Friday, 4 April 2014

Manston deadline extended, Isle of Thanet Gazette and Council Lease Clive Hart at daggers over council trashing community skate park, a Friday Ramble.

While on the one hand Gatwick are starting the process of getting another runway here in Thanet Unite, the trade union representing 40 staff at the airport and members of staff there who have come up with their own business plans to save the airport from closure have been granted a stay of execution.

The airport owners say that they will extend the consultation period until the end of the month and promise to give ten days notice when the close the airport.


On to the council, I never know where to start on this one, how a Labour led council could trash a community built youth facility in Cliftonville takes a bit of explaining.

Here is the link to the petition about Little Oasis Skate Park https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/save-little-oasis-diy-skate-park

The rumour on the street (which I think is unlikely) is that the council’s chief executive is negotiating a severance package, probably another six figure sum out of the council tax.

The council have apparently now appointed the independent expert to have a look at The Royal Sands foundations on the Pleasurama site in Ramsgate (let’s hope he looks at the structural integrity of the sea defence that hold the sand in place that the foundations sit on) and prepare the works schedule, which should lead to the termination of the development agreement with SFP Ventures.  

Once that is done the council can start the process of dissolving the site leaseholds and perhaps by about summer 2016 we could get the site cleared and put to some temporary leisure and parking use while permanent site use is considered.

I think it will have to be tarmaced  over as the salt spray down there means nothing much will grow there.

On the blog comment front I am now taking a tighter line on comments, I think that while on the one hand there are obviously some commentators with mental health problems on the other hand we now seem to have developed a group of people who seem to derive pleasure form baiting these disabled people.   

My take on this one is that comments where the information appears barmy and misleading get deleted out of hand as will those comments where the commentator appears to baiting someone they obviously consider to have mental health issues. 


Anyway my take is that this all goes in the bin with ageist, sexist, homophobic and racist comments.

On to The Race of the Classics 2014, The Tall Ships, this will evidently not now be coming to Ramsgate tomorrow as they are sailing towards Amsterdam, see
http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&prev=/search%3Fq%3Drace%2Bof%2Bthe%2Bclassics%26safe%3Doff%26espv%3D210%26es_sm%3D93&rurl=translate.google.co.uk&sl=nl&u=http://www.rotc.nl/index.php/live&usg=ALkJrhgCuWCXlSBhEfwKPV4tdzqaQVUbTw

My guess would be this is because the wind is blowing the wrong way for Ramsgate. 

Needless to say I will ramble on here as I get the chance. 

127 comments:

  1. So - Clive is blaming this on Sue??? Could he not have come up with Plan B to prevent this happening? And (sorry) a shameless plug. Please sign the petition if you are against this decision - https://you.38degrees.org.uk/p/skate

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Duncan added the link to the post, plug away

      Delete
    2. Thank you very much Michael :D

      Delete
  2. Some of the other bits of information on your newsfeed aren't public! Try cropping the screensave!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks anon, I think I am a bit past multitasking, and missed that

      Delete
  3. If there are to be changes at TDC cant they wait until the LGA Peer report on TDC is published. Unless of course the council already know its contents.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The way the skate park was destroyed was disgusting, but it needed to be removed. As the councils insurance would not cover it. If one person say for instance broke their back, it could of cost the tax payers of Thanet half a million in compo. Then questions would be why it was left.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It needed adaptation, not removing! The rush to declutter our streets from unecessary street furniture and signage, mend broken pavements etc that cause countless injuries and claims, is not happening! Your reasoning or justification in this case is erroneous - sorry!

      Delete
    2. I do take your point 4:50 but could a solution not have been found? Work WITH the group, rather than just bulldozer it? And the site is currently more of a health and safety nightmare as there are big lumps of concrete just laying around the site. Its a shame that a solution wasnt found.

      Delete
  5. I think the whole petition to save Manston is a bit silly and pathetic. If there really were thousands of people prepared to put their hands in their pockets to keep it running it wouldn't be going bust. But, like all of their predecessors, KLM has found that they haven't been able to fill the seats and the service has been running at a loss. It costs milions every year to run the airport and it's isn't realistic to suggest that Ann Gloag should shoulder those losses. Nor is it realistic to suggest that the taxpayer should get involved. If taxpayer money were being used for economic development (and I don't think it should be) there is no reason why the airport should get a handout in preference to other, far more successful Thanet businesses which could expand and recruit staff tomorrow.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think the fact that almost everyone who is anti-Manston chooses to remain anonymous is a bit silly and pathetic... and those who claim that few support the airport financially have got it all wrong. Almost every time I go shopping I support the freights by buying the produce! So it's not as simple as only flying to and from the airport.

      Anyway, good to see Roger, Laura and others doing their best for what the MAJORITY of locals want!

      Delete
    2. I am with Peter on this and there is a lot more that depends on the airport as will become apparent if it really does close. As for KLM, they have not gone because their flights were not used, quite the contrary as they were well on target with passenger numbers, but because the airport owners are closing the place. Seems to be still in the melting pot and the owners are at least showing a bit of flexibility by extending the deadline.

      Be helpful though if 4:56 could give me a list of these Thanet businesses that could expand and recruit staff tomorrow.

      Delete
    3. Why dont you people understand it blights the lives of 1000s of people in ramsgate and stops investors from investing and loses loads of money without employing 100s of people that would make it worthwhile. Why why why would you keep supporting it after 15 years is it because you are that thick you still believe in your wonderful roger and laura who have told you things that can and will never happen it will never be a success just deal with it you have been fed a load of s**t and like an idiot you have swallowed it all
      These MP's are supposed to represent all of us but dont

      Delete
    4. Peter, William, the problem of Manston has been one of scale, the pro camp wanting Manston to become London’s third airport with a flight every 30 seconds, with the anti camp wanting it closed.

      The airport site alone is so large because of the desire to be able to land Concorde, be London’s third airport or whatever it is that just the business rates run to about half a million a year.

      I support a regional airport with definite future parameters on the extent of the number of flights and a reasonable understanding of both the economic benefits to the area, the noise and other pollution factors.

      I have never been supportive of the airport running as it has recently with no environmental permit and considerable uncertainty about the extent of future activity there.

      So what is it you support?

      Delete
    5. I support fresh fruit and veg from all corners of the globe at all times of year... what I do NOT support is rude comments from anonymous commentators, so (again) I'm out of here until you stop cowards like 8:50 from posting.

      Delete
    6. What dont you like the truth or have i said something thats incorrect???????

      Delete
    7. Its not us that started to be rude
      bit silly and pathetic...

      Delete
    8. Unless you're over 98 years old, then the airport was there before you. End of.

      Delete
    9. Just because its been there for 98 years it does not mean it should be there for another 98 years it would never get the go ahead to be there today
      It really does seem as that you want it to carry on blighting ramsgate no matter what the cost dont you care about where you live. If I lived close to a town that was being blighted by something I would be the first to help not do all In my power to hinder.
      Ramsgate was there first and its a great town
      So its the end of manston and the end of the ramblings of the people that support manston no matter what the cost

      Delete
    10. It's not the end. It will carry on. Have faith, my boy...

      Delete
    11. What supported by you or the tax payer?

      Delete
    12. And I am not your boy do you understand about business?

      Delete
    13. I hope the people of Ramsgate one day can return the favour to margate

      Delete
    14. Last night i singed a petition to help the young people of margate get their skate park back
      why would you fight for manston if you dont work there?
      or do you mind you if you did you would know your fighting a loosing battle

      Delete
    15. Peter @ 1707 & William @ 2035,

      They have both said it for me.

      Delete
    16. Anon 8:58,

      Manston: I live under the flight path and close by the threshold; and I wish to see Manston thrive as an airport.

      Delete
    17. Anon 4:56

      I do not understand your phrase silly and pathetic. Are you able to explain your choice of words, or are you just being rude for the sake of it?

      Delete
    18. 10.53
      I will never understand why people in ramsgate would want to live under a flight path but if it closes i hope you move to heathrow before Ramsgate goes up and you dont make any money

      Delete
    19. Michael, see Anon 11:04 and his particular piece of nastiness addressed to me. Am I under your new guidelines allowed to reply in kind, or should I just ignore him for the nasty lemon sucking twit that he appears to be? I would welcome your advice and guidance.

      Delete
    20. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    21. Michael,

      Please see the gratuitously rude comment addressed to me by 12:04 pm above. In what manner should I reply, if at all? I would welcome your advice and guidance.

      Delete
    22. You "singed" 10:16? Don't you mean you "sang"? Not that I can see the connection.

      Delete
    23. John, I think we're in a Catch 22 situation here: On the one hand we're not to tease those who have mental health problems, yet on the other hand anyone who buys a house 2 miles from an airport and then finds out it's too noisy obviously need their heads examining.

      Delete
    24. Peter,

      Well said.

      When I win the Lottery, it is only a matter of time, I intend to but a big house in Richmond and set about the exciting task of closing down LHR.

      Delete
    25. I am puzzled why two of the posters here so hate anonymous posters and yet they are regular contributors to the anonymous ECR blog? If they feel that way then they should not even read ECR's blog.

      Delete
    26. Possibly, Anon, because, like me, they know who ECR is. In any event, the issue is about commenting in your own name, not whether the blog administrator uses a pseudonym or not.

      Delete
    27. Who's up for the newest campaign to hit Thanet? The "Shut Ramsgate Marina / Harbour / Port" campaign, all of us other people of Thanet outside of Ramsgate are sick the back teeth of paying for your little tidal pool that continually seems to loose money year after year and does nothing but drain our taxes!

      Delete
    28. Loose money or the immoral earnings a pimp perhaps?

      Delete
  6. 8:50, how can an MP support everybody? Surely that's impossible unless they all agree? Instead, they can support the majority, as is clearly the case this time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. After 15 years of blight to one town supported by the surrounding towns when do we get a say? it dont make sense if its not working why support it?

      Delete
    2. Why not have your say then, instead of posting anonymous comments on blogs? Why are you so ashamed of anyone knowing your identity? Are you worried that perhaps you really are in the minority, or that you'll get in trouble with your boss as former anti-Manston campainger Steve Higgins did? Or simply too "thick" to register?

      Delete
    3. Why do you believe that Manston is worth fighting for?
      Do you think it will ever be good for Thanet?
      Or do you just want to watch another town go down hill?
      Because its not working as it stands either it closes or it gets a lot more aircraft making life in Ramsgate unbearable in that case house prises will go down and the quality of the people buying them will also go down making Thanet worse than it is. Already so many people in Ramsgate go to public areas and give their time for free to make the place we live a better place. If all the towns did this we would soon have the area that everybody wanted to visit

      Delete
    4. Anon 10:57,

      You say that property prices in Ramsgate will collapse as a consequence of Manston growing as an airport. Your opinion sounds plausible but does not stand up to examination for the following reasons.

      Richmond & Windsor lie under the LHR flight path and Crawley under LGW. The average price of houses in these towns is as follows:- Richmond flat £433,816 terrace £790,193 semi £894,439 & the rest £1,407,817; Windsor flat £276,819 terrace £421,717 & others much more; Crawley flat £139,756 terrace £202,150 semi £249,256.

      Property prices in Windsor and Richmond are among the most expensive in the land and prices are rising in all three towns.

      Do not take my word for it, do your own research, check other towns such as Hatton Cross which is almost part of LHR. Then please explain why Thanet is an exception and that prices here would drop in your opinion.

      Delete
    5. 11.40
      You know nothing about property prices or areas you are making your self look stupid!!!!!

      Delete
    6. Anon 12:09 pm,

      Then please point out where I am wrong.

      Delete
    7. 11.40
      And believe me both of those places are pushing Boris for a new airport in the Thames estuary

      Delete
    8. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    9. Michael,

      I've tried but it's no good. Anon 12:09 pm and his ilk has killed off any chance of a real discussion. To make matters worse I am no longer allowed to reply in kind in case he has, as you say, a "mental. illness".

      Who cares, I have better things to do, the sun is shining and I'm off out.

      Delete
    10. 12.09
      If you don't think overflying aeroplanes make a difference to the price of property then ill have to stop this debate
      please do your research and then you will see what your saying is very misguided

      Delete
    11. Anon 12:09,

      I suggest that stop !!!!!at me and do your own research.

      Delete
    12. Anon 12:26,

      Can you please expand your argument with evidence, as I have done with mine?

      Or stop the debate, as you wish.

      Delete
    13. Anon, I'll gladly answer your questions when you've answered mine (see 10:35).

      Delete
    14. Richmond - London Borough
      Windsor - the queen lives there
      Crawley - it's not overflown.

      None are a comparison for Ramsgate, but if you want to do some real research, compare somewhere under the flight path such as Hounslow, against somewhere very nearby that isn't, such as Twickenham.

      And when you do, you'll see the argument that house prices are impacted by flight paths.

      Delete
    15. Anon 3:32 pm,

      I do not understand your argument, especially in regard to Windsor other than you have seized the opportunity to air your republican sympathies.

      Crawley does have overflying aircraft from LGW.

      I have lived at Hatton Cross. Look it up on the map. It is practically part of LHR. On my walk home from the tube I could stand on the edge of the threshold and watch the aircraft land that were barely 100 feet above. Never the less property prices in Hatton Cross are healthy, which can be explained by the fact that the adjacent LHR provides hundreds of well paid jobs.

      The only difference between these towns and Ramsgate in regard to aircraft noise is that you live in Ramsgate, and you do not much care what happens to Manston and the town just so long as you are not bothered by aeroplanes.

      Manston would never grow to the size of LGW or LHR; but it could provide much needed employment for Thanet which is the one of the most depressed areas in the South East. Our young would then not have to leave the area to find a career, as I had to do,

      Delete
    16. Surely cheaper house prices are good for the area by allowing younger people to get on the property ladder?

      Delete
    17. The key with Ramsgate John and anon, is not so much about the amount of real overflying of the town as the long term uncertainty about the potential amount of overflying.

      Delete
    18. Anon 9:35 pm,

      There is nothing at all wrong with cheaper houses so long as you can find a job that will provide the wherewithal to buy one.

      Ramsgate needs jobs. Much more than it needs pension 'rich' retirees like me and, presumably, you.

      Delete
    19. Michael,

      This is true and it's about time it was sorted out. For heaven's sake Manston is not the only small airport in the land. Why do these things always become so confused in Thanet?

      I fear that for some of the Manston haters even one overflight would be one too many. However, these are but a few and the decision makers are not obliged to pander to them, asuming we could actually find the decision makers and give them some backbone.

      Delete
  7. Michael, my reasons for supporting Manston airport were probably much the same as yours. It could have added to the economic mix of Thanet and provided a transport hub for East Kent. I am a realist though and appreciate that owners cannot go on indefinitely losing money, but its demise is to be more lamented than crowed about as some people seem to be doing.

    My main point in my earlier comment was the further impact closure will make on Thanet. It is not just the jobs at the airport, but also those business that derive work because it is there. Then there is the MOD Fire School. With MOD in recent years selling off their valuable South East real estate and moving military units to more remote and cheaper locations, as we have seen with Hythe, Shorncliffe, Ashford, Dover and Canterbury in this part of the world, will the Fire School stay at Manston? Currently Manston is used to accommodate crews and support staff of military aircraft taking part in exercises and airshows in the South. Take away that usage and it is likely to be a further nail in its coffin and would MOD really want a fire training school in the middle of a housing estate. More jobs and the monies spent in the local economy by that establishment and by the students attending courses there.

    Then there are the two museums, located on airport land, will the owner not want to cash in on that asset as well? They are tourist attractions in their own right and one of the few things for visitors to do on a rainy day in Thanet.

    In my view there is nothing to crow about, the closure will not suddenly attract new businesses to Thanet and house prices will surge as a result. As for the pro Manston thinking of a third London, for my part a decent regional airport, like Southend, was the best we could expect.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. William this is about the closure of the airport not the museums, and other businesses there that rent their sites from the airport owner and have commercial leases of varying lengths and would also have lease renewal rights.

      My suggestion here would be that all of the lessees seek to consolidate their positions and investigate some sort of landing area there.

      While the site is being funded both by the government via the MOD as part of the sale to Planestation agreement and the airport owner to the tune of several million per year then nothing viable will happen there.

      At the moment the situation is comparable to me trying to run my bookshop using the Westwood Tesco site with all of the associated expenses, the gap between the possible available flights and the capacity of the existing airport site is just far too wide.

      Delete
    2. Michael, you asked me why I supported the airport and I responded. I consider the other businesses and facilities that are associated with the airport as part of the reason why I would be sorry to see it go and, for your information, there are firms who depend on it, at least in part, for their business of are not on the airfield.

      See that whilst you seem quick to criticise those of us who try to present a reasoned case, under our real names, the anonymous commentator, who regularly uses stupid and senile to dismiss others, goes on unchecked.

      Delete
    3. William you have completely lost me, I have been working all day and have deleted all the comments about ten that had what appeared to have offensive content as they were made, with my mobile. I have just read through and can’t find any that I think you would find offensive, so can you kindly point out which ones you think they are.

      On to what I asked you, which was what you mean by supporting the airport, by this I mean do you support the recent situation of an airport running with no environmental permit aiming to have around a flight every thirty seconds, or do you favour a small regional airport supporting the local economy? Were you, for instance supportive of a night flying allowance the same as the major hub airports without any linkage to the amount of daytime flying?

      I think I have been pretty clear about what I do and don’t support on the airport front, and apart from those who seem to favour either total closure or virtually no restriction, I don’t seem to be finding anything else in the comment here, certainly nothing that would stand any chance of being commercially viable.

      Delete
    4. Apologies, Michael, for I based the comment about offensive remarks based on what I had read earlier and did not realise you had since deleted them.

      On the airport I always felt a regional airport, say in the size of Southend, more likely than the London Manston aspirations of Planestation. Similarly I have never advocated unlimited night flights, but just that discretion to receive aircraft that may have been delayed. Certainly a proportion to day flights would seem reasonable, but opponents talk of Jumbos every two minutes throughout the night. From where one might ask.

      I suspect, the airport is now dead in the water which, I reiterate, will have repercussions for other firms and facilities in Thanet. That is to be regretted.

      Delete
    5. William I guess the underlying problem here is that it is twice as far from the M25 to Manston than it is to Southend. The key approach to deciding if Thanet is going to viable as a London air transport hub is to look at a map of England and mark of some of the other places the same distance from the M25 as Manston is, this will lead you to Southampton London Airport and so on.

      I certainly never heard of Jumbos every two minutes throughout the night from anyone.

      On the comment phone my phone makes a noise when someone leaves a comment so I had assumed my deletions were pretty prompt, I have rebooted my phone to be on the safe side.

      Delete
    6. Surprised you have not read of the clapped out Jumbos every two minutes as this has been regularly suggested by a certain anon on ECR's site in particular on numerous occasions. It even goes back to before Labour's change of heart when Mike Harrison referred to this very scaremongering on his blog as 'Night Flight Hysteria.' Then again, you have a business to run and probably less time to surf the blogs than I.

      Pleased you are removing the offensive as this should make commenting more pleasant.

      Delete
    7. William I think you or he have got mixed up between night and day on this one, perhaps you had better take a gander at how many day flights Infratil were predicting when they took over.

      Delete
    8. Michael, I merely quote from the scaremonger merchant. I have no idea how many night flights were requested or how many there might have been, but, judging by the number of day flights, I would suggest, not many.

      Delete
  8. Michael,

    I've tried but it's no good. Anon has killed off any chance of a real discussion. To make matters worse I am no longer allowed to reply in kind in case he has, as you say, a "mental. illness".

    Who cares, I have better things to do, the sun is shining and I'm off out.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Does the geology suggest Manston as a fracking site? If so that would aid prosperity for Thanet.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I was recently chatting with a councillor who wasnt born in this area and they said, "It's been cruel how local politicians have bigged up Manstons chances to the public. It was always in the wrong location." I personally feel its a great shame to lose any business from Thanet but I fear that - like the port - its days are numbered. However, local feeling runs VERY deep on this issue and it is seen as one of the crown jewels of Thanet. I also have severe reservations about Ms Gloags moral intentions towards the site. Again - it feels like yet another outsider has come along and pillaged one of the Isle's jewels. Oh - and the council stuff is interesting in this blog piece as well Michael. Thank you for the screen shots - very interesting. I dont think I recall a leader blaming officer decisions before. Its a new excuse!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Duncan, always a problem with local politicians, for the most part it isn’t a case of voting for the best, more a case of preventing the worst from getting in. I tend to take the view at the moment that the Labour group still have some distance to go to get as far from the core of local public opinion than the Conservatives managed last time around. Perhaps they will get there by the time we come to the next local elections, I think the phrase is a close run thing.

      The strange think is that while the local politicians at every level seem to fail to grasp how to deal with local issues, I continuously hear how pretty much all of them do an excellent job of sorting out the problems of individuals.

      Perhaps it is that for the most part they let the officers run rings around them, over the skate park I wonder what the cost difference was between the price of destroying it and the price of making it liability insurance compliant.

      Delete
    2. Bang on! To take each point in turn. Agree with Labour group assessment. But that is the peril of leadership - they have to do things that will not be popular. I feel 'change' will be the by word in 2015. And I think that will hit the Conservatives as well.

      Local issues. I do know that SOME keep abreast of the local blogging scenes (hi all) but I fear the potential wrath that could be unleashed on them, should they choose to express an opinion. Which I feel is a shame. I would like to hear their thoughts and engage in productive debate with them on the issue. Alas - I fear that the dinosaurs in the party will forbid people from expressing any opinions because of the 'fear of getting it wrong'. Everything would need to be cleared by the committee prior to release. And by that time - the issue has moved on. And - frankly - I dont think either side really appreciates the power of on line discussion. The councillors that are reading this will understand, but others simply dont get it. On-line is where local people deal with local issues.

      And now the big point, imho. The officers. Running rings around them. Totally agree. But - frankly - why is no-one questioning these decisions and asking for Plan B to be investigated? Clive has openly blamed Iris and other officers for the decision - 'it had nothing to do with me'. Sorry Clive. It was something you SHOULD have dealt with!

      And - yes - financially, if Clive had given the Little Oasis Team the estimated £3,000 it cost to riip up the land, they could have built a wonderland! They did everything else on £500! The simple solution is they form a group (which they are doing), talk to the council about taking up a lease on the land and getting insurances and then applying for funding that they use VERY resourcefully!

      And there is a cycle ride tomorrow at 13:00 at the NCP in Margate to support the effort. There are also a limited supply of free cycles available from Fort Hill Cycles (which I thought was very decent of them)!

      Delete
    3. Duncan, time was when local people knew the local candidates but for the most part this is no longer the case.

      What happens in reality, come election time, is that most people are out of the equation as they always vote, Labour, Conservative, raving loony or whatever.

      The rest perhaps around 20% of those who actually vote, don’t vote the same way at every election, out of that 20% I would think it unlikely that a quarter of them have any more that a notion that “the council” mends roads and removes rubbish.

      This leaves us with a tiny proportion of the electorate that would even be able to differentiate between, county, district and town councils or have any idea what each type of council actually did.

      I think for the most part district council elections are perceived as a fairly safe way of sending a message to the Camerons and Cleggs and Millibands of this world.

      Perhaps an exception here in Thanet has been in Ramsgate where local government at one time managed to close every publicly owned bit of prime real estate in the town and seemed to be saying that they approved unlimited aircraft noise over the town.

      The perception here is difficult as there has never been an explanation about this, but I think last time around even some of the Ramsgate voters who had voted Conservative all their lives, even some members of the local Conservative association voted Labour.

      Feeling in the town about the North Thanet Conservatives was that they were not in fact for the most part Conservatives, this of course culminated in their leader going down.

      Anyway, don’t take my word for this, just ask a few random locals, which party holds the balance of power at the council and who represents them on the council.

      Delete
    4. Usual bit of jaundiced pro Labour rhetoric from our resident floating voter I see. Lots of unknown factors for 2015 like will UKIP still play a major part, where will all the lost Lib/Dems go and will the swing back to Conservative in the national polls be reflected in Thanet. All remains to be seen, but, one thing is for sure, we will be regularly reminded about Ezekiel's fall from grace on Thanetonline for next year.

      Delete
  11. I cant believe this blog has been hijacked by a few people who think its fine to insult people that have different views than they do. Then to complain to the admin when someone says something back
    Well what can you say these people want a loosing airport to carry on no matter what the cost to the tax payer (well over £600,000) and to the local people just because its been there for 98 years or maybe they think that's its got a chance to become Londons 3rd airport even after everybody has told them it does not stand a chance. And that an increase or expansion or night flights would have no impact on Ramsgate or to the price of houses here and then there is the argument well you should have not of bought there if you knew there was a airport close but thats like saying you would be fine for a small road that goes though your town to expand into a motorway and me saying well when you bought you knew there was a road there and i cant see why it would affect your house price or your quality of life

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Here we go, the anon who spells "losing" as "loosing" yet again... proof if any is needed that there's actually very few people who are against the airport. The "loosers"!

      Delete
    2. You are one of the people
      Glad you live in Margate ha ha ha
      Bet you love living there

      Delete
    3. Who's the looser

      Delete
    4. Whoever has the baggiest trousers perhaps?

      Delete
    5. I said looser instead of loser to wind up the stuffy people who can not stand to see a spelling mistake instead of answering any questions or to talk about the topic
      to keep saying your in support of manston but not tell anybody why just shows your intelligence
      How would you pay for this loss making airport
      who will benefit
      how many people will suffer for the expansion or night flight

      Delete
    6. "How would you pay for this loss making airport" I'll leave that to the experts.

      "who will benefit" Everyone.

      "how many people will suffer for the expansion or night flight" None.

      Delete
    7. good answers mate we can all see how cleaver you are now

      Delete
  12. You also keep calling people the loosers who ever does not have your view I think you dont know the meaning of the word
    And instead of picking out the odd spelling mistake why not put your point on the topic and say why you would think it would be good for you?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Loose

      adjective
      comparative adjective: looser
      1.
      not firmly or tightly fixed in place; detached or able to be detached.
      "a loose tooth"
      synonyms: not fixed in place, not secure, insecure, unsecured, unattached; More
      antonyms: secure, tight
      not held or tied together or contained within something.
      "wear your hair loose"
      synonyms: untied, unpinned, unbound, hanging free, down, flowing, floppy More
      (of a person or animal) not tied up or shut in.
      "the bull was loose with cattle in the field"
      synonyms: free, at large, at liberty, on the loose, escaped; More
      antonyms: secure
      (of the ball in a game) in play but not in any player's possession.
      2.
      (of a garment) not fitting tightly or closely.
      "she slipped into a loose T-shirt"
      synonyms: baggy, loose-fitting, easy-fitting, generously cut, slack, roomy, boyfriend;

      Delete
    2. loser

      noun
      1.
      a person or thing that loses or has lost something, especially a game or contest.
      "he was the loser in last year's race for governor"
      synonyms: defeated person, also-ran, the defeated, the vanquished

      Delete
    3. My point isn't your poor grammar, it's just that it's obvious that most of the anonymous anti-Manston messages are yours rather than several people. Almost everyone in Thanet supports the airport, though perhaps you can name some people who don't?

      Delete
    4. But why do you support an airport thats never going to go anywhere and takes public money that could spent on worthwhile things ?

      Delete
    5. I'll take that as a "no", you can't actually name ANY people who are anti-Manston airport. I presume you understand the word "name"?

      Delete
    6. How about the 40,000 that live in ramsgate

      Delete
    7. Why are you so obsessed with peoples names ?

      Delete
    8. Why are you so obsessed with hiding your identity? Scared of your work (or dole) colleagues and neighbours laughing at you?

      Delete
    9. I'm sure the people of Ramsgate are very pleased that someone is standing up for them by very bravely spamming blogs anonymously. Who needs Roger Gale and Laura Sandys when they have you, eh?!

      Delete
    10. If you must know why i dont put my name and where I live and a photo of me its because someone WILL steal your ID

      Delete
    11. Watch bang goes the theory and see what i mean

      Delete
    12. once its out there theres no going back ha ha ha

      Delete
    13. Believe me, no-one would want to make out they're you!

      Delete
    14. Don't you find it strange that not ONE person out of those "suffering" 40,000 will be an official spokesperson to represent them?

      Delete
    15. No, because I'm their representative. They all know who I am.

      Delete
    16. Grow up !!
      you still live in margate no amount of planes will ever make where we live be as where you are
      And the airport will still close ha ha ha

      Delete
    17. To the Anon that is debating with Peter,

      Would It be fair for me to say that you are indifferent to the fate of Manston, just so long as its aeroplanes do not fly over your head?

      Delete
    18. "Grow up"? Yet you "secretly" represent Ramsgate and they all know your name? Erm, thanks for the "clarification". I'll stop talking to you now, as I don't want Michael telling me off for teasing someone who clearly has problems.

      Delete
    19. the readers will decide

      Delete
  13. How can this loser be let loose amongst us? As far as I can see he/she has nothing constructive to offer in the debate.

    Spelling is absolutely crucial to everybody, as is calculation in mathematics, you wouldn't want the wrong change in a shop would you?

    If some contributors are mentally ill then why do their carers allow them access to a computer in the first place? There are some who treat blogs like a chat room such as was seen in the early days of the internet, (I have been on line since the early nineties). All comments are fair game, but idiotic ones should just be ignored since it only feeds their own gratification of having wound somebody up by arguing against them for vicarious pleasure.

    Manston should remain a viable airport, the alternatives are unthinkable. To demolish the runway would take a fleet of lorries about 38 weeks to remove the waste assuming a 15 cubic metre lorry was loaded every five minutes 24/7.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Its still going to close and theres nothing you can do about it unless you want to put your hand in you pocket for £10,000 a day or will you let the tax payer do it

      Delete
    2. If you're so convinced anon then why are you spending so much time trying to convince other people that we don't need an airport? Or are you worried that the government will come up with rescue measures?

      Delete
    3. Why should the tax payer foot the bill?

      Delete
    4. Anon 7:19

      When was that last time you paid tax. You live off the tax payer.

      Delete
    5. Just for clarification here government puts in £8,000 per day in maintenance costs via the MOD.

      Delete
    6. And £600,000 to K L M
      7.19 I dont claim Anything

      Delete
    7. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  14. With regards to expenditure of £10,000 per day, Mr Micawber's perspective on money should be embraced. And Michael, money from the MOD is taxpayers money, so I don't understand your point.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry anon I don’t think I made myself very clear here, when Infratil were running the airport it was losing them about £10,000 per day added to this is about £8,000 per day that the government subsidises the airport by. This is complicated by the airport owner paying the government around £1,000 per day in business rates, this is apportioned and paid out to councils.

      Delete
    2. I meant B of B and not anon.

      Delete
  15. £10.000 a day thats what she says it losing

    ReplyDelete
  16. All this debate and it does not matter what is said on here the only way it will stay open is if they use public money to prop it up and that's not going to last for long it will close sooner or later
    face the facts

    ReplyDelete
  17. Michael is always asking for the Conservative stance on issues. Perhaps we should now be asking Labour's PPC for Thanet South, Will Scobie, whether he agrees with the trashing of the Oasis Skate Park.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. From Twitter:

      @willscobie · Mar 27
      Tough decision, but I don't support the Council action on the Oasis skatepark this morning. They should have talked to people before acting.

      Delete
    2. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=762646837092940&set=a.600157566675202.1073741828.599779690046323&type=1&theater

      Delete
    3. What does the "independent" cllr John Worrow think of all this?

      Delete
    4. You've gone very quite William. Aren't you going to praise Will for his comments?

      Delete
    5. Not quiet at all, Peter, but out all day yesterday. Actually I am pleased to see that Will is not playing follow my leader and I agree with him that to consult first would have been the best way forward here. Also, for your info, I had a chat with Will last Monday evening and found we had quite a bit in common.

      Delete
    6. That's good William. The reason I mentioned John Worrow of course is that he seems to tow the party line more than Will, despite supposedly being independent!

      Delete
  18. Michael, can you help here? https://www.facebook.com/MargateHistory/posts/656947081007186

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Peter the first port of call here is to go to the land registry website and order the registry pack for Manston, the last time I did this I think it cost about £16, you never know what you are going to get with the land registry pack, may be a sheet of paper or may be every document relating to change of ownership of the land since 1800.

      From the dates of these covenants it is obvious that they would no longer be valid though, so I don’t think it would achieve anything much.

      As I said previously the site is a brownfield site and it will be very difficult for local government to do much about the nature of the way it is developed. The covenant road makes about as much sense as trying to close Westwood Cross bases on it not being a hospital and trying to use the covenants used when the land was acquired for Haine Hospital.

      My feelings remain that any serious attempt to retain some aviation activity at Manston that included flying to and from there would be for the existing leaseholders to consolidate their position now.

      Frankly viable at Manston given the level of public and private losses is likely to be much smaller or nothing.

      Delete

Please note comments that may be libellous, comments that may be construed as offensive, anonymous derogatory comments about real people, comments baiting internet trolls, comments saying that an anonymous comment was made by a named real person, boring comments and spam comments, comments in CAPs will be deleted. Playground stuff like calling real people by their time stamp or surname alone, referring to groups as gangs, old duffers and so on will result in deletion. Comment that may be construed as offensive to minority groups is not allowed here either, so think before you write it, remember that the internet is a public place, that it is very difficult to be truly anonymous and that everyone who uses it leaves a trail of some sort. Also note the facility to leave anonymous comment will be turned of during periods when I am unable to monitor comment, this will not affect people commenting who are signed on to their blogger accounts. When things are particularly difficult on the commercial spam front I may turn comment moderation on for periods.

If you feel that someone has left a comment that is offensive and directed at you personally please email me (link on the sidebar) asking to have it removed, you will need to tell which post and the date and timestamp of the offending comment. Please do not reply to the offending comment as I will assume you continuing the dialogue as meaning that you want the comments left there.