Press Release: City Airport admits it got its sums wrong

Estimated number of jobs created by expansion cut by 50%

London City Airport has admitted that it over-estimated the number of jobs which would be created by the proposed expansion of the airport by 50%. In a letter to local MP Stephen Timms, seen by the pressure group Fight the Flights, Newham Council reveals that the Airport now acknowledges that there will only be 480 new jobs.

A letter says that “The Airport itself now accepts that the application was lodged before the current economic downturn, bringing with it a downturn in demand for air travel, and that additional employment to the extent shown in the original application is unlikely now to be realised by 2010.”

Newham Council recently gave London City Airport permission to increase the number of flights using the airport by 50%.

A spokesperson from Fight the Flights, said, “Newham Council has always argued it favoured expansion because of the number of jobs it would create. Now we discover it is no more than work in a big superstore. Yet, the extra noise caused by the planes will bring misery to tens of thousands.”

ENDS

For further information:

fighttheflights@yahoo.co.uk

Press Release dated: 24 August 2009

London City Airport's Economics - The FACTS

London City Airport costs London taxpayers over £5million a year in Metropolitan Police security costs

LCA costs taxpayers, per passenger 1000% (£1.70) more than Heathrow passengers

Each direct aviation job receives a tax subsidy of £50,000 per year, £1000 per week or £25 per day by way of the £9billion lost in fuel tax and vat which the aviation industry are excused from paying

In 1998, at the last expansion, London City Airport promised jobs would go from 1100 to 4000 direct and indirect jobs

In 2008 the airport claims to have 'created' 2000 jobs – but there is no hard evidence – this falls short by 2000 of their claims in 1998

In 2008 the airport directly employs just 406 people, of which 120 come from Newham

The airport has failed to meet the employment targets as set out in the section 106.

Newham residents should make up 35% of employees, they make up 29%.

Local employment (local regarded as a five mile radius) should be 70% but is 68%.

Newham is the most socially deprived borough in London and England, even after 20 years of the airports claimed effect on regeneration on the community

London City Airport contributed a 'small contribution of £2million' to the DLR which cost £140million – this was questioned by the Transport Select Committee, May 2007

------------------------

London City Airport and the aviation industry are nothing more than modern day highwaymen...stand a deliver your taxes now!!

Cllr Patricia Holland & London City Airport & Local People Upset They Can't Get Good Jobs

Whoops: Has Councillor Patricia Holland forgotten that her and her colleagues have been repeating the mantra that the airport was a major quality employer in the area? That the airport provided so much work for local people - all 120 jobs for Newham residents after 20 years of operation? Well she's been commenting on how there MIGHT be UP TO 200 new jobs at a new hotel at the Excel. She didn't go so far as listing what types of jobs will be offered at the hotel....but we believe you all know what kinds of jobs, and pay are generally offered across the hotel hospitality board once it's built.

It seems Patricia is also admitting that Councillors have failed in ensuring that local residents get a fair share of decent jobs in the past too! We couldn't agree more Patricia. Now what will she do about London City Airport? Is she going to enforce that those 1000 jobs they pulled out of the hat as part of the stick and carrot technique to this gullible council actually materialise? Will her colleagues who said that the job 'creation' value overode all the pollution and cost to healthcare, and the odd death as a result be worth it?

Hmmm seems Cllr Holland made a bit of an admission in her comment to The Wharf:

Custom House councillor Patricia Holland said it was imperative the community around Excel benefitted.

She said: "Recent events at the Excel have seen hotels around it full up, so this development should be welcomed.

"However, quite a few people in the area are upset they can't get good jobs and we need to ensure a fair share of them can work on this project."

Try not to laugh at the hypocrisy. Pat perhaps could bring the issue up at the next Newham Homes meeting, on which Richard Gooding sits on the board with her.....and a whole selection of Royal Docks Councillors. Cosy.

Boris Johnson Uses 'Hear Say' Not Evidence As Justification For Expansion At London City Airport

Ever wondered why Boris has such double standards and likes to try and bury his decision to support London City Airport expansion at every opportunity?

Well we thought we'd ask where Boris gets the statistics he keeps throwing out at residents when he is challenged on his decision to support expansion at LCA. Boris is particularly keen to use the stick and carrot of jobs....but really Boris, this FOI request (see beneath) and answer from your office appears to indicate that you have no such evidence to support what we know are incorrect and unsubstantiated claims that you keep throwing out!

We find it quite dissapointing that this FOI response indicates that he simply bases his decisions on 'hear say'? No wonder he's got so many double standards, he needs to start dealing in evidence and the facts. Can't say this is the type of behaviour that builds confidence or trust - but then Boris seems willing to sacrifice anything for his double standards over London City Airport - even his credibility. Boris can keep trying to bury the LCA issue - but Heathrow will not save his face as double standards are not attractive and objectors to the expansion are not going anywhere.

1) At the Mayors Question time Boris Johnson claimed that the "expansion of London City Airport would provide 1000 new jobs". Can I have a copy of all documentation that the Mayor has seen to support this claim PRE this request.

The Mayor received a verbal briefing before PQT, so the Greater London Authority holds no such documentation.

2) Can I also have a breakdown of the 1,000 jobs and a time line for the jobs?

The Greater London Authority does not hold this information.


Yours sincerely


Zoë Newcombe
Mayor’s Office

London City Airport Jobs: False Hopes, Cruel Hoax

The disingenuous London City Airport continues to be revealed as purposely feeding the communities with inaccurate and misleading information in a bid to quell objections. And what for? To get what they want: a load of money at the expense of residents suffering from ill health, and decreased educational attainment all from increasing pollution levels.

We all know the biggest stick and carrot an airport can wave at gullible and ill informed councils is the promise of job creation. Oh and isn't that emotive in a borough that has high unemployment levels even when the rest of the country levels had been relatively low!

You see, the poorly skilled elected officials at the London Borough of Newham chose to overlook the previous multitude of broken promises from London City Airport on many issues, including on the job creation front. LB Newham are however rather quick to help LCA on making out that there are more jobs for Newham residents than there actually are - that is how desparate Sir Robin Wales is to not let down his mate and alleged fellow funny hand shaker! You can read about the lies and broken promises about jobs here and here.

But using jobs as bait in a bid to get harmful aviation expansion approved is not unique to London City Airport. We cordially invite you to read an excellent piece of work recently written by Brendon Sewell: Airport Jobs: False Hopes, Cruel Hoax.

It doesn't have London City Airports data but that is probably because job statistics from the airport, although legally required under the Section 106 by the LB Newham are like trying to access a document under the official secrets act. A recent FOI request to Newham was rejected because apparently the airport only has this data. We don't think so! We know Newham have this data, but simply don't want to release it because it yet again proves the point that the airport has indeed given false hopes over the years, which have indeed ended up as cruel hoaxes to local residents.

And if you are a resident who believes the likes of that ignoramous Stephen Timms MP and is confident in just how much locals have benefited from 'direct employment' at the airport (not from the guy who grinds the flour, that makes the bread, that ends up in Bewleys bread but whom lives 200 miles away for instance!)as a result of its expansion, we invite you to ask LB Newham for the annual statistics and breakdown of employees by borough, salary ranges, and contract types? It wont make for comfortable reading for you at all.

LCAs Broken Promises, and Pork Pies: JOBS

In the London City Airport application to increase flights to 73,000 submitted on the 2nd of June 1998, the employment section still makes mind boggling reading....

"Regeneration and Partnerships do expect considerable job growth if the number of air services is extended as suggested - the economic impact study estimates that if the full increase in ATMs is allowed airport related employment will rise from 1,140 in 1997 to 4,275 in 2005 , an increase of over 3000 jobs.The point is taken that because of the need for high provision of services , estimates of employment growth at airports in Britain have tended to materialise.

We would however question the assumption that the use of additional new technology will not restrain this growth and there will be no diminishing returns as the airport expands.
The projection of 4,275 jobs may prove too high an estimate.However if , say , 1500 - 2000 or more jobs were created , even as a conservative estimate , this would represent a very welcome boost for the borough"

In the current application the airport claims 1866 jobs. And if the application goes through they claim to create another 1000.

But in 10 years from the 1998 application job figure of 1140 to the current 1866 the airport has created 726 jobs!! So what happened to the projected 4275? They haven't even hit HALF of the most conservative estimate of 1500!!!!!

An increase of 36,000 flights actually created 726 jobs over a DECADE. Now they plan to increase flights by 40,000 and create 957 jobs by 2010.

How??

Even at best case scenario and on history and current figures it would take 13 YEARS.

Then we have 328 employees on-site who are not required to provide address information as they are employed by control authorities such as the Metropolitan Police, Special Branch, HM Immigration and HM Revenue and Customs.In layman's terms its the tax payer who is paying for these jobs. So are we paying for half the jobs created?

Then we have Cityjet paying in Euros and the jobs going through Ireland. How many are there? Are they included in the 726?

From a projection of 4275 to only 726. So Even in the best case scenario and with only 29% of these jobs going to Newham , the airport has created 210 Newham jobs over a decade, of which just over 120 are direct employment at the airport.

So 210 jobs times the Newham average wage of £27,600 totals £5.7 million a year. Funnily enough just about the same as the annual security bill. But we suspect that the majority of those jobs receive far from near the average salary, even Newham's.

Robin Wales - Confronted Over London City Airport

In the recent explosive Mayoral 'question time' in Beckton , 'Sir' Robin Wales was questioned about London City Airport.

Before he was questioned he did a little self PR about 0% council tax rises. Don't let this fool you though! The average income for a household in Newham is £27,600, compared with £34,625 for London as a whole. So the average Newham family receives 76% LESS than these families passing through London City Airport £27,600 Vs, £116,000 and puts up with all the noise and air pollution for the pleasure.

He also tried to shout down the questioner for bringing up the 16 homes owned by a Beckton Cllr sitting in the front row of the meeting and the 5600 homeless families in Newham.

He was asked what he was most ashamed of...

(a) Why the children's choir that sung at the beginning of the meeting and that he was happy to be photographed with , why then was he happy to let them be continually exposed to choking Nitrogen Dioxide gases 50% higher than acceptable EU levels from London City Airport.
(b) Why was it acceptable for the children's education to be continually interrupted by noise from LCA - much of which is unmonitored and in breach of World Health Organisation levels.
(c) Why do LCA airport receive over £5 million a year of Tax Payers money for security and policing while crime is up in Beckton and Royal docks area and they are closing down the local police station.
(d) Why he spent over £100 MILLION of tax payers money to buy Building 1000 beside LCA even though it was classed as not fit for purpose.In fact a bit like HIMSELF!

Anyway the usual word answers came from his mouth saying that things are "not perfect at the airport, but jobs were created and this was the most important".

Then why, oh why has this happened......

Since 2005 - the date of the winning bid - the Government has been working its fingers to the bone issuing new national insurance numbers in Newham to workers taking up the new opportunities British taxpayers and British lottery payers are financing.

But what do the facts tell us? Since 2005 more than 50,000 national insurance numbers have been issued in Newham, and if you click here you can read the ever practical Frank Field's take on it all:

Suddenly Robin Wales isn't that interested in jobs for Newham people (except at the airport when it comes to planning applications: in all but words, and certainly not deeds!) It really is shameful.

Even Worse now, is it has come to light that the vast amount of workers at CityJet get paid in EUROS and their jobs and taxes are through DUBLIN!! Cityjet are one of the largest employers at the airport.

So why wasn't this declared and looked into at the expansion proposal? Probably because the true number of Newham residents employed by the airport has never been disclosed by the airport or Newham as it is so pitiful.

But when the airport and 'Sir' Robin Wales has good friends like Stephen Timms MP, that useless waste of space of a junior minister in government who supported a higher tax for the lowest earners, then it helps. Clearly anything can be 'pushed through' if it means that more of the higher tax band payers (the better off) can travel from an area (Newham) where the lowest earners pay proportionately MORE tax on their incomes, AND in addition PAY for LCA security out of their COUNCIL TAXES, whilst only dreaming of being able to use their 'local airport'! Oh, and don't forget the damage to their children's education and to their health that they have to incur as a result of the excessive noise levels.

Wales never answered the question in the end.

What should he be more ashamed of? Of course we know the answer. London City Airport.

The Great Web Of Deception

There are a lot of things about this application that have been uncovered during the last 9 months or so. Most of all it is the level of deception that the community have been fed in the absence of real facts, and accurate information that has been the most concerning.

1. Residents are still being told - ''noise mitigation will be offered to all households in the noise contours to deal with the increased noise levels".

This is a really good one to get rid of objecting residents, who haven't seen or had time to read the details of the noise mitigation programme, and whose main concern are the noise levels.

There's two problems with this: firstly the noise contours are based on estimates, secondly any home built of given planning permission after 1997 is not eligible for assistance to sound insulation. You may be offered motorised ventilation simply because opening your windows will be unbearable with the level of noise from jets - but this will not reduce the noise experienced from 50% more planes at intervals of 90seconds!

2. Noise contours - residents have been led to believe that the current noise contours are only estimated for the past year.

Estimated noise contours are a real money saver for London City Airport (think of all those properties which may be eligible for noise mitigation for the past 7 years but haven't been identified as 'eligible'!)and rather helpful when you want to get an application through to expand to a major airport, in the middle of a residential area when the noise levels really matter.

As you will know if you read this blog they have been estimated for over 6 years. Why? Because LCA and Newham don't care and appear to have had some sort of amnesia with regards to the Section 106 requirements since the document was written. But don't worry, a nice, new shiny section 106 with a 50% increase in flights will make everything much, much better, so we are told!

3. Employment Figures - the great myth

Jobs, jobs, jobs - a great tool to try and bury the outweighing negatives to any community! After all who would dare stand up and say no to more 'estimated' jobs? Even if they are just words in the quest to get approval to make loadsamoney, even if it does mean an additional 46,000 people will have to live in sealed up homes, children's development will be affected, and cardiovascular conditions continue to soar in Newham and Greenwich in the areas most affected by the noise levels? Stephen Timm's is right behind on the job issue, shame his equivalent in health isn't right behind the people on the health impacts! Still the price put on the head of a resident, appears to be far less value than that of business - check out the PSZ guidance to see this in practice! But we are sure with Newham's excellent track record in enforcement they will of course follow up and independently check the validity of such job growth claims!!

The airport never, ever quotes that it directly employs just over 400 people. Instead it likes to think it can isolate other job growth in the area and take all the credit for it themselves.

So just over 400 jobs soon become 2000 jobs 'created' but they consistently omit in identifying the distinction between the two categories. They could give lessons on how to purposely mislead the reader - and we thought it was all ''open and honest''! When members of the LCACC also start to express their unhappiness with the figures and projections of job growth, well that says everything.

Itsy, bitsy, spider....

Alledged Redundancies At London City Airport

Fight the Flights has received an anonymous email from an ex employee of London City Airport alledging that they are 1 of 18 individuals whom has been made redundant.

We will of course be waiting for London City Airports official response to this.

If it is accurate, so much for job creation for 'locals': Job cut backs to preserve the profits on current operations, is not a good sign at all - 'cloud cuckoo land' is becoming reality.

Newham Council - Do they ignore residents and only listen to big business?

London City Airport, like most airports whom have no other positives to spin regarding airport expansion (as there are so few), regularly try and bait Councils and residents with the promise of job creation. You may recall London City Airport's words, that lack wisdom at the best of times, stating that job creation will make up for the environmental impacts. Clearly that is not the case at all. You can read an article on this issue entitled 'Jobs are used to justify anything - but the numbers don't add up' by George Monbiot.

A few, rather naive/autocratic elected officials may buy this - but clearly they have not read through the masterplan which aims at 176,000 flights per year, nor the current application by LCA with regard to how many residents are going to suffer from increased pollution and noise levels. Essentially living in the area will be a nightmare and the sky full of noise will hardly 'benefit' residents no matter how much spin the pinnochios put on it.

46,000+ additional residents will be bought into the noise contours which means noise is on the increase - and that is just an estimate. Of course if London City Airport and LB Newham had actually been doing their jobs properly with regard to community responsibility over the past 20 years: that is carrying out accurate and regular noise and air pollution monitoring from London City Airport then we wouldn't be having to quote that the noise levels are just estimates.

In reality the 46,000 residents being bought into the new noise maps could be just the tip of the iceberg so a few hundred jobs (that are not even certain) really are not a good enough bargaining tool at all.

Compare the suffering of increasing noise levels to LCA's offer of job creation ' to make up for it' against the environmental impacts of increasing noise levels and air pollution. LCA may like to think it's generous, but its a shame that the 'locals' haven't benefited from LCA operations in the past 20 years and continue to pay for it's security in the bargaining. But then LCA get paid to say how good the firm is and put a nice spin on it - at any cost.

Employment we must remind you, appears to be only open to those that can afford to own a car, or have access to one, and that 'local jobs' mean within a five mile radius - which in reality does not interpret as local jobs for Newham residents.

Alongside this the fact that official bodies regularly make statements about the jobs that go unfilled throughout London it seems to us that the jobs that LCA are plying Newham with are irrelevant to the application for expansion. If Newham are foolish enough to buy this line after 20 years of LCA's operation then they are even more foolish than we currently believe they are.

We feel that those elected officials who use the job scenario as the one item that supports the application need to start opening their eyes and getting a little more in contact with what is happening in the job market and the implications of the expansion on THEIR constituents.

Or is it just a case for some of these elected individuals to yes to business all the way - regardless of the 46,000+ residents who will pay a very high price for so few jobs of which the vast majority will not go to Newham residents?

We wondered if they also factored the continuing cost to residents who pay for LCAs £7million security bill? Going by a few outrageously un-informed statements we've seen and heard by elected and paid officials (who we will be keeping a close eye on), we think it is very likely that they don't even know about that little sum!

Job creation does not have to be at the cost of 46,000+ residents suffering increasing noise levels and health problems linked to aviation activities.

If LCA paid their £7million security costs, instead of Londoners paying it, it might just free up £7million for employment training, start up grants etc to create jobs that pay a salary that sustains a family and offers real opportunities and career growth for locals - not opportunities that are only open to them if they own, or have access to a car!