Claims made in the local press today that 6,200 new jobs will be created at Southend Airport cruelly deceive the job-seekers of the area. This is an old figure based upon the old Joint Area Action Plan (JAAP), which the Council abandoned more than 2 years ago when Stobart bought the airport and submitted a planning application to extend the runway.

Ignoring the democratic process that had been set out for the JAAP, the councils accepted the planning application submission and proceeded to decide in favour of the runway extension despite the fact that 80% of respondents[2] had opposed the “High Growth” proposal that included the runway extension.

SAEN[1] spokesman Denis Walker explained “The old figure of 6700 jobs was itself a piece of creative accounting by Southend and Rochford Councils but they ditched the JAAP, which had already met with massive public opposition, when Stobart bought the airport.

“All that has happened here is that the supposed total of 500 jobs, which the airport is claiming to be creating, has been subtracted from the three-year-old figure. That figure was based on the assumption that the Saxon Business Park would be fully occupied, but so far there’s not even a developer lined up to build the busiess park. Even if it does get built, those jobs would not be new as the plans include a proposal to move businesses out of the Eldon Way Industiral Estate in Hockley.

“The Council were promising these jobs three years ago but so far there’s no business park, no new jobs and even the promises of airlines to ferry people to Ireland and Germany are disappearing into thin air.

“Southend and Rochford Councils have consistently talked up the jobs and supposed economic benefits that the airport expansion and nearby building projects would create, but there is no evidence to back the claims up. EasyJet are bringing 150 existing staff with them from Stansted and Stobart have used their own Civil Engineering firm (which is based in Cumbria) to build St Laurence Way and the runway extension. These are not jobs for local people.

“The town is being blighted by the closure of Eastwoodbury Lane, the demolition of six homes and the threat of thousands of flights a month, but we’re getting nothing in return but more noise and more traffic. Regional airports take money out of the local economy as people go abroad to spend and while there will be a few jobs they never match the numbers the developers claim. The town has been double-crossed and councillors should be ashamed.”

ENDS.

Notes to Editors

1. “Stop Airport Extension Now” (SAEN) was formed to campaign against the runway extension at Southend Airport. The group is not opposed to the Airport itself, which has co-existed with the residents of Southend for many years. SAEN is against the runway extension, which would lead to a massive increase in flights and destroy the lives of the people living, working or going to school anywhere near the flightpath.
2. http://www.saen.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Resp-to-JAAP-POR-Final-Version.pdf (see p4)

For further information:

• Contact Denis Walker, Press Officer SAEN (Stop Airport Extension Now)
• Visit the SAEN website – http://saen.org.uk/

Rochford Council was, it seems, anticipating trouble as there was a police presence at the venue. By the time your correspondent arrived, the meeting hall was already packed and so the remaining members of the public, of which there were over thirty, had to brave the cold and listen to the meeting through a loudspeaker outside the building. A steward providing copies of the documentation estimated that there were 70-100 members of the public present inside the meeting.

From outside the meeting, we were left lacking a number of significant pieces of information, most notably the results of the vote which was conducted by a show of hands only. Members of the public outside the meeting were not given copies of the maps being discussed.

Hopefully, someone who was inside the meeting room can furnish us with more details so that these can be added.

No doubt, minutes of the meeting will be available in due course on the Rochford District Council website.

• Agenda for the DCC Meeting
• Report on Rochford’s opinion of the planning application
• Addendum to Item 4 and 5 Report (see first item)

No doubt you will be incensed at the temerity of the Stobart group in submitting an application for planning permission to extend the runway at Southend Airport part-way through the Joint Area Action Plan process being conducted at the time by your Council and Southend Borough Council to decide joint policy on, among other things, that very issue.

I trust therefore that Rochford District Council’s Development Control Committee will be expressing in the strongest terms the Council’s anger at this move and insist that Southend Borough Council defers the decision until after the JAAP process has been concluded.

I presume also that the Council will want to take the earliest opportunity to instruct the Government Office for the East of England that it is their desire to have the application called in for determination by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, John Denham MP following a Public Inquiry at which the Council and all other parties will be given the opportunity to test the airport’s various assertions as to the benefits of the runway extension and put forward their own views.

I look forward to your prompt response.

Yours sincerely,

–
Denis Walker
Press Officer, Stop Airport Extension Now

http://www.saen.org.uk/

Rochford District Council’s development committee met yesterday (Wednesday) to discuss the plans. However, the proposal did not constitute a planning application as owner, Eddie Stobart, has the ‘benefit of permitted development rights’.

Southend Airport submitted the application for the 27m high tower because its current 50-year-old facility has reached the end of its life.

The figures are now available on Rochford Council’s website at:

http://www.rochford.gov.uk/pdf/JAAP_representations_summary.pdf

As noted in the preamble of that document, the numerical breakdown we now have isn’t the whole picture. It is the content of people’s objections that counts, but Rochford Council are still withholding this information in the case of submissions made on paper. Another document is due to be published by the Council at a later date providing a proper analysis of the results, but given the overwhelming opposition to the airport’s expansion, it’s obvious that they are very reluctant to publish.

BBC London News is running the story this evening (6:30pm, BBC1 London). Fran and I were interviewed and no doubt Alistair Welch will do his usual “Jobs, jobs, jobs” routine.

Our press release is available at:

http://www.saen.org.uk/2009/11/huge-opposition-to-airport-expansion-revealed/

5th November 2009

Huge opposition to airport expansion revealed

The “Stop Airport Extension Now” (SAEN) campaign is today celebrating success in forcing Rochford District Council to reveal the results of a consultation into plans to expand Southend Airport.

Initially, Rochford Council refused to release the figures, claiming that it was not in the public interest to do so[1]. However, following a Freedom of Information appeal by SAEN, the Information Commissioner ruled that the Council must publish the results[2].

At the time of writing, the results are yet to appear on the Rochford Council website[3], but SAEN has learned that they show that out of 2229 respondents, 1718 had objections to the Joint Area Action Plan with 437 of 572 specifically opposing the runway extension.

Denis Walker, press officer for SAEN, said “It’s a pity Rochford Council wanted to hide these figures from the public. It’s only through the determined work of the SAEN committee that the Information Commissioner ruled that they had to be released.

“What the figures show is that there is an overwhelming majority against the airport expansion – well over three to one against. No wonder the Council wanted to keep them quiet. It demonstrates that Southend and Rochford Councils are more interested in supporting big business than protecting local residents’ quality of life.”

People need to remember that even though they may already have registered their opposition, they have to do it again by submitting an objection to the airport’s planning application by 20th November. Details on how to do this are available at http://saen.org.uk/

ENDS

Notes to Editors:

[1] http://www.saen.org.uk/2009/08/shaun-scrutton-refusal-to-publish-consultation-results-and-other-matters/
[2] http://www.saen.org.uk/2009/11/information-commissioners-ruling-on-jaap-results/
[3] http://www.rochford.gov.uk/

About SAEN:

SAEN was formed to campaign against the runway extension at Southend Airport. The group is not opposed to the Airport itself, which has co-existed with the residents of Southend for many years. SAEN is against the runway extension, which would lead to a massive increase in flights and destroy the lives of the people living, working or going to school anywhere near the flightpath.

Website: http://saen.org.uk/
For further comment, email press@saen.org.uk

3rd November 2009

COUNCIL FORCED TO REVEAL AIRPORT OPPOSITION FIGURES

After intervention by the Information Commissioner, Rochford District Council have been told to publish the results of Stage 2 of the Joint Area Action Plan relating to the expansion of Southend Airport.

Initially Shaun Scrutton, the Head of Planning from Rochford DC, had refused to release the information on the grounds that “it was not in the public interest”. However, after representations from SAEN, the Council will now have to reveal the extent of the public opposition to the scheme. Unofficial assessments by SAEN have revealed that the on-line responses were 80% opposed to airport expansion. It is expected that the written opposition will be similarly overwhelming, but this is the information that Mr. Scrutton wanted to keep quiet.

“Obviously we are pleased that the Council has had to reveal this information,” said Kiti Theobald, the SAEN Chairman, “but this episode reveals what a grubby process the Council have allowed themselves to become embroiled in. Telling the public that it’s not in their interests to know collectively what their views are on an issue is something taken straight from the Afghan School of Democracy, but I’m afraid that this is what we’ve come to expect from Rochford and Southend Councils where the airport is concerned.”

There is a planning application currently open for which objections need to be submitted by 20th November. http://saen.org.uk/planningapp.

ENDS

Notes to Editors:

SAEN was formed to campaign against the runway extension at Southend Airport. The group is not opposed to the Airport itself, which has co-existed with the residents of Southend for many years. SAEN is against the runway extension, which would lead to a massive increase in flights and destroy the lives of the people living, working or going to school anywhere near the flightpath.

Website: http://saen.org.uk/

Case Reference Number FS50254427

Dear Mrs Theobald and Mr Clarke

Further to your recent submissions I have been in contact with Rochford Council. I have indicated my view that the provision of a numerical analysis of the representations received to the JAAP consultation would not constitute the creation of new information and, on that basis, it would be my initial assessment that that information should be provided.

The council has considered my arguments and has agreed to undertake a numerical analysis of the nature of the comments received (ie ‘support’, ‘comment’ or ‘object’) and publish this on its website on 6 November 2009.

It has indicated that a more thorough analysis of the JAAP consultation is not now expected to be reported until early 2010 when it will be published alongside the next submission version of the JAAP.

I note that your original complaint to the Commissioner was wider in scope than this element alone, but that you had indicated that this was the most pressing aspect. Your email, received 19 October, appears to indicate that the scope of your complaint has now been narrowed to cover this material alone, in the hope of a speedy resolution.

Assuming that the council does publish as promised on 6 November, I therefore propose to close this case as ‘informally resolved’. I would therefore be grateful for an indication from you (once the disclosure has been received) if you are content to withdraw your complaint at that point. If there are matters which still require my attention, however, please make me aware of them at that point.

I hope the above is helpful.

Yours sincerely

Steven Dickinson
Complaints Officer

http://www.saen.org.uk
committee@saen.org.uk

Mr. Shaun Scrutton,
Head of Planning and Transportation,
Rochford District Council,
South Street,
Rochford,
Essex

Dear Mr Scrutton,

I am recently in receipt of information that the latest stage of the JAAP Consultation elicited about ten thousand responses before the close of the response period. I have no doubt that the response analysis has by now been completed, and I am aware that you have no wish to release the full analysis until such time as it suits your purposes to do so.

There is no doubt that most of those ten thousand responses will have declared support or objection to the runway extension. For Rochford District Council to continue to withhold the analysis of the responses whilst the planning application deadline barely leaves time for another round of objections to be heard is nothing short of disgraceful.

There is a great deal of unrest among people who live below the flight path in the Southend area, and increasing unrest amongst the population of Rochford upon reading that more flights are intended to be directed over Rochford if weather permits.

The country has recently lost faith in Government ministers over issues of secrecy and is likely to lose faith in its local council if it suspects that similar things are happening at the town hall, and are likely to bear all this in mind during next year’s local and governmental elections.

SAEN would like you to reconsider your approach to holding back on the release of JAAP response analysis, so that we can all move forward in an open and frank manner. We have written to both MPS to outline the current situation, and subsequent press releases may well depend upon your response to this letter. I urge your immediate attention to this matter,

Yours sincerely

Kiti Theobald (chairman)

Ms K Theobold
SAEN
PO Box 5909
Southend on Sea MLO
Short Street
Southend on Sea
Essex SS1 1AA

8 October 2009

Dear Ms Theobald

London Southend Airport & Environs JAAP

I refer to your letter of 4 September 2009 and must apologise for delaying my response.

1. Archaeological investigations
   The archaeological report is part of the public record and you can obtain a copy when it is available.
2. Existing S106 agreement
   1. I note the point you make about the trigger point for noise monitoring in the S106 agreement related to the consent for the new terminal building and railway station.

      Please find attached a copy of the press release issued on 7 October that sets out new controls to be applied to the operation of the airport, in the first instance through revisions to the lease with Southend Council. You will note that these controls will be augmented as appropriate by further controls linked to the town and country planning process.

   2. A new set of controls has now been agreed with the airport operator, as outlined in the press release.

      Whilst I cannot be specific at this stage, it is likely that further controls may be applied as appropriate and specific to any applications submitted in the future. The controls now agreed will be built into the final JAAP submission.

   3. In my previous letter I did not rule out a review of the S106, but indicated that an immediate review, as you requested, would not be carried out.
3. S106 review meeting
   I am not able to provide you with details of when a review of the S106 might be carried out. As I have indicated, the new controls provide for a significant change in the future operation of the airport. The Council will keep the situation under review.
4. Preferred Option consultation responses
   I note the comments you make about the consultation, but I am not prepared to change the conclusion I reached in response to your original request for information about the consultations.

   The joint Councils are not concealing any information about the consultation responses – all are available to view through the website. [This is not true. Only responses submitted online are available via the website.] However, the analysis of the responses will be published at a later date along with the submission version of the JAAP.

   On that basis, I reiterate my previous decision that the information is exempt under Section 21 of the Freedom of Information Act as it is information that is reasonably accessible by other means. [Again, untrue for the reason above. The Information Commissioner's Office asked the council to release a summary of results a few weeks later.] All the responses received to the consultation on the JAAP Preferred Options document.

   www.rochford.gov.uk/planning/policy/local_development_framework/london_southend_airport.aspx

   The joint Councils will provide a detailed analysis of the responses received and explain how these will be taken into account in the preparation of the submission version of the JAAP.

   Your request asks the Council to undertake work to prepare a statistical breakdown of the responses received in advance of the publication of a full report on the consultations. I also refuse this request under the provisions of section 22 of the Freedom of Information Act. The reason for refusing your request under section 22 is that it is important that a proper assessment, review and analysis of the consultation responses is prepared and published in full at the next stage in the plan making process. It is anticipated the submission version of the JAAP will be published later in 2009. In all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

5. Environmental Protection Act
   It is my understanding that airports are exempt form the provisions of the EPA and that aircraft noise is a matter dealt with by the Civil Aviation Authority.

Please let me know if I can provide any further advice on these matters.

Yours sincerely

Shaun Scrutton
Head of Planning & Transportation