|
Post by expressflight on Mar 13, 2009 15:55:26 GMT
|
|
|
Post by pug on Mar 13, 2009 17:04:08 GMT
Have you noticed how 99% of NIMBY arguments are false? I do agree with some for various reasons, mainly if its certain ruthless property developers sexing up the 'facts' but NIMBY's seem to have nothing better to do.
|
|
|
Post by expressflight on Mar 18, 2009 8:35:23 GMT
No sign yet of the new website www.flysouthend2012.com which was supposed to be up and running by about now. Currently that web address takes you to the existing SEN website.
|
|
|
Post by expressflight on Mar 25, 2009 8:37:14 GMT
|
|
|
Post by roche on Mar 26, 2009 23:31:14 GMT
Having been away for a few weeks, it's quite disappointing to come back and see that the anti airport brigade seem to well and truly have the upper hand in this consultation process. Of the random selection of submissions I looked at on the JAAP website, 75/80% strongly objected to the preferred option. The Echo also seem to favour the 'no expansion' people as well, because although there are numerous on-line comments in favour of the expansion, the vast majority of letters printed are from the 'no' camp. It seems that the airport manged to get their new website up and running this week, 2/3 weeks after it was advertised in their newsletter, so I don't imagine many people will know it's there. Maybe I'm missing something here, but I would have thought Alistair Welch should be out there doing interviews with the Echo and local radio to highlight where people can access the facts (as opposed to SAEN's fiction) and to allay peoples fears. It would be a disaster if the preferred option was voted down due to people putting pressure on their councillors as a result of SAEN's misinformation.
|
|
|
Post by expressflight on Mar 27, 2009 7:59:36 GMT
I quite take your point Roche and agree with much of what you say.
Just today I am making it known to the powers that be that there is this disquiet among supporters of the airport that it should be more pro-active and I will be making suggestions as to the sort of things which might be done in that context.
|
|
|
Post by Tarquin on Mar 27, 2009 23:00:38 GMT
I wouldn't be too concerned about the amount of negatives on the JAAP site. If you read them, most people (probably SAEN) have just repeated the same thing in every proposal. Effectively meaning they have only made one objection overall. The airport are very much on the offensive. I wouldn't worry too much. Stobart group are not daft when it comes to this sort of thing. But it still needs everyone to speak up if they support the proposals.
|
|
|
Post by expressflight on Mar 29, 2009 6:44:21 GMT
Tarquin,
You say that "the airport are very much on the offensive". Could you give a few examples of this "offensive"?
It seems to me that the airport has actually stood rather to one side of the argument so far and is not prepared to engage with the 'anti' brigade. SAEN did comment that nobody from the airport attended their meeting in Eastwood last week, so I assume they would have let AW speak had he expressed a wish to attend. Now that would have been what I would call "on the offensive" and might actually have won a few converts and nailed a few of SAEN's lies at the same time.
As far as Stobart is concerned, I believe that the CAX Airport Director fronted several public meetings in respect of their recent planning application, so one can only assume that they do not think this the appropriate time to do so as far as SEN is concerned.
I'm not personally criticising the present SEN's stance as they may well have a broader strategy in place for the future, but the very fact that several members of this forum have expressed concern on the subject indicates that more could be done now in the view of many people.
|
|
|
Post by devonian on Mar 29, 2009 9:59:39 GMT
I agree wholeheartedly with Expressflight. The JAAP consultation is dominated by gainsayers. Some are raising perfectly legitimate points of concern, most of which could be addressed very easily by the SEN management. Many however are trotting out half truths and downright falsehoods. I think it's important for everyone to be aware of the differences between the opponents to the development and not label everyone as a n'er do well.
If anyone on this forum hasn't placed their messages of support on the consultation site, please do so.
|
|
|
Post by expressflight on Mar 31, 2009 10:51:32 GMT
From information received over the past couple of days I am now much less worried about SEN's responses to date to the JAAP debate than I was previously. What is important at this stage is that members of the public support the expansion plans at every opportunity, as I know fellow members of this forum already do.
|
|
|
Post by Tarquin on Mar 31, 2009 21:52:51 GMT
You see. What did I say?
|
|
|
Post by roche on Apr 3, 2009 10:58:44 GMT
Interesting that based on the posts by Tarquin and Expressflight, there seems to be a certain level of confidence on the airport side. The latest newsletter from SAEN, as well as suggesting that airport staff are bribing students at Southend college with lollipops to support the airport (some of the rubbish they write astounds me), also suggests a certain level of confidence, with them claiming that they now have the upper hand. One of the 2 parties is in for a disappointment...I sincerely hope it's SAEN, but I remain to be convinced that it will be.
|
|
|
Post by expressflight on Apr 3, 2009 15:24:37 GMT
Roche As I am of a slightly pessimistic nature, unless I had recently received some firm information which I found reassuring then I would not have said what I did a couple of days ago. Unfortunately I cannot divulge any details. SAEN are bound to overstate their case, and their confidence, as that is the only way they can garner support.
|
|
|
Post by roche on Apr 3, 2009 22:35:47 GMT
Well, I look forward to seeing how things pan out.
Does anybody know what the next steps are once the consultation closes? My understanding is that the chosen option goes to a government inspector in the summer, but what happens between the 9th April and that submission and then what does the inspector do? Does he have a consultation period?
|
|
|
Post by expressflight on Apr 4, 2009 7:15:20 GMT
As far as I understand it, the submission document will be drawn up for approval by both Councils about 10 weeks after the end of this consultation, with that period being taken up by analysis of the responses received from both the public and other 'stakeholders'. Any 'tweaking' of the preferred option is then carried out to produce the submission document.
The submission plan is published once approved by the Councils and submitted to the Secretary of State within a couple of weeks. I believe the Secretary of State then appoints a planning inspector who conducts a public examination of the plan prior to its approval and adoption. Obviously the timescale for this last procedure lies in the hands of the government department, so who knows how long that will take.
As I understand it the inspector does not carry out a public consultation as such but would hear submissions from interested parties on various matters as part of his public examination.
Once all those hurdles are cleared a planning application can be lodged in respect of any of the adopted developments: in this case by London Southend Airport Co. Ltd..
I believe the above to be correct but am not privvy to the exact procedures.
|
|