Thanet Council’s Overview and Scrutiny Panel met tonight to
discuss the latest developments concerning the troubled Pleasurama development which
has blighted Ramsgate’s seafront for over a decade.
Council officers and Labour Cabinet member Rick Everitt
tried their best to bamboozle and scare councillors into accepting a deal whereby
Canterbury building contractors, Cardy,
would buy out the controversial development company SFP Ventures (UK) Ltd and
complete the project within a three year period. Everitt said that the stalled legal
action against SFP Ventures for breach of agreement would cost a fortune and that
a deal with Cardy might be the best option. Chief Executive Madeline Homer said
that she though legal action would “take years” and that it would be preferable
to make a deal with Cardy.
Conservative leader Bob Bayford and his colleague Councillor
Chris Wells challenged much of what Everitt had to say. Green Party Councillor
Ian Driver pointed out that everything Everitt and Homer had said was based on
legal and valuation advice which members of the Overview and Scrutiny Panel had
not seen. He expressed his concern that the Panel was being asked to make recommendations
on an incredibly complex issue without having seen the key information. This
was an highly improper abuse of process. Driver then moved a motion calling for
the members of the Panel to be provided with copies of the legal and valuation
advice and the officers report about progress on the Cardy takeover of SFP.
Driver’s motion was passed by 7 votes to 5 with 2 abstentions. It was
notable that the 5 votes against and 2 abstentions were Labour
Councillors, Campbell, Huxley, Moore, Matterface and Poole voted against Driver’s
motion. Worrow and Fenner abstained.
Said Driver “Labour showed their true colours tonight. They
voted to prevent the Panel from having sight of key documents about Pleasurama
before they make a decision. This is undemocratic and appallingly
irresponsible. Quite clearly Cabinet member Everitt and his labour colleagues,
supported by senior council officers, are determined to drive through this deal with
Cardy and foist on the people of Ramsgate a development which is extremely unpopular
and which many people oppose.
What makes this this worse is that Everitt and 6 of the Councillors who voted against or abstained
on my motion (Campbell, Fenner, Huxley, Moore, Poole and
Worrow), represent, or have been selected to represent, Ramsgate wards. These people have shown by
their actions tonight that they don’t give a damn about their constituents concerns over
Pleasurama. They have demonstrated that they cannot be trusted by the voters, preferring
to stab local people in fthe back in a cynical pusuit of party politics.
A source close to senior council officersreported that Chief Executive Homer was
incandescent with rage as her plans to have the Cardy/ SFP takeover rubber
stamped were scuppered by Driver and Conservative councillors. Apparently the
air turned blue at a hastily convened officer pow-wow called by Homer
immediately after the Scrutiny meeting had ended. Said Driver the Chief Executive must realise that if councillors are being asked to
make important decisions, such as the future of the of the Pleasurama site, we
must be provided with all the relevant background documentation instead of second
hand explanations and vacuous summaries We are not a rubber stamping factory we
are supposed to be scrutinising and evauating decisions on behalf of the public. We can't do this without the relevant information.
Thanet South
Green Party PPC, Ian Drivers Calls on TDC Leader to Resign Over Alleged “Politically
Motivated” Spending on CPO
Following
today’s announcement of the sale of
Manston Airport to the owners of Discovery Park Sandwich, Thanet South Green Party Parliamentary Candidate, Ian
Driver, has alleged that Thanet Council has
improperly spent £thousands in taxpayers
money on a “deceitful, disingenuous, politically motivated charade of securing a compulsory purchase order on the airport, in
order to secure votes”.
He has also
called on the Labour Leader of Thanet District Council, Iris Johnston to “do
the right thing and resign for overseeing on her watch what appears to be an extraordinary and significant
abuse of public funds for political purposes”.
In an article
on his blog site Driver previously revealed that strategic economic planning
agencies the Kent and Medway Economic
Partnership (KMEP) and the South East
England Local Economic Partnership
(SEELEP) of which Thanet District Council is a member, had agreed,before Anne Gloag had bought Manston Airport and before she closed it
down, to designate the airport land as a major site for commercial, industrial and residential
development and growth.
KMEP/ SEELEP’s
successful application for £10 million Government
fundingtowards building the Thanet Parkway station near to
the airport site, even after it had been closed, demonstrated, according to
Driver, “that a clear agreement and commitment
existed between Kent political and business leaders to support the transformation of the former airport siteinto an area of major economic and residential development”.
Earlier today
in a response to a Freedom of Information Request made by Driver,Thanet District Council, whilst acknowledging
that they held the information, refused to divulge to him documents, notes list of
attendees and the dates of internal and
external meetings where senior politicians, council officers and others
discussed the post-closure future of
Manston Airport.
Said Driver “it
is simply inconceivable that senior politicians at Thanet District Council were unaware of KMEP
and SEELEP plans for the Manston Airport site once it had closed. In
fact these politicians had discussed and agreed the plans in the 2 years prior to
the closure. Furthermore, it is clear from the response to my FOI that extensive
internal and external discussions about the future developmentof Manston Airport involving senior Thanet politicians
and council officers took place in the months following the closure. I will be
appealing to the Information Commissioner to force Thanet Council to reveal all
the information they hold on these meetings and am confident that we will shortly know what
was discussed with who and when”.
“I believe that
it will quickly become apparent to the voters of Thanet that senior Labour politicians,
perhaps with the support of officers, may have wilfully and recklessly agreed
to spend taxpayers money on securing a CPO in order to protect their political positions, when all
along their intention was to implement the plans they had previously agreed
with KMEP and SEELEP to allow the development of the former airport site into an industrial commercial and residential growth
area. The possibility of political deception on such a huge scale and the
associated possibility that large amounts of public money may have been spent
to fund this deception is an extremely
serious matter. Once I have collected the necessary evidence I will be
submitting a formal complaint to the District
Auditor”.
In a further
astonishing twist, Driver revealed that, Paul Barber, the Managing Director
ofDiscovery Park, the purchasers of
Manston Airport, was appointed in June of this as the Chairman of the Thanet
Regeneration Board. Said Driver “The Thanet Regeneration Board, itsChairman, members, senior council officers and politicians will
have been discussing formally and informally the future of Manston Airport
since it closure was announced. I want to know what Paul Barber might have said
about his company’s plans to buy the airport. I simply can’t ’ believe that
Barber , as Chairman of the Thanet Regeneration Board, kept these plans secret
from, Regeneration Board members. Surely he must have declared his company’s
interest to the Leader of Thanet Council or the Acting Chief Executive? If so
then the most senior people at the Thanet Council must have known about the purchase before it was completed,
yet continued using public money to fund the CPO. The public deserve a full and frank
explanation of what has happened here.
Thank you for your communication received on 08/07/2014 where you
requested the following information:
Please tell me if Thanet District Council has conducted any internal
discussions involving officers and/ or Cabinet/ shadow cabinet members
about the future of the Manston Airport site post its closure by owner
Anne Gloag. If so please tell me the dates of any such meetings and who
was in attendance. Please provide me with copies of any documents which
have been produced related to such discussions including notes of
meetings, reports or e-mails.
Please tell me if Thanet District Council including members of its staff
or councillors have engaged in discussions with other organisations e.g.
other local authorities, Thanet Regeneration Board, East Kent Regeneration
Board, Kent and Medway Economic Partnership, South East Local Economic
Partnership, Government Departments, Ministers, Civil Servants etc, about
the future of the Manston Airport site post its closure by owner Anne
Gloag. If so please tell me the dates of any such meetings and who was in
attendance. Please provide me with copies of any documents which have been
produced related to such discussions including notes of meetings, reports
or e-mails.
I can confirm that Thanet District Council holds this information. This
information is exempt under Section 36 of the Freedom of Information Act
and is, therefore, being withheld.
The requested information falls into the terms of a qualified exemption.
In the opinion of the qualified person (the Council's Monitoring Officer),
disclosure would or would be likely to inhibit the free and frank
provision of advice or exchange of views for the purposes of the ongoing
deliberations in this matter and prejudice the effective conduct of public
affairs. The balance of the public interest test determines that the
information is exempt from release.
Having considered the public interest, the Department’s decision is to
withhold the information.
If you are dissatisfied with the handling of your request, you have the
right to ask for an internal review. Internal review requests should be
submitted within two months of the date of receipt of the response to your
original letter and should be addressed to: Information Request Assessor,
Thanet District Council, P O Box 9 Cecil Street, Margate Kent CT9 1XZ, or
send an email to [email
address].
Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future
communications.
If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you have
the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a
decision. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at: Information
Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9
5AF
Yours sincerely,
Colin Fitt
Interim Head of Built Environment
Email to Ian Driver Re appointment of Paul Barber to Thanet Regeneration Board
Forwarded Message -----
From: Madeline Homer
To: Cllr-Ian Driver
Sent: Tuesday, 12 August 2014, 16:40
Subject: Appointment of New Chair of
Thanet Regeneration Board
Dear Cllr Driver,
Thank you for
your e-mail concerning the Thanet Regeneration Board and the minutes of the
Board meeting on 21st March 2014.
The position
for clarity sake is that the Board is not a body which is subject to the
Council procedures and it is not a formally constituted entity or a part of
TDC's formal organisation structure. That said the minute you refer to does not
accurately reflect the full and open discussion and conversations with and
commitment from the Board about attracting a Chair from the Private Sector.
I made
enquiries into the amount of hits the Boards website receives and it is
actually quite low. As a result of thisthe approach adopted was to receive direct nominations with the support
of a role description for the chair. The Panel consisted of 2 members of the
Board and myself. All nominations were shortlisted and interviews were then
arranged but regrettably this process did not provide a successfulcandidate.
In discussion
with the Panel given the position we were in I then directly approached Paul
Barber and asked him whether he would be interested in talking to us about the
role to which he agreed. He then met with myself and one member of the Panel (the
other member being unavailable at the time) following which we offered him the
role as Chair of TRB on a voluntary basis.
Thanet South Green Party Parliamentary Candidate Ian Driver
said that “ any industrial,
commercial and residential development
on or around the Manston Airport site
must comply with the highest environmental standards. The new owners of the
site must ensure that micro generation, water re-use and insulation technologies are
deployed in any developments and that
any jobs created are long term sustainable and pay living wages. The new owners
should also return some of their land to agricultural
use and set aside land for nature areas
and community allotments for residents. If properly managed the
development of the Manston/ Thanet Central Island area could be good for the environment
and good for the economy and jobs. Thanet Green Party and I will not spare our efforts in ensuring that planning applications from the owner are throughly scrutinised, of the highest standard and that our environment is protected"
So the best Iris Johnston and Roger Gale could do to save
Manston Airport was to invite Grant Shapps MP to Thanet for a couple of hours.
Not a “proper”Government minister with an aviation or
regeneration portfolio; nor an influential heavyweight in the corridors of power at Westminster; Shapps
is the Tory Party Chairman. A post generally occupied by failed Tory
wannabes who didn’t have the talent to make
it to the top table, or for those
politicians who have seen better days and who are being gently eased out of their
senior responsibilities and retired from the A team.
Ever Get the Feeling You've Been Cheated?
But its not the fact that a political nobody turned up at
Manston Airport last week, but that this nobody said nothing, which should be
of concern. His 2 minute speech was full ofgushing hyperbole, yet Shapps failed to give a commitment that his
Government would support Thanet Council’s
moves to compulsorilypurchase the
airport site. In fact he didn’t mention
the CPO once. And sadly the short film of Shapps meaningless rhetorical flannel
illustrates, through the applause he received, that it is indeed possible for
politicians to fool most the people most of the time.
Becausejust like Thanet
Labour who are cynically manipulating the Manston CPO to gain votes in 2015, here
was the Chairman of the Tory Party,whose job it is to manage the Tory general
election campaign, doing exactly the
same thing in order to shore upsupport against the UKIP onslaught in Thanet
in 2015. The spectacle of Johnston and
Shapps shoulder to shoulder at Manston was nothing less than a shameful circus
sideshow ofrank political opportunism
by politicians from the 2 old fashioned parties who are underwear soilingly fearful of
the future.
Should You
Trust Her??
The real truth is that both Labour and the Tories know
damn well that securing a CPO on the
airport will be an incredibly expensive and high risk long shot with no guarantee
of success. They know that there is
nothing they could do to prevent would be investor RiverOak, or any other
investment partner, from acting in precisely the same way as Anne Gloag if they
got their hands on the airport lands. They know that the best brains in the aviation business; the
cleverest airport consultants; the most well-informed aeronautical strategists have,
through expensive hands-on experience and rigorous market
evaluation, allconcluded that Manston
Airport does not have a long-term sustainable future. Shapps and Jonhnston know this too but have
chosen instead to opt for political expediency and deceit instead of being
honest and open with the people.
To mislead and to give publically funded false hope in order to protect your political party's arse is manipulation and
cynicism of the first order, which in my opinion verges on the immoral, if not possibly the
downright criminal. Yet this is precisely
what theLabour and Tory parties,through the personages of Shapps and
Johnston, appear to be doing. I make this allegation
because whilst espousing the Save Manston mantra and leading the CPO battle cry the
Labour and Tory parties have been
formulating policies based upon having no airport at Manston for at
least a year before Anne Gloag owned
the site and long before she announced it was going to close! Here’s the
evidence of the deceitful game played by old fashioned Labour and Tory politicians.
First, in December 2013, 4 months before the airport closure was
announced by Anne Gloag, the Kent and Medway Economic Partnership (KMEP), a
secretive organisation made up of Kent’s Council Leaders (including Clive Hart
and more recently Iris Johnston) and
senior Kent businessmen, including
several developers builders and financiers, published a document called “Unlocking
the Potential; Going the Growth - Kent and Medway’s Growth Plan: Opportunities,
challenges and solutions”. This 71 page document contains lots of
interesting ideas forimproving the
economic fortunes of Kent, many of which I agree with. But most intriguingly it
includesa list of 32 locations in Kent
where plans for economic and population growth will be located.
This list of 32 includes “Manston/ Thanet Central Island”
where, according to the document, there is a large supply of commercial and
residential land available. Howeverthe
viability of this land, so the report argues,needs to be improved by public sector intervention including the
speeding up of the HS1 rail-link to London, the development of Thanet Parkway
Station and support by the Council of large housing projects such the East Kent
Opportunities development at New Haine Road which was recently subject to a
planning appeal, and the forthcoming
Manston Green development which comes before TDC Planning Committee shortly,
and which is situated extremely close to
the airport runway. It may well be that discussions, earlier this year,about building 1000 houses on the airport’s
northern grassland are not unrelated to the KMEEPs document as
well. But quite clearly the direction of travel of this document is for a major
commercial, industrial and residential development in the Manston/ Thanet
Central Island area which could not
realistically be accomplished with a commercial airport operating in the middle of the
same location.
KMEEP’s large, well-researched,
comprehensive documentmust have taken
many months to prepare. There would have been extensive discussions between senior
politicians and council officers such as Thanet‘s then Labour leader Clive
Hart and, currently indisposedChief Executive,
Sue McGongigal. There must have been detailed discussions with the developers,
financiers and builders from KMEP who’s
ears must have been become embarassingly erect in anticipation of the exciting and increbily profitable opportunities likely to be coming their way on the insider track.
There must also have been plenty of unofficial discussions with the owners of the rolling
acres of real estate in Manston / Thanet Central Island area, including
Infratil, the largest landowner of them all, to help formulate, facilitate and shape the KMEP policy
document. This process most have taken at least year or longer before the
December 2013 document was finally published.
So as early as 2012 senior politicians, council
officers and businessmen were already actively discussing and planning for the Manston/ Thanet Central Island area to become a majorcentre for residential, commercial and industrial growthwithout the need for an airport.
Although of
course no-one was stupid enough to say this out loud, it’s not inconceivable
that Infratil, a company with close associations with Anne Gloag’s Stagecoach,
or perhaps a politician or a council officer,may possibly hvae briefed Gloag about KMEPsemerging plans for the Manston/ Thanet
Central Island area. Gloag would have immediately realised just how massively lucrative
buying the airport and closing it down it could be for her, as the land she owned was central to KMEPs plans for the area. Its entirley possible that Labour and Conservative polticians, or senior council officers closely associated with KMEP prvately encouraged Gloag to buy and then close the aiprort with promsies of a touble free planning application process nas astronomic profits. But of course this
is purely conjecture on my part.
Speculation aside, KMEPs plans for major, commercial, industrial and
residential growth in the Manston/ Thanet Central Island area were eventually fed into the South East England Local Economic
Partnership’s (SEELEP), bid for Government Growth Fund money in early 2014. The
SEELEPbid document “Growth Deal and Strategic
Economic Plan”, was submitted
shortly after Ann Gloag began the consultation on the futureof Manston Airport , yet even though the airport was not formally closed, the document appeared to describe a future without it.
The document pointed out that “the area around Manston and
Discovery Park contains extensive land suitable for residential andemployment use, and is well connected by new
infrastructure”. In order to open-up this land, and make it more
attractive for developers, the document requested the Government to
·provide
“£3.5 million Local Growth Fund finance to support commercial development at
Manston and Discovery Park
·invest
“in Thanet Parkway station as a priority to reinforce the success of Discovery
Park and support investment at Manston”
·invest
in the Westwood Relief Strategy,
eliminating a major bottleneck impacting on residential, employment and
commercial growth in Thanet Central Island.
So, well over a year before there was any mention of the airport closingand shortly after Gloag opened the closure
consultation, senior Conservative and
Labour politicians of the 12 Kent District
Councils; Medway Council; Kent County
Council Leader Paul Carter;and the developers, builders and financiers
who together make up the secretive KMEP and SEELEP network (about which I will write
separately in the near future) had already decided that the future of the so-called Manston/ Thanet Central Island area would be a large commercial, industrial
and residential area with no room for an airport.Indeed the closure of Manston was manna for the planners, allowing them to
develop grander more extensive strategies for the rural open spaces of Thanet
than the inconvenientpresence of an
airport would otherwise have allowed for.
And thereinlies
the jaw-dropping hypocrisy and deceit of Thanet’s Labour and Tory Parties. Because the
political bosses of these parties and senior council officers, knew damn well
that significant and extremely serious plans wereemerging within the KMEP and SEELEP network to
transform Manston and Thanet Central Island into a major commercial, industrial
and residential centre with no airport. But instead of telling the truth and
being honest with residents they gambled on no-one knowing about the secret
machinations of these shadowy bodies and instead chose a path of deceit,
dishonesty and political corruption over the fate of the airport.
So where does this take us? Well I think the big question
is how will this game play out. My guess is that that the last thing the local
Tory and Labour parties want is to be
caught with their knickers down and be exposed for their deceit before the
2015 election. What they have probably done is use their influence with Ann Gloag to ask
that she holds back her planning applications for the airport until afterthe election has taken place, with the
promise that her plans will befast
tracked and expedited for being patient. The “nobody saying nothing”,Grant Shapps, may also be persuaded to use
what little influence he wields with Government grandees to hold back the
announcement extending the Discovery Park Enterprise Zone to Thanet. That way
nobody will sniff out the rat-like
stench associated with the double game being played by our politicians. In the meantime RiverOak or
whoever becomes TDC CPO partner, will be played for a fool, at great public
expense, by Thanet Council who will delay and drag out the legal process until
after the election, when of course support for this solution will collapse in
face of Gloags plans and Thanet’snew
Enterprise Zone status.
Alternatively it may be possible thatI have credited Thanet Council and itspoliticians with too much intelligence and
cunning to have planned such a Machiavellian course of action. In which case
Gloags plans for the airport, the intentions of KMEEP and SEELEP for Manston, the
announcement of the Enterprise Zone extension and the collapse of the CPO may,
bit by bit, become known before the election takes place. Indeed this appears to be happening already. The Government announced in July £10 million in principle funding for
the Parkway station even though they knew that Manston airport had been closed. The
controversial East Kent Opportunities planning application for 550 houses at
New Haine Road is in Secretary States, Eric Pickles, in tray for decision shortly.
The 850 house planning application for the Manston Green development will be
discussed byTDC planning committee in October or
November. And any day now I am expecting to hear about plans for the development of a major logistic centre, depot
and vehicle repair hub for east-Kent monopoly transport outfit Stagecoach buses in
one of the hangars at Manston. Which of course will create hundreds of new jobs,
and enjoy the benefit of zero business rates when the Discovery Park Enterprise
Zone isexpanded north-eastwards into
Thanet. And perhaps 1000 houses on the northern grassland might be thrown in
for good measure.
Either way there is no doubt in my mind that the 2 old
fashioned parties, Labour and Tory, have cynically manipulated and deceived the
people of Thanet about saving the airport and securing a CPO for political
gain. When this stinking , politically corrupt game became evident to me is
when I stopped arguing for the CPO and began calling for a public discussion on
Plan B for Manston. Because whether you agree with my politics or not I believe above all else that public affairs should managed in an open and transparent way.
As one my heroes Johnny Rotten once said “ever get the
feeling you’ve been cheated”.
Thanet
SouthGreen Party Parliamentary Candidate
, Ian Driver, claims that TDCs ruling Labour group are “hopelessly split and
acting deceitfully” over plansto secure
a CompulsoryPurchase Order (CPO) for
the recently closed Manston Airport.
Jawdropping Deceit
Driver made
his claim afterreceiving copies of
secretLabour Partye-mails (published below) which showsharp differencesbetween senior ThanetLabour Councillors about the CPO.In an e-mailto Council Leader, Iris Johnston, former Deputy Leader, Allan Poole,
criticises her public support for the CPO saying"the CPO will lose us the election as
opposed to opposing night flights last time winning us the election. There is
more than enough evidence already to show the airport is not viable and the CPO
proposal is merely 'show boating'........it will 'bite us on the butt' if we
don't start being honest with the voters".
In reply to
Poole, Johnston appears to say that her commitment to the CPO is not as genuine
as her high profile public statements on this matter suggest "I am afraid
you are the only person who is consistently saying I am in favour of CPO's! I
was never happy with any I have ever seen before including Dreamland. They are
fraught with difficulties".
Poole replies
"Sorry to contradict you Iris but I distinctly remember at the Group
Meeting before the last Cabinet Meeting you said you were in favour of the
Manston CPO and seemed very happy wearing a SMA T-shirt...And Peter (Campbell)
got rather cross with you".
The communications
also reveal that Cabinet member Mike Harrison, was extremely critical of No
Night Flight campaigners who oppose the CPO saying "they are really not
representative of our electorate, especially in Ramsgate. They are basically a
rabble using intimidation to get their views across......their arguments are
emotional and simply do not hold water. The NNFleadership, in the main, are not Thanet voters and certainly have their
own agenda."
Driver has pointed
to comments made by Cabinet Member David Green on social media saying that“TDC will not agree to any solution to the
airport that is detrimental to Ramsgate's environment”, and “in my opinion an
airport CPO is not economically viable” as further evidence of division amongst Labour Councillors. He also highlightedLabour controlled Ramsgate Town Council’s condemnation of “proposals for the development of Manston
Airport into a major freight hub”; and
Labour Chief Whip, Steve Alexandrou’s letter to the Thanet Gazette saying that he
will not vote for a CPO, as proof that Thanet Labour Party is at war with itself
over Manston Airport and the CPO.
Said Driver “Council
Leader Iris Johnston has shamefully misled and deceived residents into believing that Thanet Labour Councillors
were united in supporting a CPO for Manston Airport, when she knew this was not
true and that many of her councillors opposed it. This was a cynical political manoeuvre
by Johnston aimed at securing votes for Labour in the 2015 elections. To deceive
the public like this is unforgivable. But it’s now likely to blow up in her
face”.
“I understand
that several of the newly selected Labour
candidates for the 2015 Council elections are very much opposed to the CPO and are asking
questions about how much the Council is
spending on this process. I also understand from reliable sources that investment
company RiverOak who are rumoured to have been selected as the Council’s CPO Partner and who are likely
to meeting Iris Johnston soon, are worried about doing business with a Council
whose leadership is split on supporting the CPO. Quite naturally, an investment
company like RiverOak would be worried about doing a potentially expensive deal with
a partner who has deep internal divisions. If I was in this position I would walk
away from the deal rather than risk my money. Personally I believe that the CPO
game is well and truly over. Johnston has
been exposed by her own people for political game playing. She has lost
credibility with the public, her own party members and probably with RiverOak,
if indeed they are the CPO partner. The funding, several months ago, of the Parkway station as a rail link to
support housing and employment, rather than an airport also suggests to me that
the South East England Local Economic Partnership has given up the ghost on
Manstom. If this is true then it must be game over for Manston”.
“Thanet Green
Party has been arguing for a while that the CPO would not succeed and the
evidence appears to confirm our view.. We
have been saying that’s it’s time to
start talking about Plan B and the
alternative uses of the site.From a Green prospective we are opposed to
large scale housing developments on the former airport site. There is sufficient previously used land and long term empty
residential property within Thanet’s urban boundaries to meet most of our housing
need. We would besupportive of leisure,
health, education and employment based developments provided that they have small
carbon footprints, are sustainable, environmentally friendly and create well
rewarded jobs. We would also wish to explore using some of the land for the
generation of renewable energy, growing crops and providing a habitat for our
wild animals and plants. We also believe that the Council should launch an extensive
public consultation with residents about future uses for the airport site and
we support the opening of dialogue with the airport owner, Anne Gloag, about
future use of the site”.
The e-mails
Dear John
Add more humour please the CPO JOKE is running thin
Peter C
> On 10 Aug 2014, at 16:22, cllr-John Worrow
<cllr-John.Worrow@THANET.GOV.UK>
wrote:
>
> I respect everyone's views; however, the outcome is in the hands of the
gods now.> FARAGE is our real problem, NOT the airport (or possibly personal
differences?) We all have views, and by the nature of politics someone will always
be offended by our views.
> I actually think you have all made some very good points... (I'm am
tempted to add a bit of humour, but I won't in case it offends someone) time
for good thoughts darlings!
>
> John xxx
>
> On 10 Aug 2014, at 15:42, "cllr-Steve Alexandrou"
<cllr-Steve.Alexandrou@THANET.GOV.UKcllr-Steve.Alexandrou@THANET.GOV
.UK>> wrote:
>
> No airport equals no night flights, equals no manifesto commitment to
support something which does not exist, you move on.
> On 10 Aug 2014, at 14:55, "cllr-Iris Johnston"
<cllr-Iris.Johnston@THANET.GOV.UKcllr-Iris.Johnston@THANET.GOV.UK>>
wrote:
>
> No Alan I mentioned our manifesto commitment to 'support the airport but
not night flights'. Support the airport means to look at all options and one
they are exhausted move on!
> On 10 Aug 2014,
at 14:49, "Alan Poole"
<poole@btinternet.compoole@btinternet.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi Iris,
> Sorry to contradict you Iris but I distinctly remember at the Group
Meeting before the last Cabinet Meeting you said you were in favour of the
Manston CPO and seemed very happy wearing a SMA T-shirt...And Peter got rather
cross with you.....
>
> Alan
> On 10 Aug 2014, at 14:30, cllr-Iris Johnston
<cllr-Iris.Johnston@THANET.GOV.UKcllr-Iris.Johnston@THANET.GOV.UK>>
wrote:
>
> Alan,
> I am afraid you are the only person who is consistently saying I am in
favour of CPO's! I was never happy with any I have ever seen before including
Dreamland. They are fraught with difficulties and it seems no matter how often
I say it you miss the point,
>
> We must consider all options for Manston and also await Sir Howard Davies
updated report and the Select Committees smaller airport deliberations, Cabinet
,are with group support , following the usual processes on the petition for a
CPO and bond scheme. We have made it clear we cannot do either on our own.
>
> I wish you had attended the public meeting at the Marlowe where my support
for the airport was clear but where I reiterated the problems of a CPO yet
again.
>
> A CPO is only possible if we have strict guarantees and a massive amount
of money banked that supports a probable twenty year plan.
>
> I also reminded those present I was opposed to night flights and the
Liberal candidate asked for a show of hands that was overwhelmingly in support
of them 24/7.
>
> Now let's all enjoy the sunshine and check if there is any sewage on the
beaches,
>
> Regards,
>
> Iris
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 10 Aug 2014, at 14:06, "Alan Poole"
<poole@btinternet.compoole@btinternet.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi Mike,
> The difference this time is the CPO will lose us the election as opposed
to opposing night flights last time winning us the election.....
> There is more than enough evidence already to show the airport is not
viable and the CPO proposal is merely 'show boating'........it will 'bite us on
the butt' if we don't start being honest with the voters.
Alan
> On 10 Aug 2014, at 12:02, cllr-Mike Harrison
<cllr-Mike.Harrison@THANET.GOV.UKcllr-Mike.Harrison@THANET.GOV.UK>>
wrote:
>
> I could of course write that "
> The NNF may be (or maybe not) a properly constituted group but they
are really not representative of our electorate, especially in Ramsgate. They are
basically a rabble using intimidation to get their views across......their
arguments are emotional and simply do not hold water. The NNF leadership,
in the main, are not Thanet voters and certainly have their own agenda"
>
> I for one will not decide on whether or not to support a CPO until we have
all the facts, legal advice and other information. I would like to think that
comrades would do the same and not base their decision on emotion or perceived
threats from pressure groups.
> Mike Harrison.
> Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Operational Services.
So Thanet Council’s Labour Leader, Iris Johnston, and her cabinet colleagues David and Elizabeth Green, Richard Nicholson, Mike Harrison and Rick Everitt claim they are trying to save Manston Airport and secure a Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) on the site.
On the face of it this appears to be true.
They have commissioned legal advice, added to officers workloads producing reports,
advertised for CPO venture partners, all at great public expense, and made positive comments to the media and posted lots of encouraging comments on the several pro-Manston Airport Facebook pages. TDC even hosted on its web-site the pro-Manston petition, they couldn’t have been more helpful.But look more closely and the cracks are now clear to see.
Let’s begin with Cabinet member David Green who is on record as saying, “TDC will not agree to any solution to the airport that is detrimental to Ramsgate's environment”, and “in my opinion an airport CPO is not economically viable”. His Cabinet colleague, and deputy leader of the council, Richard Nicholson was hardly an effusive supporter of potential Airport champion RiverOak saying, “we are not going to do business with people like this”. Worse still Labour dominated Ramsgate Town Council, which includes all of Iris Johnston’s cabinet colleagues, recently voted to support a motion which condemned “proposals for the development of Manston Airport into a major freight hub” and resolved to “defend the environment against harmful development, in particular to oppose night time flying”. And just yesterday Labour Councillor, and party whip, Steve Alexandrou in a letter published in Friday 12 Sept., Thanet Gazette said, “I cannot and will not vote for a CPO”.
So TDCs Labour Cabinet and councillors, who were supposedly committed to saving
the airport by securing a CPO, are, through their comments and actions, openly undermining their own position. In fact a senior TDC officer, who wishes to remain anonymous, recently told me that Cabinet members are openly saying that the CPO is a charade aimed at securing votes for Labour in 2015. This is borne out by ex-Labour Councillor and former Mayor of Ramsgate, Kim Gibson, who has said that Iris Johnston told her that it was politically expedient for Labour to appear to be trying to get the CPO, even though they didn’t really want it. It was all about ‘politics and votes’. I don’t doubt Kim. She is an honest person who speaks her mind without fear or favour.
Political Deceit and Dishonesty
But just in case you have any vestiges of faith remaining in Iris Johnston and her Labour colleagues, consider her latest Facebook post about how she is trying to save Manston. She reproaches Sir Roger Gale MP for not reconvening the Manston Taskforce “without which we are going to have problems”. She criticises Sir Howard Davis for his “disappointing” failure to mention Manston in his latest Airport Commission report. I suspect that these comments are designed to set up fall guys and villains whom Johnston and her Labour colleagues can blame and use as a smokescreen to justify a U-turn on their support for the CPO, which I am sure will be happening soon.
I can see it now - with a superficial air of concern, deep sadness and perhaps a few tears, Iris Johnston announces that the CPO is dead in the water. It’s failure will have nothing to do with the Council Labour Group which of course tried its very best to get the CPO, but others - people in government and at the Airport Commission who failed to support the (lost) cause. It’s the oldest political trick in the book! Courting electoral popularity by pretending you are trying to do something, which in reality you oppose and then blaming others for the failure of your half-hearted less than genuine efforts..
Cynical political manoeuvres like this demonstrate that Cllr Johnston and her
Hypocrisy in Action
colleagues harbour an arrogant contempt for Thanet residents. They show that the Labour Party in Thanet is callously manipulative and deceitful, putting party interest and votes before the concerns of local people.This is probably why decent and honourable politicians like Steve Alexendrou, who are uneasy about Thanet Labour’s dishonesty and game-playing, are now beginning to speak out. Indeed some of my friends in the Labour Group tell me that discontent about support for the CPO is growing.
For my part I have been arguing for a while that the possibility of securing a CPO and the feasibility of the airport being resurrected is unrealistic and that we should now be discussing Plan B.
I believe this to be the case because it has already been made clear that the Parkway station is going to be for people and businesses and not the airport. Also in the next few weeks we shall see important developments which will mark the end of any hopes for an airport revival. These will include an announcement about the extension of the Discovery Park Enterprise Zone to Thanet, the approval of the Manston Green and EKO planning applications to build housing close to the airport site and of course from Anne Gloag OBE, her much anticipated announcement about transforming the airport site probably into a housing and employment zone. Labour will of course not wish to be seen opposing these opportunities and will use every excuse in the book to re-align itself behind these new proposals.
Thanet Green Party opposes the building of houses on rural open space. There wis already sufficient housing development land within Thanet's urban boundaries. If we are unable to stop the rural development we will be fighting to ensure that housing and employment proposals at Manston and the surrounding are sustainable, that they support gainful employment, have little environmental impact and are carbon neutral. We will strive to ensure that proper democratic protocols are followed by TDC to enable public involvement in deciding what developments take at the former Manston Airport site.
I fully support the decision of Health
Regulator Monitor to place the East Kent NHS Trust into special measures.
Thanet already suffers from severe health
inequalities compared with other parts of Kent. We must have a health and
hospital service which is properly funded and fit for purpose instead of a failing
service which is letting down many Thanet residents.
I hope that the additional support and
expertise provided by special measures will enable the East Kent Hospital Trust to become stronger and more effective. However until we
have a properly funded NHS free from privatization and profiteering services
will continue to be inadequate and poor for many people.
I understand that building company Cardy has offered to purchase
Pleasurama Developers, SFP Ventures Ltd, takeover the development agreement with Thanet
Council and complete the planned building works. I have serious concerns about
this.
First the Pleasuramadevelopment is located in an area designated as
a high risk flood zone. The Environment
Agency has already expressed concerns to
Thanet Council about constructingresidential
buildings on this site without a proper
flood risk assessment. As an elected
councillor my first priority must be public safety, especially bearing in mind
the impact of climate change and rising sea levels on this particular site. If
building work is to resume on the site then there must be aflood risk assessment and the design of any
buildings to be built must comply with any flood assessment recommendations. Anything
less is not acceptable. I also suspect that anything which is built on the site
which falls outside of this safety framework will probably be uninsurable and red-lined
by lenders. Second many
people have already expressed concerns about the stability of the cliff face which
will be in close proximity to the buildings. Once again this presents a serious
safety risk to the occupiers of any residential and business buildings on the site.
Furthermore, who will pay for the day-to-day maintenance of the cliff face? This should not be Thanet
District Council as any profits made by TDC for allowing the development to proceed will quickly
be used up by year-on-year cliff face maintenance. Indeed it is entirely
possible that the Council, over time, mayspend a lot more money than it makes from the developers looking after
the cliff face. In my opinion it should be the developers who assume
responsibility for the maintenance of the cliff face.
Third, it has
been the clear intention of the current
developers SFP Ventures to secure the freehold of the Pleasurama site. This
site is an integral part of Ramsgate’s historic seafront. Under no circumstances
should thefreehold be handed over to any other organisation it should
remain with Thanet Council.
Fourth, although
Cardy may well purchase SFP Ventures what guarantees are there that some of people
associated with the SFP, who have treated Ramsgate with utter contempt over the
past 12 years, will not be working with and influencing Cardy as funders, sales agents , or advisers.
I think it is extremely unlikely that these people will simply walk away from the project. They will want a
slice of the action.
Fifth, what due
diligence will be undertaken into Cardy
to ascertain if they have access to the
finance and have the experience to
complete the development? I trust that such due diligence will be of a much higher and more robust
standard to that which was carried out by a senior council officer in 2009.
Last but not
least, I am not convinced that a hotel and apartments are what the people of Ramsgate would like to see developed on this large and important site. I believe
that most people would like to see a more leisure focused development such as a
seafront park, a public stage, cafes, bars, restaurants, play areas, a skate
park and state of the art IT gaming arcades etc which will attract locals and
visitors in their thousands to the seafront. This would generate more income
for local economy and create more jobs than a small hotel and apartments.
Council officers and Labour Cabinet member Rick Everitt
tried their best to bamboozle and scare councillors into accepting a deal whereby
Canterbury building contractors, Cardy,
would buy out the controversial development company SFP Ventures (UK) Ltd and
complete the project within a three year period. Everitt said that the stalled legal
action against SFP Ventures for breach of agreement would cost a fortune and that
a deal with Cardy might be the best option. Chief Executive Madeline Homer said
that she though legal action would “take years” and that it would be preferable
to make a deal with Cardy.
Said Driver “Labour showed their true colours tonight. They
voted to prevent the Panel from having sight of key documents about Pleasurama
before they make a decision. This is undemocratic and appallingly
irresponsible. Quite clearly Cabinet member Everitt and his labour colleagues,
supported by senior council officers, are determined to drive through this deal with
Cardy and foist on the people of Ramsgate a development which is extremely unpopular
and which many people oppose. 
