TAG revised application to double weekend flights

Aviation is the most highly polluting transport mode on earth. This includes noise pollution (with associated health costs in lost sleep, damage to children's education etc) and air pollution (including CO2, Nitrogen Oxides, Carbon Monoxide). Claims made by TAG that aviation is of benefit to the economy are extremely questionable. -- Caroline Lucas MEP

TAG revised planning application ref 05/00640/FUL

TAG Aviation, made an application October 2005 to double the number of weekend and bank holiday movements at Farnborough Airport, desiring an increase from 2,500 movements per annum to 5,000 movements per annum.

February 2006, TAG Aviation put in a revised application. The revised application seeks a doubling of weekend and bank holiday movements. Thus nothing has materially changed. Thus my original objection stands.

TAG are putting corporate greed before the needs of the local community.

The original condition was put in place to safeguard local amenity. This still applies. In fact today even more so as thanks to crass planning decisions there are now more people affected by Farnborough Airport than when it was originally granted planning consent.

The application by TAG gives the opportunity to tighten up on the lax planning conditions attached to the operation of Farnborough Airport.

All movements into and out of Farnborough Airport should be counted, not just business flights airshow movements, helicopters, light aircraft, MoD, diplomatic etc.

TAG claim their business is suffering due to the fact they have reached their present limit and are having to turn away business.

Welcome to the real world! It is not the role or function of the planning system to bail out failing businesses.

At the meeting of the Farnborough Airport Consultative Committee November 2005, TAG were given the opportunity to justify their application to modify condition 11 of their original planning consent. They failed. All they could say was that we are losing money and that global corporations who use Farnborough Airport wish to operate 7 days a week.

TAG also added that their Middle East customers work on a Sunday. TAG may not have noticed, but Farnborough is not in the Middle East. The people of Farnborough wish to relax on a Sunday and wish to protect their peace and quiet on a Sunday.

To their revised application, TAG have added a number of conditions. As these have no bearing whatsoever on the doubling of weekend movements, these attached conditions do not even have the merit of being cosmetic.

What has been offered as attached conditions, should be on the table anyway. Were we to have competent councillors on the Farnborough Airport Consultation Committee, our councillors would have been pushing for this and more, but to date they have singularly failed to act in the best interests of the local community.

additional movements will be phased in

This would have happened anyway as the projected growth in business at Farnborough Airport.

No mention of what happens when the new limit is reached in 2008.

TAG breached the limit on weight in the Local Plan (up from 50 tonnes to 80 tonnes), because it was in their commercial interest. Are wishing to breach the limit on weekend and bank holiday movements (proposed increase from 2,500 movements per annum to 5,000 movements per annum), because it is in their commercial interest.

It is only a question of of time which limit they will wish to breach next the overall annual limit of 28,000 movements, the limits on noise and other pollutants, the limits on weight or the proposed new limit of 5,000 on weekend and bank holiday movements because it is in their commercial interest.

electrical power to replace noisy diesel power plants

I suggested this to TAG at least two years ago. Yes it would help to improve the operation of Farnborough Airport. It is something TAG should have implemented a long time ago as 'good neighbours', it has nothing to do with this application.

monitoring of movements

TAG are required to do this already under the Section 106 agreement between TAG and Rushmoor.

adherence to flight paths

TAG are already required to do this. Complaints at non-compliance are dismissed as 'authorised non-compliance'.

A large amount of misinformation and disinformation has been put about by Rushmoor councillors who appear to be acting for TAG not the local community.

the airport safeguards open space

The open space is a strategic gap, safeguarded by the Rushmoor Local Plan and the Hampshire Structure Plan.

Have you ever tried walking across the airport? This has not been possible since the Second World War.

The open space occupied by the airport used to be common land. The local community wishes to see the return of its common so it is free to enjoy this open space.

the airport would be one vast housing estate

There has never been plans for housing on this site.

the airport has saved our aviation heritage

The aviation heritage was a world-class aviation research establishment that no longer exists.

Flying around business executives and wealthy Arabs has nothing to do with Farnborough's aviation heritage.

When the RAE was being wound down, the aviation heritage was being thrown out on skips, to be rescued by men with tears in their eyes, the workforce put on the scrap heap.

The aviation heritage has been safeguarded by FAST and by Slough Estates, not TAG.

TAG wished to see the wind tunnel, a listed building, demolished to enable them to accommodate heavier aircraft.

Slough Estates have only safeguarded the buildings because they have been forced to do so by English Heritage, and because there has been a slump in the commercial property market.

What little is left of the research facilities, is now owned by the Carlyle Group. The Carlyle Group is a private investment company consisting of the Bush family (and associates), Saudi royal family, and until recently, the bin Laden family.

more noise when Farnborough was a research facility

There used to be occasional noisy activity, followed by long periods of peace and quiet. With TAG we have noise every day, throughout the day.

TAG benefits the local economy

TAG have never produced any hard evidence to substantiate this ridiculous claim. No doubt this is why Aldershot and Farnborough are thriving town centres!

TAG is owned by Saudis who operate through off-shore companies. All profits are repatriated abroad.

The bottom line is that TAG wish to trade their profit for our misery, their business is put before the peace and quiet of the local community.

Rushmoor planning committee has no choice other than to REJECT this planning application to double weekend and bank holiday movements.

Websites

Reference

Lester R Brown, Plan B 2.0, Norton, 2006

Keith Parkins, Weekend flights to double at Farnborough Airport?, Indymedia UK, 31 October 2005
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2005/10/326946.html

Keith Parkins, Weekend flights to double at Farnborough?, Indymedia UK, 8 November 2005
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2005/11/327534.html

Keith Parkins, communication with Rushmoor Head of Planning Keith Holland, October 2005 - March 2006

Keith Parkins, A laughable claim, Surrey-Hants Star, 10 November 2005

Keith Parkins, FACC - November 2005, Indymedia UK, 18 November 2005
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2005/11/328072.html

Keith Parkins, TAG's problem - not ours, Farnham Herald, 18 November 2005

Reach for the Sky, Undercurrents, 2005 {available as both book and DVD}

Stop Airport Expansion Edition: The Pod Report 06, The Pod Report, Sunday 4 December 2005
http://podreport.podomatic.com/enclosure/2005-12-04T12_10_45-08_00.mp3

Craig Unger, House of Bush, House of Saud: The Secret Relationship Between the World's Two Most Powerful Dynasties, Scribner, 2004


Surrey-Hants ~ Farnborough ~ Farnborough Airfield ~ Inspector's report ~ Rushmoor modifications to Local Plan ~ TAG planning application ~ TAG condx 16 & 17 ~ TAG Aviation Section 106 environmental monitoring ~ TAG condx 11
(c) Keith Parkins 2006 -- March 2006 rev 1