More LIES and SPIN From H&K Hopeful

Our LCA mole kindly scanned in the latest SPIN from the airport not known for it's honesty: London City Airport.

The airport employee featured who regularly explains complaints from residents (from across the boroughs) away with the excuse of: "they are not LCA planes, they are Heathrow planes" has gone public in the 'low fare regional airlines' November publication.

She seems to be in denial about the 2000 + residents who expressed their objection of the airport expanding....in contrast to the 'few' who wrote letters of support in favour. Let's just remind ourselves: just over 300 letters in support of expansion were received by Newham - all but a few of them were from aviation and business.

But still the Hill & Knowlton hopeful kids herself that the airport has a 'great relationship' with the community.' Funny, we sense a real hostility to the airport in the communities which we work with - not because the airport is there, but because of the broken promises and the way the airport treat the community.

We'd like to see her be brave enough to hand deliver her 'runway news' and knock on a few doors, asking residents how they feel about the expansion, increasing noise levels, smell of kerosene, and explain why they have been waiting for noise insulation for 8 years and more. She might like to ask whether there are any ashtma sufferers in the households too...

We're not sure she'd get back to the airport in one piece emotionally. Still, if she is confident enough that the community loves and trusts the airport, and they have had such a good relationship - then no doubt she will be knocking on the doors of those most affected in the next few weeks......yeah right.

You can see the full spin article by the airport uploaded on our website. Go to Latest Headlines

LB Newham Building 1000 costs 600 jobs

This is an article from Unison Newham posted in April 2008. At a time that LB Newham & Sir Robin Wales justify inflicting an additional 46,000 residents to excessive noise levels on the basis of job creation, that never seem to appear. It seems that jobs are being lost due to the expansion of London City Airport. This building is situated right beside LCA's Runway and no private businesses wanted to move in due to the noise and pollution from the airport. Not an ideal place to live or work it seems and could explain why it remained empty for so many years.
Here's an example of how the airport stops employment coming to the area.

"Newham Council is sacking over 600 of its own workers and one of the reasons is to pay for its new headquarters in the Royal Docks. Building 1000 is costing Newham Council £75 million to buy and a further £20 million to refurbish. The money for this white elephant is being found by making over 600 loyal employees redundant.

At the same time as cutting hundreds of jobs the Council intends to carry on spending £millions on lavishly paid consultants who contribute little or nothing to Council services. In the last 12 months over £16 million has been wasted this way and this figure is likely to rise in 2008/9.

Shocked trade union officials were given the news of mass redundancies at a meeting with the Council’s Acting Chief Executive, Chris Wood, on Friday afternoon, 28th March.

Irene Stacey, Branch Secretary of Newham UNISON said:

“I am appalled by the Council’s decision to sack over 600 workers. This will as come as devastating news to hundreds of loyal staff and their families. There can be no justification for this policy of mass redundancies. Newham Council is showing itself to be callous and incompetent – callous because it doesn’t care about livelihoods of hundreds of loyal and dedicated staff; incompetent because of its ill-conceived decision to purchase a building it doesn’t need and can’t afford.”

UNISON has no intention of letting the Council get away with its policy of mass sackings. We will be calling meetings of all the sections affected and an emergency branch meeting to thrash out plans to defend every job. Our Branch Secretary is writing to all the other trade unions in the Council calling for a united stand against the Council’s plans – including, if necessary, strike action."

For more information contact Newham UNISON on
020 8555 9351

City Airport Security: Costs Taxpayers £24 Million since 2004

As seen on the Newham Recorder website: City Airport costs to London Taxpayers, yet more freeloading by London City airport:

THE Metropolitan Police Service has spent £24 million policing London City Airport in Silvertown over the past five years, it has emerged.

The figure came to light after London Assembly Green Party member Jenny Jones tabled a question on the cost. Mayor of London Boris Johnson's written response detailed the money spent on policing in each of the last five financial years.

In 2004/05 it was £2 million, £5.5 million in 2005/06, £5.3 million in 2006/07, £5.5 million in 2007/08 and £5.6 million for the current financial year.

However, these figures seem relatively small when compared to the amount the MPS spends on policing Heathrow. Over the last five years the force has spent £196 million on the west London airport, with a £43.4 million outlay in the current financial year.

But, unlike London City Airport, [LCA let taxpayers pay 100% of their security costs] the MPS recovers around 70 per cent of what it spends every year from Heathrow.

Full story by Larry Ferguson in this week's Recorder

Below is the cost to all tax payers for Heathrow & London City Airport

HEATHROW

Passengers 68,066,028

Security £43,400,000

Minus Rebate 70% £30,380,000

Total Taxpayer Cost - £13,020,000

£0.19p - Average Security Cost Per Passenger.

London City Airport

Passengers 2,904,013

Security £5,500,000

Minus Rebate 0

Total Taxpayer Cost - £5,500,000

£1.89p - Average Security Cost Per Passenger.

So per passenger London Airport costs £1.70 more. Thats 1000% more!!!

STOP PRESS: Private Eye's - Smart Alec

In the latest edition of Private Eye (28 Nov 08) you will find a rather interesting article in the 'Rotten Boroughs' section, p13 entitled 'Smart Alec'. Your local newsagent will happily sell you a copy of the genius publication for £1.50.

Regular readers of the Eye will be aware that Newham Council and Sir Robin Wales are a frequent feature in the Rotten Boroughs section - which is indicative of the less than healthy activities and interests that the local council seems to be happy to be promote and be part of. Other names mentioned are : Hill & Knowlton and Boris, Mayor of London.

"SMART ALEC"

"Last month Newham council voted in favour of allowing London City Airport to increase flights from 80,000 to 120,000 a year - an extra 150 flights a day. The protests of east London residents worried about noise , pollution and global warming were brushed aside. Anti-airport campaigners were dismayed at the about-turn of London mayor Boris Johnson, who had said he opposed the airport's expansion and then said he was actually in favour of it.

Newham labour councillor and City Airport consultative committee member Alec Kellaway is a big supporter of the airport, faithfully following the line of Newham mayor "Sir" Robin Wales that it is "good for jobs" andhelps regenerate the area. Alas , very little of the business that comes through the airport actually stays in the borough - although there are oppurtunities for cleaners.

City Airport earlier this year hired big-hitting PR firm Hill & Knowlton to spin its case. H&K is owned by the US media/PR conglomerate WPP - in which according to Newham council's register of members interests , Cllr Alec Kellaway happens to own shares worth more than £25,000. No conflict of interest there , then."

London City Airport To Meet With Newham 26-11-08

Our mole informs us that Charles Buchanan and colleagues are off to Newham Town Hall Annex tomorrow to meet with Sunil et al of Newham Planning. The point? To discuss the secret section 106 of course.

Strangely enough it appears that the section 106 might be as much a mystery to some particular LCA staff - they've been searching for details on the section 106 on this blog all day! The current section 106 is available from FTF to all LCA senior management at the cost of £10 to cover photocopy charges - oh, and don't forget to send a SAE.

LCA - The Freeloaders of East London

At the Select Committee on Transport 9 May 2007, yet again it appears that London City Airport c/o Richard Gooding has been shirking it full financial responsiblities. The moths must really build up in LCAs gold coin purse. Before reading the following, keep in mind that LCA consistently tells residents in Newham that LCA is responsible for the regeneration, particularly in the Royal Docks. They have indeed even claimed that it was down to them that the DLR came to town, always inferring that they have invested so much finance into the area and into the DLR - seems they didn't invest as much as they'd like you to think:

Q595 Chairman: How do you think dedicated services ought to be funded from airports as public transport?

Mr de Cani: The DLR extension has been funded primarily through Transport for London so it is publicly funded. However, there are small contributions through planning gain agreements, section 106 agreements. London City Airport has made a small contribution to the extension of the order of about £2 million. That compares to a capital cost of about 140 million. We would have liked it if they had made a bigger contribution and we tried to do that but the railway is serving a whole range of other objectives and contributing to the regeneration of east London so this extension was not just about the airport. We think they got a good deal.

Chairman: I am sure they did.

You may also recall that LCA refuse to pay anything towards the £7million pounds annual security cost for their airport. Len Duval GLA and MPA Chair asked:

Are you aware that London City Airport provides no cost towards the security of its perimeters and, in a sense, that we and part of the GLA family are subsidising them? Before you enter into commercial agreements with London City Airport or give any undertaking that security, the primacy of security around our airports and users of airports comes first and therefore that they should not be subsidised by London taxpayers, they should make a contribution like other airports; even Heathrow are cooperating in that. There seems to be a real problem with London City Airport ; they do not seem to want to even engage in a conversation about costs and they are quite adamant they are not going to pay it.

And so the penny pinching, but money grabbing from London taxpaying residents continues, whilst Sir Robin Wales turns a blind eye, and Richard Gooding claims the airport brings 'prosperity' for him maybe, but not for the residents of east London. And so far in 20 years it's only bought just over a 100 jobs.

Hill & Knowlton and Newham Council, Keeping it in the family

Last week we found out that Cllr Alec Kellaway holds £25K + shares in WPP - the owner of Hill & Knowlton. No wonder Cllr Kellaway was pretending to residents that expansion would not be at any cost, whilst being a secret squirrel and submitting a letter in support of the expansion behind their backs. A slight conflict of interest wouldn't you say? Something about lining one's own pocket and business interests. Not a very honest move for a lay reader.

Today - yet another connection between Hill & Knowlton and Newham Council has come to light:

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/3/BBB/339

Paula Feery
Associate Director at Hill & Knowlton
London, United Kingdom

Past
Community Relations Manager at London Borough of Newham

Paula Feery’s Summary
Key player in the Learning and Skills Council's current ‘In Our Hands’ national campaign to inspire everyone to learnMedia and stakeholder relations for UK government agency with an £11 billion annual spendCommunications strategist for national and international programmes

Paula Feery’s Specialties:
Public sector media relations and internal commsCorporate communications - profile and brand development. Creating fully integrated PR/marketing/advertising campaigns

Associate Director
Hill & Knowlton
(Public Company; 1001-5000 employees; WPPGY; Public Relations and Communications industry)
March 2006 — Present (2 years 9 months)
Public sector - education/employer B2B communications, public awareness campaigns for the Learning and Skills Council

Community Relations Manager
London Borough of Newham
(Government Agency; 5001-10,000 employees; Government Administration industry)
November 2004 — August 2005 (10 months)
BME communications, change management for this Olympic borough

Oh joy, lets keep in the family!

LCA Boss Can't Give Tickets Away!

Charles Buchanan Director of Business Development at London City Airport was alledgedly recently overheard saying that he 'couldn't give flight tickets away'. So business is looking really good for London City Airport then!! No surprise why H & K had been forced to switch on to the confidence building PR for LCA a month or so ago - to hide the reality once again.

But the director soon moved on to a far more critical business issue: amusing himself with a tale about how he left home one morning wearing two odd shoes - which his colleagues and BAP man didn't find quite as amusing as the director found himself. A man who can be so careless as to put on two odd shoes and leaving home is entrusted to be the director of business development? Good choice Credit Suisse and GE - sounds like a real recipe for, something. We can see now, why LCA have such a fundamental problem in not being able to follow simple planning laws set upon them.

Oh happy days: seems there's a mole in LCA and a director who just doesn't know when to be discreet.

Fight The Flights At The Houses Of Parliament

FTF were recently invited to speak on the platform at an event in the Houses of Parliament, organised by Friends of The Earth , and hosted by Paul Truswell MP on the proposed new 'Planning Bill'. We were honoured to be asked, and to stand alongside other successful campaigners from the local communities.

It gave us the opportunity to tell MPs our experience of the failings in London City Airports application - which required consistent objections and requests for clarification and further information - all of which happened to be on the bits that the airport wanted to bury as they were negative. To be able to object and technically challenge is crucial - RPS, Bickerdike Allan Partner and LCA all have their own agendas - to make money. Not too much else matters to them - and that is why the communities voice is so important and the current proposed Planning Bill is bad news for communities.

For those of you not familiar with the proposed bill, it would essentially move all MAJOR applications away from local councils and into the hands of an unelected board of individuals.

It will:

1. remove the meaningful right for communities to participate in decisions about where they live
2. not take account of climate change

As we all know the current system is not perfect, it relies upon an efficient and fair council that is objective and not biased or autocratic. Newham Council clearly does not fall into such a description, however communities do at least get a chance to represent their concerns, even if Newham don't listen to them and ignore requirements. Hazel Blears however is even misguided enough to support that developers carry out their own consultations in this new bill - can you imagine the advertisement which masquerades as a consultation, that London City Airport would carry out? Probably the same one they have already carried out with their 'partners' LB Newham. Statements made by Richard Gooding the CEO of LCA such as 'there will be no increase in noise levels' would be even more commonplace than they have been in such a system. But this time it would be endorsed by a ridiculous piece of legislation which is the biggest threat to democracy since post war. Public inquiries would no longer be available communities.

Still that is the way LB Newham seems to like it - either remove funding from groups that don't play their game, or ostracise anyone who dares to object or criticise the council, or its Mayor. They call that totalitarianism don't they?

Hazel Blears wants this new planning bill - she says to speed things up and refers to residents as 'minnows' and the developers as 'sharks' to justify removing the democratic rights of residents to have a say about their communities . She might be right about the business/developer 'sharks' but she is completely out of touch in referring to residents in communities as 'minnows'. She should have realised that when she sees the growing group of aviation anti expansion campaigners and direct action campaigners. Minnows they are not.

The way to speed planning up is to ensure that developers such as London City Airport submit decent, accurate and detailed applications in the first place. They did not, and even on approval they had not. That developers choose to overlook the negative impacts of their plans slows the process down, it is the applicants that Blears should be looking to if she wants to speed up the process.

Blears wants to stop you asking questions but do you trust an unelected board to put you and your community above the requests of the sharks? We say no.

Hazel Blears Backs Big Business But Ignores London ‘Crash Zone’

The Government Office for London has released the decision by Hazel Blears NOT to call in the application by London City Airport to expand flights by 50% from 76,000 flights to 120,000 flights per year. This is despite London City Airport submitting an application in which it admitted the failure to monitor and record noise data for nearly a decade in breach of planning agreements.

Data submitted on noise, employment, air and environmental effects are felt to be deeply flawed, inaccurate and misleading. It also completely overlooks the safety impact on roads such as the Connaught Bridge - in conflict with the Department of Transport guidance.

Crash zone maps (public safety zones) and data submitted by London City Airport and also by NATS all indicated that the increase in air traffic would result in a substantial escalation of risk to people in the vicinity of the airport. This was not assessed by Newham Planning authority. Government guidance puts the responsibility on local planning authorities to ensure community safety in planning decisions.

The London Borough of Newham approved the application in the face of widespread opposition and outrage from residents, councillors, surrounding boroughs and environmental campaign groups. The effects of expansion are widespread - across at least 8 London boroughs and the boroughs of Essex and Kent, many of which received little or no consultation.

Residents have accused Hazel Blears of ‘turning a blind eye’ to the missing and flawed data and ‘putting business before the health and safety of residents’ in the areas most affected. Once again, we see the government supporting aviation expansion at any cost, risking fines by the European Union at increased air pollution and putting residents at risk in the most densely populated area in England. By not calling this in Hazel Blears is failing in her duty of care to the residents of East London in her role as Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government.

London City Airport is the busiest airport in the middle of a residential area in the UK and the effects are widespread, and felt all the more acutely.

Fight the Flights sends a clear message to the government; residents who would have never have considered campaigning or direct action are now being forced to do one or both. Residents anger is growing at not being listened to by government and it is spreading across the country.

Over the past year we have reached out to residents to help voice their concerns. We have exposed the lies, misconceptions and the lobbyist tactics used by the airport to push through this expansion and the failure of Newham Council to put residents ahead of big business. The safety,care and welfare of the residents is paramount to us.

We are united and support the other main campaign groups such as: Stop Stanstead Expansion (who have just launched their own high court legal challenge) and HACAN (Heathrow Association Campaign Against Noise) .

More news to follow...

Jim Fitzpatrick Confirms: London City Airport Breaks Operating Conditions

Admission

In a response to a local MPs questions regarding the consistent breaches of planning law by London City Airport - Jim Fitzpatrick, Aviation Minister and MP for Poplar has confirmed that 3 flights have taken off outside of operating hours in 2007/2008. Rather an embarassing admission coming from the aviation minister himself!

And what action has Newham taken regarding these 3 breaches (alongside all the others)? Fitzpatrick didn't mention that, unsurprisingly. But we do know what the answer is don't we: predicatably no enforcement action was taken.

Pity

Perhaps a pat on the back and a promise of expansion by 'friends', and Sir Robin's alledged comments of "you can't say no to big business" all helped them forget the ghastly business....of being caught out. Ahh, pity the airport! And while we are on 'pity' that is the focus of the current campaign thought up by the reported six figure sum paid to Hill & Knowlton -'pity the airport' LCA are so warm, fluffy and love and value human beings so much...Yes so much that they are going to buy carbon credits from other parts of the world so they can dump loads of harmful carbon dust in your air, which will irritate respiratory conditions such as asthma and increase noise so that it raises your blood pressure. Oh yes, and you will have to stay inside, because it's too noisy outside and you will only complain.

Get prepared for a replay from the 'Wales Fanzine' the affectionate term that the outstanding Private Eye has for the Newham Recorder: 'it was for the children' and it was 'only the three times' and the female director 'is a mother herself'. But of course - it was simply the fanzines 'word for word copy of the Hill and Knowlton aided press release.

We knew we'd need those paper sick bags one day....oh yuk.

Noise Complaints Soar to New Levels at LCA

Noise complaints have soared at London City Airport over the past year.

The effects of the increased use of jets, flights and patterns of flights have had a huge effect on not only Newham residents but also those across neighbouring boroughs. Of course, the airport tries to explain these away as being mostly 'Heathrow flights' and due to the 'summer months'.

Nice try by LCA, just a shame those complaints which do refer to Heathrow planes are so few compared to those complaints which are accurately in relation to LCA flights, and we are not sure if it passed them by, but it wasn't a particularly hot or dry summer, so the privelege of spending time outside was minimal and cannot be 'blamed' for the increase in complaints! You've got to laugh at the lame excuses they come up with.

More news on 'complaints' to follow.

Newham & LCA Keep it in 'the family' - UPDATE - Cllr Alec Kellaway Looks After His Interests

Click on the image to enlarge.

When Cllr Alec Kellaway wrote in to support London City Airport's growth - he strangely omitted to say that he owned over £25K of shares in WPP.

WPP is a subsidiary of Hill & Knowlton - the PR alledged mercenaries - who have reportedly been paid a six figure sum - to 'push the application through' by London City Airport.

We feel a Standards Board complaint coming on.

Now just fancy that!

Happy Birthday Fight The Flights

Yes, we're one year old and what a year it's been. We've gone from strength to strength, made some fantastic friends, and have seen the most amazing skills and community spirit.

We've uncovered the dirty little secrets that London City Aiport and Newham Council tried to hide from residents, we've highlighted flawed and missing data in the planning application, seen flash mobs at Newham Town Hall, we've received funding, we're listed on the BBC and known in media circles for our reliability of information and evidence (lets try not to think about the Newham Recorder for now) , FTF is a known name in the anti expansion campaigning world. We now see cross party support, we've been to City Hall and next we go to the Houses of Parliament. In one year we have achieved and learnt so much.

But most of all FTF is community focussed, we actually care about the communities we live in and the people that make them communities. It is the work we have done with residents, and meeting some of the most amazing people which has given us the encouragement and focus to continue. We are fed up of Newham overlooking the constant breaches of planning law by LCA and the abuse of residents and communities as a result. It's about time Sir Rob stopped cosying up to LCA and parading local children in LCA sweatshirts of a company which has consistently breached planning law conditions. What sort of example is that to set to children? Ignore planning law and you'll get rich and get some influential contacts? Tut, tut.

We are here for the long haul - sorry for the pun. Roll on the future, we're waiting.

Newham and its Councillors Suffer Ongoing Amnesia

We wondered, is there something in the water at Newham Town Hall, or is it something that is in the Town Hall which appears to affect the accurate recollection of councillors when they make statements about London City Airport and the communities? This is particularly noticeable when they don't mention the planning departments inability to enforce planning conditions against the aiport and how the airport keeps breaking planning condition law - all to the detriment of residents.

The councillors tend not to mention that 2 public inquiries have been held over the airport amongst fierce opposition against expansion, and certain promises were made to residents - all of which have been broken. They also don't mention that THEIR council has neglected their duty to an extent of gross maladministration for 8 years in not enforcing the planning conditions. But no, the councillors haven't mentioned that, they clearly are not affected, and it doesn't worry them: they've had 8 YEARS TO ACT after all and have done NOTHING. Councillor Graham Lane appears to fall into that category.

Cllr Lane strangely stated in the Newham Recorder that Ken Livingstone supports London City Airports expansion. Ken Livingstone has not supported the airport expansion (and it is well documented if you care to research), in fact he wanted to see it closed down. He wanted to see much needed homes for the Newham residents who continue to live in substandard housing, or are termed as 'homeless' built in the area. As Cllr Lane should know Newham has one of the worst housing shortages in England.

They are clearly out of touch with the residents in the communities affected, despite residents growing anger with Newham from across the boroughs. Robin Wales has a problem on his hands, and it just isn't going to go away, no matter how much they continue to pour spin to try and bury the 'plane truth'.

So just who are the councillors representing?

Voters, or London City Airport?

"Increase movements each year [at LCA] until something bad happens" - Pprune

FTFs pilot friend has alerted us to a thread on Pprune - the Professional pilots rumour network:

"City airport by its pure existence is a pain in the a**e.lack of stands, ancient procedures and c**p flow..... but lets increase the movements each year until something bad happens".

Quote from Pprune member who started thread on Thames Radar/London City Airport Controllers: 04/11/08

That just about sums up how most resident objectors feel across the boroughs of east and south east London, Kent and Essex.

Then follows a comment from a 27 year old 'not in my backyard' pro aviation, at any cost 'individual' who recommends some "tridents" and "VC10s down the approach" to put residents concerns and issues with noise, and breaches of the section 106 into perspective. He hates his neighbours apparently. We suspect the feeling might be mutual between him and his neighbours. (pictured above VC10)

Another individual claims 'the' objector lives in the 'penthouse flat, that was built after the airport' - apparently you are the only one objecting! Whoever is the person in the penthouse flat? However they've linked that comment to the Newham Recorder so at least their keeping in tradition with the paper in printing inaccurate biased statements.

Prune member must know something we don't, but he also doesn't know a lot of things that we do...such as how many objectors have lived in the area for 3 generations or more and far outdate the airports short life. Or is he making the point that residents have no right in a democracy to object if they moved to the area in the past 20 years despite the airport promising to be nothing other than a stolport for small business aircraft?He happened to forget to quote that there were over 1000 objection letters and almost 1000 signatures against expansion. Hmm there must be more penthouse flats in east and south east London than we thought!

Ignorance is bliss for some. Could they possibly dig deeper holes for themselves?

Newham Recorder FORCED to Report BOTH Sides Of Story

The Newham Recorder has been forced to print a follow up story on the advert by London City Airport in last weeks newspaper.

Residents from across the boroughs complained to Editor Colin Grainger, and Chief Executive Angie Carwood that Colin had consistently put to print unbalanced reporting on the airport over the past year, all bar around 3 items out of double figure features. Colin Grainger has denied this accusation and residents have requested that he provide the evidence of balanced reporting: he has failed to do this in nearly 8 weeks of waiting and it looks unlikely that he will do so. Clearly he doesn't have the evidence to argue against residents accusations.

What the Newham Recorder article didn't inform residents of was that Colin Grainger, and the Chief Executive were advised that unless reporting was more balanced now and in the future (that means two sides of the story should always be presented in articles) that a complaint would be made to the Press Complaints Commission. In the media world it is standard good practice to present balanced articles.

Clearly the Editor felt that he was on unsteady footing if a complaint was sent in to the PCC, and decided to print the follow up you see on the Newham Recorders website today.

What is worth noting is that the only individuals who appear to defend the airport are paid officials and some businesses. Although the Newham Recorder likes to make out that there are just a handful of residents who object, the 1000 objection letters, and just under a thousand signatures and requests for public inquiries from: Bexley Council, MP John Austin, Cllr Alan Craig and various other individuals and businesses seems to be something that Newham, and the Newham Recorder have to be forced to report upon.

Oh dear.

As for Alec Kelleway and Robin Wales - they ignore that the airport has consistently breached section 106 conditions for 8 years to the detriment of local residents. This means that they clearly condone the breaking of planning law. Residents have approached them directly on these issues and Robin Wales was alledged to say ''you can't say no to big business''. They should both be throughly ashamed of themselves as both are indicative of a borough which claims to be democratic but clearly is not, and also selects who it applies the law to. You know what they say: power corrupts. Let's hope that residents make their unhappiness known at the next ballot box.

Residents are now keeping a close eye on the behaviour of LB Newham and the Newham Recorder. They will pursue issues through the correct procedures to make individuals accountable as and when they need to.

LCA BA Cityflyer Has Technical Malfunction on Take Off

Incident: BA Cityflyer RJ85 at London on Oct 31st 2008, technical malfunction
By Simon Hradecky, created Friday, Oct 31st 2008 18:58Z, last updated Friday, Oct 31st 2008 18:59Z

A BA Cityflyer Avro RJ-85, registration G-LCYB performing flight CJ8767 from London City,EN (UK) to Zurich (Switzerland), diverted to London Stansted,EN due to an unspecified technical malfunction. The crew declared emergency almost immediately after takeoff, turned left and went straight to Stansted. British Airways confirmed the incident stating, that engineers are currently examining the airplane. The passengers have been bussed back to London City Airport and will board another airplane to Zurich.