Saturday, March 08, 2008

Time to Cry Wolf - Why Not to Trust London City Airport

In the recent article by Bloomberg, Thomas Penny stated:

Before the airport opened in 1987, developers said it would be limited to 36,500 propeller-plane flights a year. Opponents who said there could be as many as 200 flights a day were denounced as ``wholly unrealistic.'' The latest expansion application calls for an average of 329 flights a day, most of them jet aircraft, though the airport will remain shut for 24 hours each weekend.

Well, well..the airport has managed to come a long way since then - trampling over those assertions from the first public enquiry that there would be no jets, and no more than 36,500 propellor flights a year. What on earth happened??
We think it is quite appropriate to say, once again, that residents have been lied to and deceived over the past 20 years.

When FTF recently posted an article regarding the first public enquiry (the item referred to above) and said that residents had been cheated and deceieved - the secretary of LCACC questioned the value of making reference to the inquiry at all. Now we are confused! We understood that he, and LCACC, are supposed to be 'independent', so why would he raise such a question - perhaps he doesn't want you all to know what the first public inquiry said?

Well, if he doesn't realise the relevance by now after 20 years of being on the LCACC then there's not much hope - and the long term residents of the Royal Docks would relate to that after having their concerns trampled all over. However it does indicate his lack of understanding for the communities around the airport - and that is rather dissapointing.
But there was one change, albeit it in a small 1987 resident objectors concerns were called ' wholly unrealistic' now their just 'confused'.

LCA has trampled over all of the previous inquiries recommendations, with the support of Newham Council. It doesn't care about any of the residents affected . It takes no responsibility for the ongoing appalling levels of health (respiratory) or the persisting levels of social deprivation in the areas, and for a company which claims it has done so much for the area it is hard to find any benefit to the communities at all over the past 20 years.
LCA are only interested in one thing, and that's money - at any cost to the communities affected.