 Conservative, 26 Labour and 3 Independents. In exchange for chairmanship of their preferred committees, the Indies backed Cllr Bayford's bid for leadership - oh well, at least it was naked self-interest, rather than anything underhand...

However, it didn't change the maths of the situation, so when John Worrow resigned the Conservative party whip (apparently disgusted by "his" party's treatment of animal export protesters, and their disregard for the plight of Birchington businessmen), the main parties were back at level pegging, and the door was opened to tonight's confidence vote and subsequent leadership vote.

Bob Bayford lost the confidence vote. Inexplicably, the Conservatives then presented him as the candidate for Leader. He lost again. Cllr Clive Hart is now Leader.

So what?

Theoretically, this game of musical chair could be played out at every full Council meeting, with the outcome being decided by the level of attendance, and the whim of the Independents. Clearly, this would be a totally ineffective way to run the Council. Personally, I'm rather taken with Michael Child's assessment:

Essentially the problems revolve around there being no councillor charismatic enough to be a leader who would take all of the councillors with them and sort out some of the serious problems that Thanet has.

I don’t think either the Labour or the Conservative group have grasped the fundamentals of working within a situation where they have no overall majority. I think most councillors see the resolutions in terms of personal gain, handing out posts to independents that carry a good allowance, rather than in terms of actually trying resolve Thanet’s problems.

I think what I would do, if I was in the position of leading either group, would be to start with a list of objectives for the term of the current administration, put those objectives in the public domain, with a challenge to the independents to support them.

Herein lies the key. With the democratic power being so finely balanced, the solution must be found beyond the narrow interests of the representatives. Attention must be focussed on the wider and over-arching purpose of the representatives - to represent and promote the wishes and best interests of those they represent.

If the TDC councillors fail to grasp what is so often irritatingly called the "bigger picture", we're in for a long and dispiriting round of political mud-wrestling, petty squabbling, tit-for-tat point-scoring and venal pork barrel politics.

On the other hand, they could step back and look afresh at their duty to their community. Wherever they stand on the political spectrum, it must be clear to each and every councillor that Thanet has a number of glaringly obvious problems. Typically these require long-term solutions that need to be started immediately (or soon) and then pursued tenaciously - get stuck in, and stick at it.

This is the time for the councillors to concentrate on what matters to the electorate rather then what matters to the elected. Instead of squabbling (or at the very least, before becoming completely engrossed in squabbling) they could easily identify a handful of key objectives, policies or solutions that they largely agree on, and get cracking.

It is widely accepted within the Council that the relationship with Manston (particularly the S106 agreement and its monitoring) has been poorly handled, with the people of Thanet getting the short end of the stick - "if we were starting again, we wouldn't start from here".

Grasp the nettle, Cllr Hart:

• Discard the pretence that Manston is an "airfield" and embrace the fact that is an "airport".
• Acknowledge the potential that a well-managed and thriving local airport would have.
• Accept that the central pillar of that good management must be proper planning consent for the airport and its operations as a whole, to rationalise and replace the piecemeal development of the last decade.
• Order an Environmental Impact Assessment to provide independent guidance for what is acceptable and sustainable.
• Put in place an S106 agreement that puts Kentish lives and quality of life before share-holder interests, and then monitor and enforce it.

Life under the flight path

Hi,

I attended your meeting at Chatham House School on Friday 25.11.11 and I was impressed to see so many like minded people ready to stand against Manston Airports plans, great meeting, great job done by all the speakers, keep up the good work.

I brought along a copy of a photo which I was asked to send to you. I live on a Mobile home park known as Smugglers Leap which is situated in a large chalk pit next to the Minster roundabout Ramsgate, this park is directly situated next to the flight path of planes coming into land from the Canterbury direction, I am supplying a photo of a 747 coming into land, the roof apex in this photo is my mobile home.

Coming into land this way is not so bad but when large planes take off over our direction the noise is considerably more and the thrust of the engines can be felt, indeed our mobile homes shake, I have no problem with Manston expanding if it is helping our local economy but if regular night flying is to become the norm then living in my home will obviously become impossible.

And to those people who say "well you chose to live there" I can only reply that some of us have no choice but to live in places like this indeed some of us are not as fortunate as people who can afford to move into large well insulated houses.