Filed under boris johnson, estuary airport, hoo peninsula, isle of grain, Lord Foster, mark reckless, poll, rochester and strood, Thames Hub
I am not convinced that additional air travel capacity is needed, however, that aside the Thames Estuary and the Medway Towns are not a suitable places to build an airport being the most densely populated in the South East amid the hazards of visiting birds and the SS Montgomery. These are not new arguments and the Medway Towns need new investment opportunities but not at any cost. Boris Johnson & Lord Foster need to listen to the views of the near 3/4 million people most affected.
i think it will be a travesty if an another airport is not built in the south east, Heathrow is a no go for expansion, it does not have the road infrastucture. Just think of an estuary airport, you will have another crossing over the thames and a route up north instead of relying on the crowded m25 carpark. And stuck in the normal a2 carpark up to the capital. Thats what i call progress. Same as the protesters who are objecting to hs2, shameful. What about the montgomery, if you use that as an argument, you must consider all of us who live in it’s shadow to move out of the area now.
I agree with everything you said ,I just wish people would move on and except this as a way foreward.As far as the Monty it can be moved if they realy want to.
It strikes me that the proposal is the same but the location has changed. The waste and time that goes into these proposals is scandalous with no real proof that there is a need in the area. The pressure on the local infrastructure is already stretched and any additional “attraction” would act in detriment to the unique environment of the Hoo peninsular.
This plan is complete madness if you care for London and surrounding area’s (Thames/Medway et al) wildlife. I love to visit the area for its tranquility – unusual history filled views across acient walkways and smuggling routes and most of all for the wildlife – herons and egrets and a hoast of other sights, sounds and joys in sleepy backwaters. Thanks for this voting campaign, as a local resident I want my views heard. I don’t think the addition of a famous name ie Lord Foster adds any credibility to the plans it simply looks like a desperate attempt, where several others have failed with plenty of good reason, to force through poorly thought out concepts.
No, I don’t support Lord Fosters plan. This is a daft idea with so many problems about the location that it is a non starter. Not to even mention the greenhouse gases emmitted by first the the construction and then the aircraft.
Conservative policy: no expansion to any airport anywhere in UK. Let our Air Transport industry utilise Amsterdam, Paris and Frankfurt airports
Some people are saying if it means they can get on an aeroplane without touching the M25 bring it on! #justsaying
It sounds a crazy idea with present airport problems and places like Stansted cancelling their expansion. Spoiling a lovely natural area.
I wanted to say this was a reckless planning, but that would be totally unfair ;-). A case of really bad planning – sticking an airport so close to wetlands of international importance to birds. No thank-you.
I previously suggested that it be built in France and the that the passengers then transfer to Eurostar.
How about asking the residents of Grain who will be affected the most as no one has even bothered as of yet, not even you Mark Reckless, shameful
Airport development = rich people living elsewhere getting richer; rest of us stuck forever with concrete sprawl, horrendous noise, pollution, congestion, etc; people say we will be uncompetitive without more airports; try telling the residents of West London they are being competitive so that’s alright then; there is no limit to how far greedy money will push developments like this; the only sensible response is for sane people to say enough is enough
So what is your alternative Mark? Being opposed to this without providing an alternative is simply nimbyism. Heathrow is full and causes daily misery to millions. Gatwick is full, the worlds busiest single runway airport. Government has apparently ruled out expansion at Heathrow, Gatwick and Stanstead, yet more and more people want to fly by air, so where from Mark? A single hub site is far better for the economy than spreading development around due to the agglomeration effect. And the estuary is the only site near enough to London where planes can land over water. Plus the rail and freight parts of this are just as needed. What we really need is a national debate on whether we want to invest in infrastructure to underpin the next 100 years of the UK, or allow the UK to gently decline with ‘make do and mend’. Your knee jerk nimbyism isn’t helping create the debate the UK really needs to have. So I say again, what is your alternative for the next 100 years of the UK – invest in infrastructure, or allow the country to decline?
Why not have done with it and tarmac over what little remains of the green bits on the British isles? Job done – then you can choose whether you want to land on it or drive on it afterwards.
As a resident of Grain the proposed site for this rediculous idea I would like to know if any of the people that think this is a good idea realise that we have a large LNG site situated here which we are currently fighting to stop any further development happening because of the potential hazzard, could you imagine what would happen if a plane were to hit one of these tanks or do you think that like the person who suggested moving the monty this is also an option, how would you evacuate an airport full of people in the event of an emergency we have a single road in and out. Why doesn’t anyone look at Manston Airport thats already there why not just exspand that.
Re: Stephen Colebourne’s contribution:
‘Being opposed to this without providing an alternative is simply nimbyism.’
>> Well, I am opposed to it, I don’t have an alternative (see below) and I live in London (so I can’t be a nimby).
‘Heathrow is full and causes daily misery to millions.’
>> Millions? Every day? Don’t think so. I have used Heathrow four times this year and each time was it was fine, full of happy people going on holiday or coming home again with tans. Sure, you get occasional problems but then you do at any airport.
‘Gatwick is full, the worlds busiest single runway airport.’
>> So, sounds like well used infrastructure to me.
‘Government has apparently ruled out expansion at Heathrow, Gatwick and Stanstead, yet more and more people want to fly by air, so where from Mark?’
>> Bristol, Southampton, Stansted (way under capacity at the moment), Birmingham, East Midlands, Norwich, Manchester, Luton, etc, etc, etc.
‘A single hub site is far better for the economy than spreading development around due to the agglomeration effect.’
>> This statement makes no sense at all. What on earth are you trying to say?
‘And the estuary is the only site near enough to London where planes can land over water.’
>> So planes can only land over water?
‘Plus the rail and freight parts of this are just as needed.’
>> Six-lane highways and rail lines are needed to link the south east to, er, the Isle of Grain? LOL
‘What we really need is a national debate on whether we want to invest in infrastructure to underpin the next 100 years of the UK…’
>> I think that is what we are having
‘… or allow the UK to gently decline with ‘make do and mend.’
>> We are already declining in relative economic terms, at a time when our population’s living standards and life expectancy are both still increasing fast. The growth of the Asian countries which are overtaking us (such as China and India) is accompanied by mega-cities and pollution. Personally I don’t like urban sprawl or pollution. In fact relative economic decline doesn’t sound too bad to me.
‘Your knee jerk nimbyism isn’t helping create the debate the UK really needs to have.’
>> Surely a debate allows for (even requires) opposing points of view? And why shouldn’t people whose lives will be blighted by development be allowed to oppose it?
‘So I say again, what is your alternative for the next 100 years of the UK – invest in infrastructure, or allow the country to decline?’
>> See above. In summary 1) if other parts of the world want to mess themselves up then let them, 2) we have loads of airports already so everyone who wants to will be able to fly, 3) ‘decline’ is only relative – we will carry on getting richer and healthier with or without a new mega-airport and 4) we will enjoy our longer lives more if we haven’t screwed up our country along the way.
This “sophisticated doodle” is not supported by the UK government or the aviation industry. It is not a proposal by the UK government or even commissioned by the UK government. It is merely a self-funded, self-promoting study by Foster + Partners. The fanciful imaginings of Lord Foster or as the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds so succinctly puts it “… the glossy and lavishly illustrated concept that exists only to waste scarce time and resources countering the benefits with a sober assessment of the costs.” Economically, environmentally and ecologically it is a complete non-starter.
Why are we so obsessed with expanding airports to help our economy grow? This is a false economy. The more we expand airports the more damage we will do to our environment and the more we will have to spend in aid and mitigation measures to combat the catastrophic effects of climate change. We should be investing in our railways and more sustainable methods of transport, we should be leading the world in renewable energy manufacture and generation. But what are we doing? Pandering to the airline industry lobbyists by looking to expand and build more airports, pandering to the motorist with the ridiculous idea of increasing the speed limit on motorways. Politicians need to get real and look at the bigger and longer term picture. If we do not take drastic action NOW to curb our carbon emissions then airports, motorways and the world’s economy will be completely irrelevant. It is about time our planet came first, before the needs of a selfish few.
Absolute madness to build an airport in this location. Why not develop MANSTON, a facility that is already in being and grossly under used. The area needs employment. Extend a branch line from the high speed rail lines that already serve Kent for access to London.
As the KCC have now built on West Malling airfield, then perhaps they could consider building an airport at their site at Detling, instead of Hoo. The landing strips could be on the top and the passenger facilities in the surrounding valleys. It would be between the M2 and M20, plus a fast rail connection to Europe and the rest of the UK via Ebbsfleet. What more could you ask?.
First of all it would bring 70,000 local jobs; then 70,000 new homes would have to be built to accommodate said workers, the goal posts are mobile on this already.
We all know that it will be foreign investors first, until it inevitably goes over-budget and the good old British taxpayer will be bailing-out another over-priced white elephant. The building work will be carried-out by overseas investors using foreign-built components, for guidance see the windfarm off of Thanet and the debacle of the A20 tunnel near Folkestone. Labour will probably be provided by eastern Europeans, but, never fear, once it opens, there will be plenty of jobs for the local residents: baristas, fast-food assistants, cleaners and security officials. I’m not knocking the people who do these jobs, far from it, but the people of the Medway towns deserve better than this.
I fear that this will happen; part of the government has begun to wobble, despite Cameron’s promise that it wouldn’t happen; don’t forget, he promised us a referendum on Europe…
If you don’t want this to happen, the fight has to start now.
With oil heading steadily towards the expected $200 a barrel we won’t be needing more airport capacity, most ordinary people won’t be able to afford to fly for much longer.
It still won’t stop the building of this monstrosity though.
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Google+ account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Twitter account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Facebook account.
( Log Out /
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.
Enter your email address to subscribe to Mark's newsletter and receive notifications of new posts by email.
Join 7,663 other followers
This website is not funded from Parliamentary allowances and is the responsibility of Mark Reckless