Boris shoots own foot in sympathy

NEWSFLASH: the real reasons Flybe quit Manston - click HERE

---

'Boris Island' airport plan grounded over Johnson's briefing to Telegraph

An artist's impression of Norman Foster's design for a new four-runway airport on the Thames estuary

Downing Street told Boris Johnson on Wednesday that he had killed off any moves towards an airport in the Thames Estuary ahead of the next general election after an announcement by the London mayor was seized on by the Liberal Democrats. 

David Cameron and George Osborne, who have become alarmed by growing business anxiety about their opposition to expanding Heathrow, had indicated they were warm about a new airport which would assume Heathrow's role as a hub.

But the London mayor was told that he had handed a gift to the Lib Dems, who are opposed to any airport expansion in the south-east, when he briefed the Daily Telegraph that Downing Street had signed up to his proposal. A Whitehall source said:

"Boris is not going to get it. Yes to scoping on a new airport, but he won't get it. The way this has plopped out in the Telegraph, no doubt via Boris's team, has given people a chance to kill it."

The Lib Dems will support a consultation by Justine Greening, the transport secretary, on how to maintain a hub, but they will oppose any new airport. A Lib Dem source said:

"We are against airport expansion in the south-east. We are happy to go along with the consultation, but we have a policy which will not change."

Johnson was upbeat on Wednesday evening after he outlined his plans to a meeting of the Conservative 1922 committee.

"We must not count our chickens or over-egg this – to continue with a chicken metaphor – [but] the government is still looking at all the options. But George really gets the point about regeneration and jobs in the Thames estuary and the amazing capacity of a big transport hub to drive Britain's competitiveness for a long time to come."

The proposed airport would be an international hub that could open up new routes to south-east Asia and have capacity for connecting flights. At present, the British aviation industry says the nation is losing out to rivals airports such as Schiphol in Amsterdam and Charles de Gaulle in Paris. The government has ruled out a third runway at Heathrow, as has Labour since leaving power, a current political reality that has been reluctantly accepted by the industry.

Colin Matthews, the chief executive of airports operator BAA, said he was "pleased there was an acknowledgement that there was a need" for more airport capacity, but it would take decades to construct a whole new airport.

"The recognition today is that it matters to the UK economy, to jobs and to growth. There's no reason why any option should be ruled out."

Greening, however, has also ruled out further runways at Gatwick and Stansted in answers to parliamentary questions. Johnson told the BBC:

"You can't go on expecting Britain to compete with France and Germany when we simply can't supply the flights to growth destinations."

Heathrow, he said, was "fundamentally in the wrong place". He said listening to the "Heathrow recidivists" who argue that other options for airport expansion take too long would only lead to paralysis.

In his autumn statement, Osborne indicated the government would consider all options for airport expansion, which he sees as an opportunity for economic regeneration.

The architect Norman Foster has drawn up plans for an airport on the Isle of Grain, the easternmost point of the Hoo peninsula, with four runways and which could handle 150m passengers a year – double the current number passing through Heathrow. It is the latest in a range of proposals dating back decades for the estuary, including a mooted "Boris Island" airport at nearby Shivering Sands.

Aircraft would, however, have to contend with the multitudes of birds that flock in the area – a hazard to aviation and an issue that has brought opposition from environmental groups. The RSPB said it was a vital habitat for wildfowl and wading birds. Balpa, the pilots' union, said it would seek reassurances on the dangers posed by birdstrikes, as well as potential air traffic conflicts with Brussels, Heathrow and London City airports.

Guardian 18th Jan 2012

Cameron shoots everybody in the foot, himself first

NEWSFLASH: the real reasons Flybe quit Manston - click HERE

---

How not to make a decision on Boris Island

There is a right way and a wrong way to make decisions on airports and Cameron’s approach would have been destroyed in the courts.  The 2008 Act, and the EU SEA directive, and the Greenpeace caselaw all set out a proper process for making such decisions:

Set out the need for the development and options in a draft aviation NPS;

Carry out an SEA and consultation;

Choose an option and put the NPS to parliament;

Minister makes final decision.

Of course a minister can be minded to change a policy but they can't show predetermination. Announcing support for ‘Boris Island’ before the need had been established, before that site had been shown to be practical or even if there were not much better sites (which they are) would have been a recipe for successful JR.

Yet again Cameron has shown that he is is own worst enemy when it comes to major policy decisions when he ignores the advice of DCLG and DT civil servents.  The rules aren't that complicated - they can be written on the back of an envelope.

Andrew Lainton 17th Jan 2012

---

David Cameron to give his provisional support to estuary airport

Cameron is expected to offer his provisional support to Boris’s estuary airport scheme. He is now thought to back the project, though he was initially against it.

The Thames airport proposal will be in the government’s aviation policy consultation that starts in March, though Downing Street says the government will make a final decision on the basis of the consultation process. This announcement may have been intended for earlier in the month, and may have been delayed by doubts by Nick Clegg. The Lib Dems used to have a policy to oppose airport expansion. 

Since we have committed to spend £32 billion on HST, there isn’t a lot of spare money for other projects.

AirportWatch 17th Jan 2012

---

Cameron paves the way for new London airport

The Prime Minister is expected to offer his provisional support for a scheme originally proposed by Boris Johnson, the Mayor of London. The Government had planned to announce preliminary backing for the scheme on Jan 3, with feasibility studies beginning in the Spring. The announcement was expected to be linked to plans for a second high-speed rail line as part of the Government’s long-term vision for Britain’s transport infrastructure.

Nick Clegg, the Deputy Prime Minister, blocked the announcement amid concerns that it was being rushed out and had not been thought through. No 10 sources said a decision on aviation strategy was now due to be announced in March and that “discussions are ongoing”.

The Daily Telegraph understands that Mr Cameron will be supportive of the proposed airport but will make a final decision on the basis of the consultation process. Mr Clegg is said to have an “open mind” over the proposal but is keen to consider the views of environmental campaigners and residents. The Liberal Democrat position is currently to oppose airport expansion.

The ongoing discussions over the airport plan — and Mr Clegg’s intervention over the proposed announcement — have led to Coalition tensions. Senior Tories suspect that Mr Clegg is uneasy about allowing Government backing for the scheme before the election for the Mayor of London as it would provide a boost for Mr Johnson’s campaign.

One senior Conservative source said: “No 10 was all ready to announce the new airport and then at the last minute Nick Clegg stepped in to block it.”

Another Tory source claimed: “It was a purely political act that had nothing to do with the national interest.”

However, a senior Liberal Democrat source said:

“Aviation policy is very sensitive and we didn’t support rushing out an announcement over the New Year. The consultation will almost certainly be launched in March and Nick Clegg does not have a fixed view on the outcome.”

Mr Johnson has advocated building an airport on a man-made island in the Thames Estuary to cope with the growing pressure on other London facilities. He claims that without providing more airport capacity, the capital will lose jobs as businesses relocate elsewhere in Europe.

Environmental campaigners claim it will boost global warming emissions and endanger wildlife.

Mr Johnson has ordered his own detailed review of the plan. He recently said:

“The capital’s airports are full, our runways are rammed and we risk losing jobs to Frankfurt, Amsterdam, Madrid or other European cities should we fail to act. No other city even approaches the volume of passengers handled at London’s airports but we need to start planning for a brand new airport that can help meet the ever-increasing demand for aviation and act as a hub, particularly to the rest of the UK.”

The Prime Minister has refused to allow the expansion of Heathrow on environmental grounds and was previously thought to be lukewarm about the prospect of a new airport. However, both he and George Osborne, the Chancellor, are thought to have become more interested.

Telegraph 17th Jan 2012, Robert Winnett, Political Editor

Online comment:

So let’s look at this decision. Instead of building a third runway at Heathrow at a cost of a few billion pounds, Cameron wants to build a £20 billion airport on the estuary. The total cost of the project is £50 billion when you add in an orbital railway and other infrastructure. And this is somehow better for the environment. In what way? Not in engine emissions.

What this decision is about is that Cameron wanted to keep seats around Heathrow at the last election. Philip Hammond’s constituency is nearby and Justine Greening’s is under the flight path. So the government has decided to spend tens of billions more than is required to save seats around Heathrow. The level of stupidity is beyond limits for this government.

And who will be funding this airport? Since we have committed to spend £32 billion on HST, there isn’t a lot of spare money for other projects. So much for an Oxford education when you study PPE.

More airport expansion

NEWSFLASH: the real reasons Flybe quit Manston - click HERE

---

Well, well - here's another airport in the south-east that's looking to expand. Their proposal for 57% growth will be rushed through public consultation in just 4 weeks. They are promising to continue to be a "good neighbour". They say that the impact on the environment noise and road traffic flows will be "fully evaluated".

They even say that they will be submitting a planning application. Ahem. Nudge, nudge. Wouldn't it be nice if all airports had planning permission?

Following the BBC news item below, you will find a report from the trade press which talks about "6.5 million passengers" creating "6,000 jobs". This mythical golden ratio of 1,000 jobs per million passengers should be familiar to regular readers of this blog.

And who's peddling these wildly optimistic numbers? The propeller-heads' favourite number-mongers – York Aviation. Step forward, take a bow and your customary large cheque.

---

Luton expansion plans

Luton airport -  the UK’s 5th biggest –  has announced a 4 week consultation on its plans that will start on 6th February.  It has plans to increase the annual number of passengers.

It would handle 18 million passengers a year under the plan, up from 11.5 million. Work “can be achieved within the airport’s existing boundary and using the existing runway”.  Once the consultation ends, the airport hopes to submit a planning application in April. The airport says:

“Impacts on the environment, noise and road traffic flows will be fully evaluated as part of the process.”

The airport announced plans for road improvements in November to reduce anticipated congestion at the time of the Olympics. Some of the work is paid for by public funds.

AirportWatch 16th Jan 2012

---

London Luton Airport hopes to boost passenger numbers

Luton airport has announced plans to boost passenger numbers by nearly seven million a year.  [18 million would be more like 9 million over the 2010 figure]. 

Proposals released by London Luton Airport Limited (LLAL) aim to also create 6,000 jobs. The airport, the UK’s fifth biggest, would handle 18 million passengers a year under the plan, up from 11.5 million. [Highest was 10.2 million in 2008.  Down to 8.7 million in 2010]. 

Its 57% growth bid comes after claims of an air travel capacity shortage in south east England, by 2020. A four-week public consultation will begin on the 6 February and will include a series of public exhibitions around the region.

The project, known as “futureLuToN:Optimisation”, has already been introduced to the airport’s consultative committee, which represents local residents, councils and community groups. In a statement, LLAL said the growth “can be achieved within the airport’s existing boundary and using the existing runway” and it will consider what modifications and improvements will be required.

LLAL Chair, Councillor Robin Harris said the airport needed to be ready to “embrace market demand in the future” but it would “listen carefully” before submitting a planning application.

“The benefits that will flow from the airport’s development will be realised in the local, regional and national economies. We are committed to ensure the airport will continue to be a good neighbour and any growth in passenger numbers is managed in a responsible manner. Impacts on the environment, noise and road traffic flows will be fully evaluated as part of the process.”

LLAL has said it intends to submit a planning application for consideration in or around April, at which time a further statutory consultation will be undertaken by Luton Borough Council as planning authority.

BBC online 16th Jan 2012

---

Luton Airport to expand to 18mppa

London Luton Airport has announced “ambitious plans” to optimise capacity at the gateway by around 57% so it will be able to handle at least 18 million passengers a year by 2020. The gateway said that plans to increase capacity by an additional 6.5 million passengers would take shape using the existing runway and within the airports current boundaries.

According to the airport owner – London Luton Airport Limited (LLAL) – the gateway’s current maximum capacity is 11.5 million passengers with 9.6 million expected up to the end of March 2012. In the calendar year for 2012 the airport is expecting to handle 10.2 million passengers.

The expansion project seeks to optimise the capacity of the existing airport and LLAL will consider what modifications and improvements will be required. This will include looking at the aircraft taxiways, aprons, piers and parking stands, the road network, airport car parking and the passenger terminal. Meanwhile, LLAL has estimated that the plans could create up to 6,000 new jobs and generate millions of pounds of investment.

The project – called ‘futureLuToN:Optimisation’ – was introduced today (January 16) to the airport’s consultative committee representing local residents, councils and community groups. A pre-planning application public consultation will begin on Monday February 6, when plans will be presented in Luton and around the wider area. The four-week consultation process will run until March 5 and will include a series of public exhibitions around the region.

A dedicated website – www.futureLuToN.co.uk – will also be launched for interested parties to view proposals and provide their feedback on the airport’s plans. Robin Harris, chair of LLAL, said: 

“We’re at the very beginning of a journey that builds on the tremendous success we have seen through the last decade and will ultimately bring huge benefits to Luton and the wider region – with jobs and much-needed income. We will consult actively and listen carefully ahead of submitting a planning application to enhance this important people’s asset but we must be ready to embrace market demand in the future.

Our plans that will go out for public consultation in February are ambitious. While we will have to work hard to meet our aspirations, I am encouraged by the vast majority of people and businesses in Luton and the wider region who believe strongly that the airport is a terrific asset for job creation and our biggest wealth creator.”

London Luton Airport is the UK’s fifth biggest airport. It is a headquarters for easyJet and is a major base for Wizz Air, Ryanair and Monarch.

Luton Airport added that it would also consider expanding the airport further to be able to handle 30 million passengers a year but added that “this does not form part of the proposals being consulted on in February”.

Meanwhile, it is estimated that Luton will drive an additional 440 direct on-site jobs for every extra million passengers that pass through the airport, and as a result, an estimated additional 1,750 indirect jobs will be created by the airport’s plans for it to increase capacity to 18 million passengers per year, according to York Aviation.

London Luton Airport is operated by Abertis-owned London Luton Airport Operations Limited (LLAOL).

Airport World 16th Jan 2012

Manston villagers only got half the story

NEWSFLASH: the real reasons Flybe quit Manston - click HERE

---

It makes sense to hear both sides of the story, and to hear some of the facts that Mr Buchanan might not tell you. If any other parish councils, residents associations, or other community groups are thinking of discussing night flights, do please feel free to invite the NoNightFlights group to send along someone to speak.

The parishioners of Manston voted in favour of night flights having heard one side of the story from Charles Buchanan. I have no idea why the parish Council didn't let the parishioners hear a balanced view.

Manston airport is not proposing "as many as eight flights at night", they are proposing unlimited night flights. The future of Manston airport is not dependent on night flights, it is dependent on sheer volume of traffic, be it passenger or freight. During the last 11 years, while it has been in private hands, operating without restrictions on its daytime activities Manston airport has failed to attract the necessary volume of traffic.

Infratil have not "invested" £40 million in the airport, they have lost £40 million on a bad investment. Cllr Dearing tells me that the parishioners were presented with the choice of vote for night flights or lose the airport – disingenuous to say the least.

---

Villagers from Manston have voiced support for the airport's new night-time flying policy. Those attending an extraordinary meeting of Manston Parish Council last Friday (11th Nov) voted 36 to 7 in favour of supporting proposals to have as many as eight flights a night.

Airport chief executive Charles Buchanan attended the meeting to give a presentation and to take questions from the public, for the first time since Infratil submitted a request for a new policy and lifting of the ban on scheduled night flights to Thanet council last month. Mr Buchanan said:

"This noise policy is important because it will allow the airport to develop and allow the airport to bring economic value to the area."

He told the meeting that the adoption of the new policy was "fundamental" to the success of the airport, and said more nights flights would create as many as 3,000 local jobs and bring £650,000 into the economy every year. Mr Buchanan warned that if the policy was rejected it could have detrimental affect on the airport's future. He said:

"We have invested £40 million in this airport, and a large part of that is funding losses. If we don't see any prospect of more night flights, then we have a big issue."

After his presentation he took questions from the villagers representing both sides of the debate on night flights. The only parish councillor to dispute the proposals was John Dearing, who cast doubt on whether night flights would bring as many passengers and jobs as the master plan of airport owner Infratil claims.

Mr Dearing said the prediction that passengers numbers will increase to 2.2 million a year by 2018 was "desperately optimistic and deeply flawed". He said:

"This is against a backdrop of rising fuel charges, financial crisis in Europe, and the growing evidence now that people are cutting back on oversea holidays. The master plan forecast was based on vastly out-of-date information, and is not an honest basis on which to press for night flights at Manston."

Explaining the majority support for the airport, Manston Parish Council vice-chairman Bill Bell said:

"I suppose people feel as if they are part of the airport, it is a part of their history. Personally I live right by Manston airport and I haven't got a problem with the proposals. I am ex-RAF and the sound of planes doesn't effect me whatsoever."

Mr Buchanan said he was pleased with the support from the village. He said:

"The airport shares its name with the village, so our relationship must be close. People have lived with the airport all their lives, they have grown up with the airport and they want to see it succeed and develop."

thisiskent 18th Nov 2012

CAA: exemplary regulator or lickspittle lackey?

NEWSFLASH: the real reasons Flybe quit Manston - click HERE

---

You decide...

The nice people at AirportWatch say:

The CAA (owned by airlines) produces advice to government to increase capacity in the south east. The CAA has now produced the third of its three “Insight Papers” for the DfT.  It hopes these will influence the formation of new UK aviation policy, on which a public consultation will start in March. The CAA is not a neutral government agency; its membership is entirely airlines and air travel companies, and all its funding comes from them. It is therefore entirely biased in favour of aviation growth.

The latest Insight Note, entitled “Aviation Policy for the Future” wants more airport capacity in the south east. It also wants policies to keep the price of flying cheap, and stresses the importance of aviation growth to the UK’s economic prosperity, while keeping remarkably silent on the impact of air travel in taking UK money out of the country. It includes strange suggestions on noise like introducing a cap and trade system, and increasing the degree of community trust in airports.

This shows how the CAA is a mouthpiece for the aviation industry (which owns it) rather than an independent regulator that is trying to reduce the impacts of the industry. Its aim is to get growth for the aviation industry, and try to gloss over any difficulties or public opposition to achieving that growth.

airportwatch 10th Jan 2012

---

The CAA say:

The Government is currently undertaking a thorough review of aviation policy for the UK.

In his February 2011 letter to the CAA Chair setting out his priorities for the CAA, the then Secretary of State requested that the CAA contributes to the Government’s aim to promote sustainable aviation by providing advice to inform the development of a sustainable aviation policy framework for the UK. A copy of his letter is here.

The Economic Policy and International Aviation (EPIA) team within the CAA leads on advising on the Government’s aviation policy development and is responsible for taking a forward a programme of work to ensure we contribute effectively to the Government’s work in developing a sustainable aviation framework and help to forge a consensus on the issues raised.

The CAA recognises that there is a pressing need for a robust and sustainable policy framework in order that the aviation industry delivers the choice and value that UK aviation consumers demand whilst ensuring that local and global environmental challenges are met.

The CAA has committed to publish a series of three Insight Notes to build on this initial contribution:

Aviation Policy for Consumers is the first document in the series. It considers the issue of connectivity from the perspective of current and future consumers. In particular, it addresses the implications of forecast demand growth for the choice and value offered to UK consumers.

Aviation Policy for the Environment considers how UK aviation can grow without unacceptable environmental consequences in terms of climate change, noise and local air quality.

Aviation Policy for the Future considers a number of the challenges that will need to be addressed to ensure that the framework provides both a robust strategic platform for the successful delivery of investment, and the improvements to the UK aviation system required to meet the needs of aviation consumers and the UK economy.

Trevor wants a Parkway

NEWSFLASH: the real reasons Flybe quit Manston - click HERE

---

Kent Online's business editor Trevor Sturgess argues for a Parkway station and high speed rail links, but I think he's missed a few relevant points [my comments are bracketed in italics].

---

Flybe’s decision to pull out of Manston is another blow to the airport, especially disappointing at the turn of the year. However attractive we in Kent think Manston is, it seems that not enough people agree.

Flybe’s bold experiment to run flights to Edinburgh, Manchester and Belfast was welcomed, but once again it ends in disappointment. The Manchester service was pulled some time ago, and the Belfast operation was grounded at the end of the summer. Edinburgh has been popular with leisure flyers, students, servicemen and women, and some business folk. But the lack of a day round trip made it inconvenient for business. It was a similar disappointment a few years ago when the Irish-based airline EUjet went belly-up after stretching itself over too many services.

[Business sense, and common sense, meant that Flybe reserved its prime slots at Manchester, Edinburgh and Belfast for the flights that they knew were going to be full. This meant that flights offering same day turnaround were not available for Manston. This is simply another example of success breeding success, and the devil take the hindmost. This is a problem that Manston will always face - they will have to make the most of the scraps and crumbs offered to them, at least to start with.]

So despite the smiles on the ebullient airport CEO Charles Buchanan, Manston has a problem with scheduled passenger services. What message does Flybe's decision send to other would-be operators? Manston has no difficulty with freight - including horses through its new equine centre - and charter flights to holiday places in the summer do pretty well. Car parking is a breeze. Two minutes after unloading the boot, you are in the terminal.

[Manston has the same difficulty with freight as it does with passengers – not enough. The holiday charter flights are seasonal, and few in number. The ease of parking and rapid access to the terminal are both a direct result of Manston being a tiny airport. If Manston does grow in line with its business plan, to the point where it's handling 3 million passengers in 2018, the car park will have to be larger, the walk will be longer, and checking in will be take longer. This is the downside of growth.]

Yet there just doesn’t seem to be a big enough market for scheduled services. Why is this? OK, the downturn has not helped but there must surely be something more fundamental than that. One factor is constrained night-time flying. Thanet council should back the airport's modest demands, despite opposition from some residents. It would, after all, be good for jobs and local people desperately need them. Manston ought to be the solution to over-crowding at Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted. But the Kent terminal with one of the longest runways in the UK has been largely overlooked in official reports, even though senior Kent people are always talking up its credentials.

[The long-standing ban on scheduled night flights is not what prevents the airport being a success. Easyjet went to Southend airport – which doesn't have night flights. London City airport and Belfast airport, both very successful, are shut overnight.

The airport's demands are not modest – they are asking for an unlimited number of flights between 11pm and 7am. The only restriction they are suggesting is between 11:30pm and 6am.

There is no evidence that night flights would be good for jobs – quite the reverse. The 3,000 jobs that Manston says it will create by 2018 is an absurd overestimate. The few hundred jobs that it might create will be easily exceeded by the number of jobs lost in the local tourism industry.

Incidentally, the length of Manston runway is no longer the advantage that it once was, as more efficient modern planes can take off and land in shorter distances.]

Manston’s disadvantage is that it’s more than 60 miles from London. At the eastern end of the UK, It is not surrounded by chimney pots.  But remote airports are not seen as a disadvantage by the likes of Ryanair and EasyJet who bus people miles from a cheap out-of-town terminal.

[Now at last we get to the heart of the matter. Location, location, location.

Ryanair and easyJet can take advantage of "remote airports" if and only if they are the closest airports to the passengers' ultimate destination. East Kent is not a popular destination for air passengers, London is. The huge number of passengers London attracts will inevitably and understandably use the airports that are more convenient.

So Manston loses out as an airport for arrivals, and it also loses out as an airport for departures. Again it's down to location. If you draw a 30 mile circle around any successful passenger airport, you will find that the circle is full of people. If you draw a 30 mile circle around Manston, you will find that 75% of it is full of seawater. There aren't enough people living near enough Manston for it to succeed.

To be a successful passenger airport, you don't need night flights, you need passengers.]

Roads like the Thanet Way are pretty good but potential customers from South East London probably think they are worse than they are. So make it easy.  A Manston Parkway station and dedicated high-speed railway –a “Manston Express?” – would make a huge difference. The Regional Growth Fund allocated some welcome cash for a track upgrade. For a fraction of the cost of a Boris Island or Foster's Grain proposal, upgraded links would transform Manston's image. It would be great to see politicians "getting it" in 2012.

[Manston airport and KCC applied to the Regional Growth Fund for £10 million to build a Parkway station (and a £600,000 sweetener to persuade KLM to use the airport). They were turned down flat. The government decided that the forecast number of passengers did not justify a station, and in any case the spur to Manston airport would slow down the trains on the recently upgraded line to Ramsgate.]

But the sad truth at the moment is that investors - and other scheduled operators - will be wary of committing to a terminal that keeps suffering setbacks.

The Business Blog, Trevor Sturgess 28th Dec 2011

Man moves house, Manston issues press release

This seems to be another fine example of PR puffery in action. It appears that Mr McQuarrie was already "Group Manager Freight Development for both airports" - so it's unclear what he'll be doing that wasn't already in his job description. The only bit of news appears to be that is moving house from Scotland to Margate. Rather poignantly, he is another employee who tries to play up Manston's lack of business as an advantage: "no congestion".

---

Manston Airport’s ability to attract freight operators has been given a boost with the appointment of an experienced freight development manager - Allan McQuarrie, 46, joined Infratil in 2007 and until recently, has been based at their airport in Prestwick, Glasgow.

Having moved to Margate, Allan will now be based at Manston, Kent, full time, concentrating on encouraging cargo operators to use the airport for chartered and scheduled flights. Allan McQuarrie, Group Manager Freight Development for both airports, said:

“I see a huge future for Manston which was part of my reason for moving here. Many freight carriers are looking for an airport that is near to London and Manston has some key selling points that are difficult to rival. There is no congestion so there will never be a situation where an aircraft is circling for an hour. Our dedicated team on the ground can turn a 747 round in around 90 minutes with freight being loaded straight into a lorry rather than a warehouse to be moved at a later date – this can often add an extra day to a product’s shelf life. At some airports, including Heathrow and Gatwick, the turn around time can be up to four hours which is obviously less attractive for operators.”

Originally from Zimbabwe but UK-based since 1984, Allan has worked in air cargo since leaving school and has experience as a freight forwarder, as well as working for airlines such as Air UK and now airports.

“Having had experience in all areas of air cargo I have a very good idea of what the customer is looking for. Manston’s proximity to London with easy access to the UK’s motorway network is a huge selling point. Being based within easy reach of the Channel ports, and therefore Europe, is also an advantage.”

Manston’s Master Plan shows the airport handling 167,000 tonnes of freight by 2018. Recent independent research by York Aviation, a leading aviation consultancy, shows that these levels are achievable, provided a managed and limited Night-time Flying Policy is implemented as submitted to Thanet District Council recently.

Charles Buchanan, Chief Executive Officer of Manston, said:

“Our investment in Allan’s role is a very important one for the airport as its long term success depends on attracting airlines here. As well as researching prospective customers, he will attend trade shows around the world to speak to anyone that could make use of Manston and spreading the message of the economic potential of East Kent.”

onlykent 1st Dec 2011

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

CAA wants more runways

Once upon a time, I thought the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) was independent. Hah! Fool.

I had assumed that as the regulatory body for the aviation industry, the CAA would be knowledgeable about (but independent of) the industry, and probably linked to the government (Dept of Transport?) in some way. No.

The CAA is entirely funded by the industry it regulates, and doubles up as an official-sounding (and well-funded) mouthpiece for the nation's propellor-heads. This explains why they keep churning out unquestioningly pro-aviation agitprop...

---

Kent passengers will pay more to fly unless new airport runways are built in the south east, the aviation regulator has warned.

In a report published today, the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) says additional capacity would offer "significant benefits" for consumers and the economy. It said improving facilities at existing airports, such as Manston, would be a "short-term" fix, but claimed new runways are needed to maintain the UK's direct access to global markets.

The CAA's comments will put more pressure on the government to explore building a new airport in Kent - possibly in the Thames Estuary or on the Isle of Grain. Andrew Haines, chief executive of the CAA, said:

"As we haven't built a single runway in the south east capable of handling Boeing 747s and Airbus A380s for over 70 years, the difficulty of increasing capacity is obvious. The challenge facing the government is to create an aviation policy that stands the test of time - not a policy for five years but one that lasts 30 years. If the private sector is to have sufficient confidence to deliver additional capacity then it needs to be convinced that government policy is based on robust evidence and is likely to last for at least a generation."

Two options for an airport in Kent have already been put forward. The Mayor of London Boris Johnson favours an airport constructed on artificial islands - a scheme dubbed 'Boris Island'. World-renowned architect Lord Foster's plans for an airport on the Isle of Grain are more advanced. He has already released artists' impressions of how the £50bn airport - capable of carrying up to 150m passengers a year - could look.

In November, Chancellor George Osborne said a new airport in the south east could form part of a series of major infrastructure projects that would galvanise the economy. However, he stopped short of announcing Kent as the government's preferred location.

kentonline 10th 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.