Southend Airport expansion gets go-ahead from Government

Southend Airport expansion gets go-ahead from Government

Southend Airport expansion gets go-ahead from Government

First published in News Exclusive by

THE EXPANSION of Southend Airport has got the go-ahead from the Secretary of State.

The extension of the runway to allow for 2 million passengers to use the aiport has been given approval by John Denham, the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government.

It had been called in by the Government days before Southend Council's development control committee approved the plans in January.

Anna Waite, planning councillor, was overjoyed when she found out the news this morning.

She said: "It's absolutely brilliant.

"It's fantastic news for the town.

"This will make us one of the best seaside towns in the country."

Comments (101)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:02am Fri 19 Mar 10

j-w says...

WOOHOO!
WOOHOO! j-w
  • Score: 0

11:07am Fri 19 Mar 10

nigeltheduck says...

Camp Cuckoo moved on, yes to the airport - what a great week for Southend!!
Camp Cuckoo moved on, yes to the airport - what a great week for Southend!! nigeltheduck
  • Score: 0

11:09am Fri 19 Mar 10

gordonbennet says...

Great news at last!!!!
Great news at last!!!! gordonbennet
  • Score: 0

11:15am Fri 19 Mar 10

Soozie says...

This will make us one of the best seaside towns in the country."

Only if you are not re-elected or step down.
This will make us one of the best seaside towns in the country." Only if you are not re-elected or step down. Soozie
  • Score: 0

11:15am Fri 19 Mar 10

anon anon says...

At last... the town moving forward...
At last... the town moving forward... anon anon
  • Score: 0

11:20am Fri 19 Mar 10

Thames Gateway says...

Extremely good news, and glad it is announced before the election slows everything down.

You only have to look at the rail station and control tower site on the east side of the airport to realise that, at last, this time it is for real!
Extremely good news, and glad it is announced before the election slows everything down. You only have to look at the rail station and control tower site on the east side of the airport to realise that, at last, this time it is for real! Thames Gateway
  • Score: 0

11:20am Fri 19 Mar 10

DannyK86 says...

fantastic news, and hopefully a great boost to the economy.
fantastic news, and hopefully a great boost to the economy. DannyK86
  • Score: 0

11:35am Fri 19 Mar 10

BASILBRUSH says...

Yes yes yes!!!
Yes yes yes!!! BASILBRUSH
  • Score: 0

11:36am Fri 19 Mar 10

SARFENDMAN says...

Here we have sensible plans finally coming to a reality. Brilliant! Unfortunately too many plans about Southend Future Development are totally are totally cream crackered nuts, yet get coverage by the media. The latest PLANS TO TRANSFORM VICTORIA AVENUE are laughable.
Here we have sensible plans finally coming to a reality. Brilliant! Unfortunately too many plans about Southend Future Development are totally are totally cream crackered nuts, yet get coverage by the media. The latest PLANS TO TRANSFORM VICTORIA AVENUE are laughable. SARFENDMAN
  • Score: 0

11:38am Fri 19 Mar 10

evilc says...

Fantastic News at last we are moving into the future.

We have a future now, road, rail and cycle path improvement.

Excellent news well done Anne Waites and others.

Private enterprise generates wealth jobs and a bright future in the local area.

Southend will at last move forward.

Ignore all The Huggers, communist anoraks and the 'V' types they are the loud minority, that want us to go back to the square wheel.
Fantastic News at last we are moving into the future. We have a future now, road, rail and cycle path improvement. Excellent news well done Anne Waites and others. Private enterprise generates wealth jobs and a bright future in the local area. Southend will at last move forward. Ignore all The Huggers, communist anoraks and the 'V' types they are the loud minority, that want us to go back to the square wheel. evilc
  • Score: 0

11:46am Fri 19 Mar 10

reptile says...

It stood to reason really, as no new airport will ever again be built in the South East we might as well look after the one we have got.
It stood to reason really, as no new airport will ever again be built in the South East we might as well look after the one we have got. reptile
  • Score: 0

11:49am Fri 19 Mar 10

karateman1964 says...

1 of the best Resorts in the country..dont make me laugh..the place is a dump.

It will take more than an Airport to save Southend.
1 of the best Resorts in the country..dont make me laugh..the place is a dump. It will take more than an Airport to save Southend. karateman1964
  • Score: 0

11:57am Fri 19 Mar 10

Peter Pantsless says...

Indeed, good news for the airport and the town in general.
.
Ludicrous though is Chainsaw's comment ""This will make us one of the best seaside towns in the country."
How can this be when you and your council have spent the best part of a decade destroying its culture???
.
Unfortunatle though that this will give the green light to Renaissance for another slew of pipe-dreams and expensive consultancy that as always amount to nothing.
Indeed, good news for the airport and the town in general. . Ludicrous though is Chainsaw's comment ""This will make us one of the best seaside towns in the country." How can this be when you and your council have spent the best part of a decade destroying its culture??? . Unfortunatle though that this will give the green light to Renaissance for another slew of pipe-dreams and expensive consultancy that as always amount to nothing. Peter Pantsless
  • Score: 0

12:13pm Fri 19 Mar 10

r6keith says...

Bloody marvelous, great news, Thank you Stobarts .
Common sense is making a come back.
Keith Terry .
Founder of planes2009.ning.com a support site for the extension of southend Airport.
It just makes me want to punch the air with joy....
Bloody marvelous, great news, Thank you Stobarts . Common sense is making a come back. Keith Terry . Founder of planes2009.ning.com a support site for the extension of southend Airport. It just makes me want to punch the air with joy.... r6keith
  • Score: 0

12:21pm Fri 19 Mar 10

evilc says...

It will improve Southend why simple:

It will create jobs (forget what the huggers say)

It will create the need for hotels and car parking facilities creating jobs.

It will create the need for aircraft suppliers to have storerooms etc which creates more jobs.

It will give more hard working locals money to spend creating more shops and servicing needs.

You only need to look at heathrow gatwick to see that it is busy.

The only thing letting the area down is the need for road improvements and the continual moaning of the small group of loud tree huggers.

What would be nice now is a new Government with a new start and all the anoraks leaving the country for Afghanistan or Iraq, where they can have daily protest meetings.

Private Enterprise works, it needs to to pay for all the non wealth generators.
It will improve Southend why simple: It will create jobs (forget what the huggers say) It will create the need for hotels and car parking facilities creating jobs. It will create the need for aircraft suppliers to have storerooms etc which creates more jobs. It will give more hard working locals money to spend creating more shops and servicing needs. You only need to look at heathrow gatwick to see that it is busy. The only thing letting the area down is the need for road improvements and the continual moaning of the small group of loud tree huggers. What would be nice now is a new Government with a new start and all the anoraks leaving the country for Afghanistan or Iraq, where they can have daily protest meetings. Private Enterprise works, it needs to to pay for all the non wealth generators. evilc
  • Score: 0

12:37pm Fri 19 Mar 10

fc1967 says...

A disaster for UK employment! The UK suffers a trade deficit in tourism with the rest of the world and this decision will accelerate that process. UK nationals already spend £18 billion more outside the UK than foreign visitors spend here.

Investing in a new airport will just make it easier for people to fly abroad, spending less money in the UK and thereby harming the UK economy and reducing overall employment within this country.

But this is how shortsighted our politicians are. So I suppose it is what we must expect.

But add to that the obscenity of increasing CO2 emissions, when the world's scientists tell us they are 90% certain increased emissions will lead to more extreme weather that will cause immense damage to agriculture, and you see how appalling our politicians are. Gordon Brown and David Cameron tell us that they do not want to see billions of people starve (as the UN has warned), they say they want to cut CO2 emissions by 80% by 2050 yet here is proof that they have no intention of doing that at all. In my view they should be prosecuted for crimes against humanity. We know 250,000 people are already dying each year due to climate change (source WHO) so I feel key politicians who are behind the expansion of polluting activities should go on trial.

Locally there is another issue - that the Conservative Party has pledged to reduce CO2 emissions in this area by over 40% by 2020. Can anyone get an answer from them as to how they are going to achieve that? No - of course not!
A disaster for UK employment! The UK suffers a trade deficit in tourism with the rest of the world and this decision will accelerate that process. UK nationals already spend £18 billion more outside the UK than foreign visitors spend here. Investing in a new airport will just make it easier for people to fly abroad, spending less money in the UK and thereby harming the UK economy and reducing overall employment within this country. But this is how shortsighted our politicians are. So I suppose it is what we must expect. But add to that the obscenity of increasing CO2 emissions, when the world's scientists tell us they are 90% certain increased emissions will lead to more extreme weather that will cause immense damage to agriculture, and you see how appalling our politicians are. Gordon Brown and David Cameron tell us that they do not want to see billions of people starve (as the UN has warned), they say they want to cut CO2 emissions by 80% by 2050 yet here is proof that they have no intention of doing that at all. In my view they should be prosecuted for crimes against humanity. We know 250,000 people are already dying each year due to climate change (source WHO) so I feel key politicians who are behind the expansion of polluting activities should go on trial. Locally there is another issue - that the Conservative Party has pledged to reduce CO2 emissions in this area by over 40% by 2020. Can anyone get an answer from them as to how they are going to achieve that? No - of course not! fc1967
  • Score: 0

12:37pm Fri 19 Mar 10

fc1967 says...

A disaster for UK employment! The UK suffers a trade deficit in tourism with the rest of the world and this decision will accelerate that process. UK nationals already spend £18 billion more outside the UK than foreign visitors spend here.

Investing in a new airport will just make it easier for people to fly abroad, spending less money in the UK and thereby harming the UK economy and reducing overall employment within this country.

But this is how shortsighted our politicians are. So I suppose it is what we must expect.

But add to that the obscenity of increasing CO2 emissions, when the world's scientists tell us they are 90% certain increased emissions will lead to more extreme weather that will cause immense damage to agriculture, and you see how appalling our politicians are. Gordon Brown and David Cameron tell us that they do not want to see billions of people starve (as the UN has warned), they say they want to cut CO2 emissions by 80% by 2050 yet here is proof that they have no intention of doing that at all. In my view they should be prosecuted for crimes against humanity. We know 250,000 people are already dying each year due to climate change (source WHO) so I feel key politicians who are behind the expansion of polluting activities should go on trial.

Locally there is another issue - that the Conservative Party has pledged to reduce CO2 emissions in this area by over 40% by 2020. Can anyone get an answer from them as to how they are going to achieve that? No - of course not!
A disaster for UK employment! The UK suffers a trade deficit in tourism with the rest of the world and this decision will accelerate that process. UK nationals already spend £18 billion more outside the UK than foreign visitors spend here. Investing in a new airport will just make it easier for people to fly abroad, spending less money in the UK and thereby harming the UK economy and reducing overall employment within this country. But this is how shortsighted our politicians are. So I suppose it is what we must expect. But add to that the obscenity of increasing CO2 emissions, when the world's scientists tell us they are 90% certain increased emissions will lead to more extreme weather that will cause immense damage to agriculture, and you see how appalling our politicians are. Gordon Brown and David Cameron tell us that they do not want to see billions of people starve (as the UN has warned), they say they want to cut CO2 emissions by 80% by 2050 yet here is proof that they have no intention of doing that at all. In my view they should be prosecuted for crimes against humanity. We know 250,000 people are already dying each year due to climate change (source WHO) so I feel key politicians who are behind the expansion of polluting activities should go on trial. Locally there is another issue - that the Conservative Party has pledged to reduce CO2 emissions in this area by over 40% by 2020. Can anyone get an answer from them as to how they are going to achieve that? No - of course not! fc1967
  • Score: 0

12:47pm Fri 19 Mar 10

Wizardweb says...

Excellent news for the town ! You need the high profile projects to happen, in order to encourage the mid-size ones.

Southend has floundered for too long. Now we need the Stadium to happen, the roads to be sorted out and something done about the pier.
Excellent news for the town ! You need the high profile projects to happen, in order to encourage the mid-size ones. Southend has floundered for too long. Now we need the Stadium to happen, the roads to be sorted out and something done about the pier. Wizardweb
  • Score: 0

1:09pm Fri 19 Mar 10

BASILBRUSH says...

'Blended winglets will have saved the world's airlines 2 billion gallons of jet fuel. This represents a global reduction in CO2 emissions of almost 21.5 million tonnes since they were first introduced in 2001.

These winglets are now flying on more than 3,700 aircraft around the world"

Thats one way.....


"According to the Enviro.aero the airline industry is operating 20% more efficiently that just ten years ago and by the year 2020 a further 25% improvement is expected."

A bit more for you.....

"The International Air Transport Association (IATA) is working with industry partners worldwide to reduce the industry's fuel requirements with a target of a 25% reduction by 2022 and ‘zero emission’ planes within 50 years. IATA claims new aircraft are already 70% more fuel efficient than 40 years ago and 20% better than 10 years ago. Modern aircraft achieve fuel efficiencies of 3.5 litres per 100 passenger km. The Airbus A380 and Boeing B787 are aiming for 3 litres per 100 passenger km."

.....
Personally I don't subscribe so readily to your new Eco-religion. You preach to people but are not prepared to listen to opposing views.
We as humans can cope with a warmer climate. We don't do so well in a colder climate.
Now, without asking climbers or a college thesis. Show me the definitive evidence that man can influence global temperatures do much.

It is said that in order to reduce the average global temperature by one degree Fahrenheit - it would take 31+ years of no fossil fuel energy use. In total, civilization would have to reduce CO2 emissions by 1 trillion tons, and since humans only generate 31 billion tons per year, it would thus take over 31 years to reach a 1 trillion ton cut for a measly 1 degree reduction.

....
I'm all for looking for ways to reduce dependance on fossil fuels, and cautiously reducing emissions. But more science is needed. Not knee-jerk fanatics preaching a new religion which threaten future generations prosperity.
......
Aviation is very very proactive in developing green technologies. Partly as the airlines themselves invest so much into it.
.....

Back to the news..... This is fantastic news for the area. SAEN should accept that the Government made the final decision based on facts, not scaremongering.
'Blended winglets will have saved the world's airlines 2 billion gallons of jet fuel. This represents a global reduction in CO2 emissions of almost 21.5 million tonnes since they were first introduced in 2001. These winglets are now flying on more than 3,700 aircraft around the world" Thats one way..... "According to the Enviro.aero the airline industry is operating 20% more efficiently that just ten years ago and by the year 2020 a further 25% improvement is expected." A bit more for you..... "The International Air Transport Association (IATA) is working with industry partners worldwide to reduce the industry's fuel requirements with a target of a 25% reduction by 2022 and ‘zero emission’ planes within 50 years. IATA claims new aircraft are already 70% more fuel efficient than 40 years ago and 20% better than 10 years ago. Modern aircraft achieve fuel efficiencies of 3.5 litres per 100 passenger km. The Airbus A380 and Boeing B787 are aiming for 3 litres per 100 passenger km." ..... Personally I don't subscribe so readily to your new Eco-religion. You preach to people but are not prepared to listen to opposing views. We as humans can cope with a warmer climate. We don't do so well in a colder climate. Now, without asking climbers or a college thesis. Show me the definitive evidence that man can influence global temperatures do much. It is said that in order to reduce the average global temperature by one degree Fahrenheit - it would take 31+ years of no fossil fuel energy use. In total, civilization would have to reduce CO2 emissions by 1 trillion tons, and since humans only generate 31 billion tons per year, it would thus take over 31 years to reach a 1 trillion ton cut for a measly 1 degree reduction. .... I'm all for looking for ways to reduce dependance on fossil fuels, and cautiously reducing emissions. But more science is needed. Not knee-jerk fanatics preaching a new religion which threaten future generations prosperity. ...... Aviation is very very proactive in developing green technologies. Partly as the airlines themselves invest so much into it. ..... Back to the news..... This is fantastic news for the area. SAEN should accept that the Government made the final decision based on facts, not scaremongering. BASILBRUSH
  • Score: 0

1:15pm Fri 19 Mar 10

Max Impact says...

karateman1964 wrote:
1 of the best Resorts in the country..dont make me laugh..the place is a dump. It will take more than an Airport to save Southend.
Whats Southend got to do with you in Poole?

Poole where the old go to...

This is superb news but lo and behold FC1967 starts his moaning.

Still two bad days for the treehuggers Yesterday Priory Cresent to day the airport, What a superb week for those of us that wat to see progress in Southend.
[quote][p][bold]karateman1964[/bold] wrote: 1 of the best Resorts in the country..dont make me laugh..the place is a dump. It will take more than an Airport to save Southend.[/p][/quote]Whats Southend got to do with you in Poole? Poole where the old go to... This is superb news but lo and behold FC1967 starts his moaning. Still two bad days for the treehuggers Yesterday Priory Cresent to day the airport, What a superb week for those of us that wat to see progress in Southend. Max Impact
  • Score: 0

1:55pm Fri 19 Mar 10

Norfolk says...

This is wonderful news and will be such a boost for the whole town's future prosperity.
John Denham's decision shows that the pros and cons of the airport expansion had been explored to the full satisfaction of the Government. The 'antis' could bluff and bluster as much as they liked but the truth has always been that the runway extension will not produce the noise pollution and traffic congestion that they claimed.
Let's all get behind this scheme now in order to take full advantage of the opportunities that it offers the area.
This is wonderful news and will be such a boost for the whole town's future prosperity. John Denham's decision shows that the pros and cons of the airport expansion had been explored to the full satisfaction of the Government. The 'antis' could bluff and bluster as much as they liked but the truth has always been that the runway extension will not produce the noise pollution and traffic congestion that they claimed. Let's all get behind this scheme now in order to take full advantage of the opportunities that it offers the area. Norfolk
  • Score: 0

2:09pm Fri 19 Mar 10

Thames Gateway says...

I'm sure they will recover. Maybe they need to form a new combined group?

How about: Southend Harassed Itinerant Tree-huggers, Stop The Irritating Roads, Runways, Earthworks & Rail Stations.

Can't think of a suitable acronym though.
I'm sure they will recover. Maybe they need to form a new combined group? How about: Southend Harassed Itinerant Tree-huggers, Stop The Irritating Roads, Runways, Earthworks & Rail Stations. Can't think of a suitable acronym though. Thames Gateway
  • Score: 0

2:18pm Fri 19 Mar 10

r6keith says...

Dear SAEN members . Everybody in this area apart from your small band of members wants this airport extension to happen, at this stage except this news, be happy for our town, and back off, accept defeat and let this town move on.If you feel so strongly about all the issues you have raised during your campaign my I suggest you sell up and move on and so we can all live in harmony.
Dear SAEN members . Everybody in this area apart from your small band of members wants this airport extension to happen, at this stage except this news, be happy for our town, and back off, accept defeat and let this town move on.If you feel so strongly about all the issues you have raised during your campaign my I suggest you sell up and move on and so we can all live in harmony. r6keith
  • Score: 0

2:34pm Fri 19 Mar 10

Real World says...

A sad day for Southend I must say!

I for one will no longer be visiting this town, why would I want to go to a town for a relaxing day and have large jets fly over me on a regular bases?
The jobs claims will speak for themselves. I'm just worried alot of people are going to be let down. These claims have been made before by other airports and not as many jobs promised came to life.
I hope I'm wrong but from what I've seen and what I've investigated I don't think I will.

RIP Southend!!!
A sad day for Southend I must say! I for one will no longer be visiting this town, why would I want to go to a town for a relaxing day and have large jets fly over me on a regular bases? The jobs claims will speak for themselves. I'm just worried alot of people are going to be let down. These claims have been made before by other airports and not as many jobs promised came to life. I hope I'm wrong but from what I've seen and what I've investigated I don't think I will. RIP Southend!!! Real World
  • Score: 0

2:40pm Fri 19 Mar 10

Marshwalker says...

Having just read the comments on this page, There is still one question, HOW THE HECK ARE WE GOING TO GET FROM SHOEBURY TO THE WEST OF THE TOWN, WHEN THE WHOLE TOWN IS GRIDLOCKED??? It might be all right for the FEW in the town that will gain enployment, But you can bet your bottom dollar that most of the jobs go to people out side of the town!!! Any bookmakers willing to take a bet on IT?!
Having just read the comments on this page, There is still one question, HOW THE HECK ARE WE GOING TO GET FROM SHOEBURY TO THE WEST OF THE TOWN, WHEN THE WHOLE TOWN IS GRIDLOCKED??? It might be all right for the FEW in the town that will gain enployment, But you can bet your bottom dollar that most of the jobs go to people out side of the town!!! Any bookmakers willing to take a bet on IT?! Marshwalker
  • Score: 0

2:55pm Fri 19 Mar 10

southendmechanic says...

i would like to say this has got to be the best 2 days ever!!! Oh Denis its all gone wrong where is that smug smile you gave the other day when you said you would eat the council on this and the cuckoo corner issue???
i would like to say this has got to be the best 2 days ever!!! Oh Denis its all gone wrong where is that smug smile you gave the other day when you said you would eat the council on this and the cuckoo corner issue??? southendmechanic
  • Score: 0

2:55pm Fri 19 Mar 10

APR says...

Great news for the airport, and all who work there.

It was always going to happen, especially after Stobart bought the airport. It was probably in the terms of the purchase.
Great news for the airport, and all who work there. It was always going to happen, especially after Stobart bought the airport. It was probably in the terms of the purchase. APR
  • Score: 0

3:29pm Fri 19 Mar 10

wakering realist says...

If 'Wrecker' Waite & her chums are in favour of this development then you can be sure it will be a disaster for the whole area. The random figures of jobs to be created will no doubt prove to have been a work of fiction, the regeneration won't happen - all that can be guaranteed is disturbed sleep, increased traffic, lower house prices, increased pollution ... hope all the yes men remember this in a year or two.
If 'Wrecker' Waite & her chums are in favour of this development then you can be sure it will be a disaster for the whole area. The random figures of jobs to be created will no doubt prove to have been a work of fiction, the regeneration won't happen - all that can be guaranteed is disturbed sleep, increased traffic, lower house prices, increased pollution ... hope all the yes men remember this in a year or two. wakering realist
  • Score: 0

3:44pm Fri 19 Mar 10

EMEM says...

This is a disaster for the town, who wants to visit a town with constant aircraft passing over head, that's if they can get there due to the congestion on the alreay gridlocked roads, and where is the evidence that these news jobs even exist and they will be offered to local people. All this has guaranteed is, more traffic, more noise, and lower house prices.
This is a disaster for the town, who wants to visit a town with constant aircraft passing over head, that's if they can get there due to the congestion on the alreay gridlocked roads, and where is the evidence that these news jobs even exist and they will be offered to local people. All this has guaranteed is, more traffic, more noise, and lower house prices. EMEM
  • Score: 0

3:54pm Fri 19 Mar 10

Nebs says...

A sad day for the unemployed of Southend, as there will soon be plenty of work for all.
A sad day for the unemployed of Southend, as there will soon be plenty of work for all. Nebs
  • Score: 0

3:56pm Fri 19 Mar 10

anon anon says...

Nebs wrote:
A sad day for the unemployed of Southend, as there will soon be plenty of work for all.
hahah...... indeed
its good news for the town and the moaners will carry on moaning !!!
[quote][p][bold]Nebs[/bold] wrote: A sad day for the unemployed of Southend, as there will soon be plenty of work for all.[/p][/quote]hahah...... indeed its good news for the town and the moaners will carry on moaning !!! anon anon
  • Score: 0

4:10pm Fri 19 Mar 10

BASILBRUSH says...

EMEM wrote:
This is a disaster for the town, who wants to visit a town with constant aircraft passing over head, that's if they can get there due to the congestion on the alreay gridlocked roads, and where is the evidence that these news jobs even exist and they will be offered to local people. All this has guaranteed is, more traffic, more noise, and lower house prices.
4 per hour during peak times is hardly constant.
Only 50% of the traffic that visits the large Tesco at peak times on the road.
As for evidence of jobs. Only last week Apprenticeships were being offered at the airport.
The airport itself already employs 80% local people.
The jobs will be advertised. Its up to local people to apply for them.
As for house prices, its SAEN with scaremongering that would have done any damage to house prices.
Anyway, its happening now. Soon we will all have an already established asset improved.
[quote][p][bold]EMEM[/bold] wrote: This is a disaster for the town, who wants to visit a town with constant aircraft passing over head, that's if they can get there due to the congestion on the alreay gridlocked roads, and where is the evidence that these news jobs even exist and they will be offered to local people. All this has guaranteed is, more traffic, more noise, and lower house prices.[/p][/quote]4 per hour during peak times is hardly constant. Only 50% of the traffic that visits the large Tesco at peak times on the road. As for evidence of jobs. Only last week Apprenticeships were being offered at the airport. The airport itself already employs 80% local people. The jobs will be advertised. Its up to local people to apply for them. As for house prices, its SAEN with scaremongering that would have done any damage to house prices. Anyway, its happening now. Soon we will all have an already established asset improved. BASILBRUSH
  • Score: 0

4:19pm Fri 19 Mar 10

RobertFS says...

How wonderful to read so many positive comments! the complainers should be reminded that during the 60's & 70's this airport was far busier than the future traffic figures are projected. that that together with tecnological advancement in quieter engines there should not be too much of a problem As for the stupid person who thinks that if the expansion doesn't go ahead that it will stop people flying abroad - well?!!!
stop complaining people and enjoy the advantages
How wonderful to read so many positive comments! the complainers should be reminded that during the 60's & 70's this airport was far busier than the future traffic figures are projected. that that together with tecnological advancement in quieter engines there should not be too much of a problem[ i live under the flight path and i don't see a problem] As for the stupid person who thinks that if the expansion doesn't go ahead that it will stop people flying abroad - well?!!! stop complaining people and enjoy the advantages RobertFS
  • Score: 0

4:47pm Fri 19 Mar 10

Campbell's dad says...

So the pro pollution group are looking forward to increased employment.
Note that another small airport that was to increase it's passenger numbers when expansion plans were submitted have recently sacked 45 of the airport support staff.
This one is also owned by Stobart & they are only really interested in the warehouse planning permissions & freight hub.
A prediction to ponder on, the runway will be found to have substandard substrate when they start the extension (if it happens). They will need to relay it all so they might as well widen it at the same time. Thus the bigger wider freight planes will get to land here & the church/graves will have to go.
I'll still be here, can not sell our house now anyway.
So the pro pollution group are looking forward to increased employment. Note that another small airport that was to increase it's passenger numbers when expansion plans were submitted have recently sacked 45 of the airport support staff. This one is also owned by Stobart & they are only really interested in the warehouse planning permissions & freight hub. A prediction to ponder on, the runway will be found to have substandard substrate when they start the extension (if it happens). They will need to relay it all so they might as well widen it at the same time. Thus the bigger wider freight planes will get to land here & the church/graves will have to go. I'll still be here, can not sell our house now anyway. Campbell's dad
  • Score: 0

5:07pm Fri 19 Mar 10

Doolaly says...

What wonderful news: We can all look forward to the reduced aircraft noise, tighter restrictions on nightime flights, thousands of new jobs, two visits from santa claus each year, free lunches, a cure for the common cold, honest politicians, world peace, and an end to starving in Africa. Get real! The only winners here are Stobarts - the people of Southend will ultimately be the losers. Yes, there may be a few new jobs (and if the Apprenticeships mentioned by BasilBrush are true, this is certainly a good thing) but these won't come to the promised thousands. I hope I'm wrong, but I think all of you 'positive' people are living in cloud cuckoo land.
What wonderful news: We can all look forward to the reduced aircraft noise, tighter restrictions on nightime flights, thousands of new jobs, two visits from santa claus each year, free lunches, a cure for the common cold, honest politicians, world peace, and an end to starving in Africa. Get real! The only winners here are Stobarts - the people of Southend will ultimately be the losers. Yes, there may be a few new jobs (and if the Apprenticeships mentioned by BasilBrush are true, this is certainly a good thing) but these won't come to the promised thousands. I hope I'm wrong, but I think all of you 'positive' people are living in cloud cuckoo land. Doolaly
  • Score: 0

5:18pm Fri 19 Mar 10

r6keith says...

Campbell's dad wrote:
So the pro pollution group are looking forward to increased employment. Note that another small airport that was to increase it's passenger numbers when expansion plans were submitted have recently sacked 45 of the airport support staff. This one is also owned by Stobart & they are only really interested in the warehouse planning permissions & freight hub. A prediction to ponder on, the runway will be found to have substandard substrate when they start the extension (if it happens). They will need to relay it all so they might as well widen it at the same time. Thus the bigger wider freight planes will get to land here & the church/graves will have to go. I'll still be here, can not sell our house now anyway.
wake up , there are things in place ,the airport will expand under the agreed guidelines , it will not be a freight terminal !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Houses are sought after in Rochford because of the airport !!!!!!!!!!
So sell if you want.
[quote][p][bold]Campbell's dad[/bold] wrote: So the pro pollution group are looking forward to increased employment. Note that another small airport that was to increase it's passenger numbers when expansion plans were submitted have recently sacked 45 of the airport support staff. This one is also owned by Stobart & they are only really interested in the warehouse planning permissions & freight hub. A prediction to ponder on, the runway will be found to have substandard substrate when they start the extension (if it happens). They will need to relay it all so they might as well widen it at the same time. Thus the bigger wider freight planes will get to land here & the church/graves will have to go. I'll still be here, can not sell our house now anyway.[/p][/quote]wake up , there are things in place ,the airport will expand under the agreed guidelines , it will not be a freight terminal !!!!!!!!!!!!! Houses are sought after in Rochford because of the airport !!!!!!!!!! So sell if you want. r6keith
  • Score: 0

7:02pm Fri 19 Mar 10

'V' says...

Nebs wrote:
A sad day for the unemployed of Southend, as there will soon be plenty of work for all.
Yes. They will all have to stop spending their days posting on this website.
[quote][p][bold]Nebs[/bold] wrote: A sad day for the unemployed of Southend, as there will soon be plenty of work for all.[/p][/quote]Yes. They will all have to stop spending their days posting on this website. 'V'
  • Score: 0

7:09pm Fri 19 Mar 10

southendmechanic says...

i know its going to make me busy so thats a good thing i have got rid of the holiday park at the end of my road with the anti establishment protesters and now i have my airport.
Good news all round
i know its going to make me busy so thats a good thing i have got rid of the holiday park at the end of my road with the anti establishment protesters and now i have my airport. Good news all round southendmechanic
  • Score: 0

7:47pm Fri 19 Mar 10

firedog says...

I hope that the aircraft noise is at least loud enough to drown out the the noise of constant winging by the no hopers on this site.This is good news for the vast majority of people in this town.
I hope that the aircraft noise is at least loud enough to drown out the the noise of constant winging by the no hopers on this site.This is good news for the vast majority of people in this town. firedog
  • Score: 0

8:06pm Fri 19 Mar 10

essexboi1989 says...

woop woop..this has made my day :-)
woop woop..this has made my day :-) essexboi1989
  • Score: 0

8:10pm Fri 19 Mar 10

paintlad says...

Well Done Sothend Airport
About time too!!
Well Done Sothend Airport About time too!! paintlad
  • Score: 0

8:14pm Fri 19 Mar 10

'V' says...

What with the increased traffic and constant aircraft noise, property prices in Priory Crescent are going to plummet.

I wouldn't give a box of tictacs for a house there now.
What with the increased traffic and constant aircraft noise, property prices in Priory Crescent are going to plummet. I wouldn't give a box of tictacs for a house there now. 'V'
  • Score: 0

8:30pm Fri 19 Mar 10

southendmechanic says...

hey when my dad brought the house in 1972 as an investment property for the family (4 years before my birth) it was 5,000 pounds or there about. Dont think i will loose much on that ;-) anyway i dont need to move got 4 bedrooms and like it here. Who am i to stand in the way of people having employment and a future, Worrying about house prices is selfish and just proves people paid over inflated prices to start with.
hey when my dad brought the house in 1972 as an investment property for the family (4 years before my birth) it was 5,000 pounds or there about. Dont think i will loose much on that ;-) anyway i dont need to move got 4 bedrooms and like it here. Who am i to stand in the way of people having employment and a future, Worrying about house prices is selfish and just proves people paid over inflated prices to start with. southendmechanic
  • Score: 0

8:43pm Fri 19 Mar 10

BASILBRUSH says...

A complete load of nonsense. Carlisle is Stobarts other airport and is perfectly suited close to M6 for their freight hub. But that is no secret.
Carlisle is a totally different project and the redundancies are not long term, but necessary in the interim period (basic research).
6 staff were made redundant at the airport, not 45 which were actually part of Stobart rail who were due to be used as construction workers at the airport during quiet periods in Railway construction and maintenance year, but couldn't start due to delays with planning disputes.
But don't let the truth get in the way of a good scaremongering story.
As for the runway at Southend, you clearly no nothing about the runway and its current use or construction.
The Church will not be touched, but a small section of graveyard wall will be converted to make it frangiable. All available for the public to see on their website in in all the planning applications.

........
Doolaly:

http://www.echo-news
.co.uk/news/local_ne
ws/southend/5061567.
__560_000_boost_for_
aircraft_apprentices
/

And that was announced prior to the runway extension permission being announced.
A complete load of nonsense. Carlisle is Stobarts other airport and is perfectly suited close to M6 for their freight hub. But that is no secret. Carlisle is a totally different project and the redundancies are not long term, but necessary in the interim period (basic research). 6 staff were made redundant at the airport, not 45 which were actually part of Stobart rail who were due to be used as construction workers at the airport during quiet periods in Railway construction and maintenance year, but couldn't start due to delays with planning disputes. But don't let the truth get in the way of a good scaremongering story. As for the runway at Southend, you clearly no nothing about the runway and its current use or construction. The Church will not be touched, but a small section of graveyard wall will be converted to make it frangiable. All available for the public to see on their website in in all the planning applications. ........ Doolaly: http://www.echo-news .co.uk/news/local_ne ws/southend/5061567. __560_000_boost_for_ aircraft_apprentices / And that was announced prior to the runway extension permission being announced. BASILBRUSH
  • Score: 0

9:44pm Fri 19 Mar 10

gunner3380 says...

Fantastic news for Southend. It's about time common sense has seen the light. In the 60's the Airport was booming and hopefully will again. Don't come and live where you know there is an Airport, Gunnery Range (it's been there since the 1850's) and then complain about it. That Guy from London, stay there mate we don't need you here. Well done Stobarts and the Council.
Fantastic news for Southend. It's about time common sense has seen the light. In the 60's the Airport was booming and hopefully will again. Don't come and live where you know there is an Airport, Gunnery Range (it's been there since the 1850's) and then complain about it. That Guy from London, stay there mate we don't need you here. Well done Stobarts and the Council. gunner3380
  • Score: 0

10:48pm Fri 19 Mar 10

southendmechanic says...

Denis has lifted his head again and come out with a new statement
THE STOBART GROUP RUINING OUR TOWN WE NEED JUSTICE OVER SOUTHEND AIRPORT.
and he has taken to the radio in a live interview which was intresting to listen to. He kept saying ermm ermm ermm which was a bit annoying when you consider Alister from Stobart Air did a interview just before and was so clear and understandable. Denis did his normal and quoted facts which he admitted he wasnt sure of (so why quote them) which is ironic when you consider that he is always bleeting about stobarts facts being wrong.
Why is he hell bent on having a go at stobarts who have a fantastic reputation of being reliable honest and trust worthy.
Can the same be said for SAEN???
Denis has lifted his head again and come out with a new statement THE STOBART GROUP RUINING OUR TOWN WE NEED JUSTICE OVER SOUTHEND AIRPORT. and he has taken to the radio in a live interview which was intresting to listen to. He kept saying ermm ermm ermm which was a bit annoying when you consider Alister from Stobart Air did a interview just before and was so clear and understandable. Denis did his normal and quoted facts which he admitted he wasnt sure of (so why quote them) which is ironic when you consider that he is always bleeting about stobarts facts being wrong. Why is he hell bent on having a go at stobarts who have a fantastic reputation of being reliable honest and trust worthy. Can the same be said for SAEN??? southendmechanic
  • Score: 0

11:25pm Fri 19 Mar 10

x2k says...

Hurrah - finally some progress in this town. Perhaps all the serial whingers can see how many supportive comments have been posted by the previously silent majority.
Hurrah - finally some progress in this town. Perhaps all the serial whingers can see how many supportive comments have been posted by the previously silent majority. x2k
  • Score: 0

11:32pm Fri 19 Mar 10

Max Impact says...

Darn missed that.

SAEN "Facts" are Fiction.

Airports facts are FACTS

SAEN picked the "facts they used out of their own heads and twisted anything said to suit thier own goals.
Darn missed that. SAEN "Facts" are Fiction. Airports facts are FACTS SAEN picked the "facts they used out of their own heads and twisted anything said to suit thier own goals. Max Impact
  • Score: 0

11:48pm Fri 19 Mar 10

emcee says...

Excellent. Now, perhaps, I will be able to fly into Europe without having to go all the way to London or Stansted. Oh, and there will be more activity from the airport on my scanner :o) Can't be bad.
Excellent. Now, perhaps, I will be able to fly into Europe without having to go all the way to London or Stansted. Oh, and there will be more activity from the airport on my scanner :o) Can't be bad. emcee
  • Score: 0

11:55pm Fri 19 Mar 10

jebe says...

southendmechanic wrote:
i know its going to make me busy so thats a good thing i have got rid of the holiday park at the end of my road with the anti establishment protesters and now i have my airport.
Good news all round
Hey Traitor...What an obnoxious self centered creep you are...now your dreams for the continued ruination of this once beautiful Town has come to fruition hopefully you will now get up off your fat lazy rear end that seems permanently stuck to a computer and shut the **** up..Obviously you will be too busy making filthy Lucre to post your ignorant arrogant remarks and give the Born and bred,True Southenders a break from your pure Ugliness and arrogance....Traitor par exellence
[quote][p][bold]southendmechanic[/bold] wrote: i know its going to make me busy so thats a good thing i have got rid of the holiday park at the end of my road with the anti establishment protesters and now i have my airport. Good news all round[/p][/quote]Hey Traitor...What an obnoxious self centered creep you are...now your dreams for the continued ruination of this once beautiful Town has come to fruition hopefully you will now get up off your fat lazy rear end that seems permanently stuck to a computer and shut the **** up..Obviously you will be too busy making filthy Lucre to post your ignorant arrogant remarks and give the Born and bred,True Southenders a break from your pure Ugliness and arrogance....Traitor par exellence jebe
  • Score: 0

12:15am Sat 20 Mar 10

jam55king says...

I am amazed how short sited people can be, believe me i am no tree hugger but even i can see that the gradual erosion of the greenbelt, trees, air quality, noise quality etc will in the end make this country and especially the south east a horrible place to live in time.All this talk of jobs is RUBBISH they'll just bring in qualified people from the London areas who will jump at the chance to move hear as they get paid to move out of London these days they'll also bring in immigrants who'll work for less!! Why on Earth would we want to make Essex into London surely we all left that place once!! Still at least a few slimey councilours got their BUNGS from Stobart hope they sleep ok and their kids dont have to live under the flight path!
I am amazed how short sited people can be, believe me i am no tree hugger but even i can see that the gradual erosion of the greenbelt, trees, air quality, noise quality etc will in the end make this country and especially the south east a horrible place to live in time.All this talk of jobs is RUBBISH they'll just bring in qualified people from the London areas who will jump at the chance to move hear as they get paid to move out of London these days they'll also bring in immigrants who'll work for less!! Why on Earth would we want to make Essex into London surely we all left that place once!! Still at least a few slimey councilours got their BUNGS from Stobart hope they sleep ok and their kids dont have to live under the flight path! jam55king
  • Score: 0

1:51am Sat 20 Mar 10

timmus says...

Jobs for immigrants and out of towners and pollution and noise for the locals is how it will be, All those who support this scheme come and live under the flight path with me and tell me it's a good idea!!!!!!!!
Jobs for immigrants and out of towners and pollution and noise for the locals is how it will be, All those who support this scheme come and live under the flight path with me and tell me it's a good idea!!!!!!!! timmus
  • Score: 0

6:50am Sat 20 Mar 10

Isaac Hunt says...

When can I book a cheap flight to Majorki....
When can I book a cheap flight to Majorki.... Isaac Hunt
  • Score: 0

7:08am Sat 20 Mar 10

themarinadog says...

After Blackpool!
After Blackpool! themarinadog
  • Score: 0

7:15am Sat 20 Mar 10

tophatdt says...

Having wrote many mails during the lead-up to this, I must say how happy I am for the airport staff and Stobart Group. Although I felt it was already a foregone conclusion (or gentlemen's agreement made in advance), I am relieved to learn of the decision yesterday. I think in 5 years time, the noise levels will surprise the anti-airport brigade when they will be pleasantly surprised how quiet and efficient the Airbus family of aircraft and Dash-8s are. I hope the airport can persuade enough new airlines to come to Southend and provide the local people with lots of interesting destinations.
Having wrote many mails during the lead-up to this, I must say how happy I am for the airport staff and Stobart Group. Although I felt it was already a foregone conclusion (or gentlemen's agreement made in advance), I am relieved to learn of the decision yesterday. I think in 5 years time, the noise levels will surprise the anti-airport brigade when they will be pleasantly surprised how quiet and efficient the Airbus family of aircraft and Dash-8s are. I hope the airport can persuade enough new airlines to come to Southend and provide the local people with lots of interesting destinations. tophatdt
  • Score: 0

7:51am Sat 20 Mar 10

Norfolk says...

The post by Campbell's dad yesterday is a classic and sums up the foolish SAEN strategy exactly.
Firstly, he states that the 6 actual redundancies at Carlisle airport were 45 - SAEN policy was always to exaggerate where possible.
Then he goes into the realms of fantasy - something in which SAEN were experts - by suggesting that the runway would be found unstable, be rebuilt and widened to take widebody freighters and, for good measure, the church and graveyards will be demolished. What is this man on I wonder? All this without one fact or piece of evidence to substantiate his delusions, and totally disregarding that a completely new planning consent would be needed, but would never, ever be granted for such a scheme. Several times I took Denis Walker to task for errors in his 'facts' and pointed out exactly where the correct figures could be obtained and what they were. Did he ever respond or post a correction? No, of course he didn't because the true facts didn't suit his argument and admitting so would have exposed SAEN for exactly what they were - alarmists and scaremongers.
Most people saw through their fabrications and when it came to detailed examination of the facts by Council planning officers and Councillors, and now by GOEast and the Minister for Communities, their case against the expansion fell flat on its face as it deserved to do.
Five years from now the people of Leigh will wonder what all the fuss was about, while the airport itself will be making a substantial contribution to the local economy in terms of employment and inward investment.
The post by Campbell's dad yesterday is a classic and sums up the foolish SAEN strategy exactly. Firstly, he states that the 6 actual redundancies at Carlisle airport were 45 - SAEN policy was always to exaggerate where possible. Then he goes into the realms of fantasy - something in which SAEN were experts - by suggesting that the runway would be found unstable, be rebuilt and widened to take widebody freighters and, for good measure, the church and graveyards will be demolished. What is this man on I wonder? All this without one fact or piece of evidence to substantiate his delusions, and totally disregarding that a completely new planning consent would be needed, but would never, ever be granted for such a scheme. Several times I took Denis Walker to task for errors in his 'facts' and pointed out exactly where the correct figures could be obtained and what they were. Did he ever respond or post a correction? No, of course he didn't because the true facts didn't suit his argument and admitting so would have exposed SAEN for exactly what they were - alarmists and scaremongers. Most people saw through their fabrications and when it came to detailed examination of the facts by Council planning officers and Councillors, and now by GOEast and the Minister for Communities, their case against the expansion fell flat on its face as it deserved to do. Five years from now the people of Leigh will wonder what all the fuss was about, while the airport itself will be making a substantial contribution to the local economy in terms of employment and inward investment. Norfolk
  • Score: 0

7:55am Sat 20 Mar 10

evilc says...

Interesting comments.

As mentioned previously the ONLY people in fear of this is the current un employed benefit seekers who have the time to go on demonstrations and protest camps.

Hopefully the next good news will be a change of Government who will change the Socialist thinking and require those work shy hippies capable of protesting and demonstrating and taking benefits to either work sweeping the roads around the new airport/station/ warehouses or STOP their(meaning our) benefit payments.
Interesting comments. As mentioned previously the ONLY people in fear of this is the current un employed benefit seekers who have the time to go on demonstrations and protest camps. Hopefully the next good news will be a change of Government who will change the Socialist thinking and require those work shy hippies capable of protesting and demonstrating and taking benefits to either work sweeping the roads around the new airport/station/ warehouses or STOP their(meaning our) benefit payments. evilc
  • Score: 0

9:02am Sat 20 Mar 10

r6keith says...

timmus wrote:
Jobs for immigrants and out of towners and pollution and noise for the locals is how it will be, All those who support this scheme come and live under the flight path with me and tell me it's a good idea!!!!!!!!
One point you missed out, it is a requirement of the aviation industry that those that work in it can read and write in English , this is even a requirement at AirBus in France. Many of the jobs filled by immigrants are so below those some "English" would even contemplate doing. Have not our hospitals been filled with immigrant workers for many years? You bought your house in a flight path live with it !
[quote][p][bold]timmus[/bold] wrote: Jobs for immigrants and out of towners and pollution and noise for the locals is how it will be, All those who support this scheme come and live under the flight path with me and tell me it's a good idea!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]One point you missed out, it is a requirement of the aviation industry that those that work in it can read and write in English , this is even a requirement at AirBus in France. Many of the jobs filled by immigrants are so below those some "English" would even contemplate doing. Have not our hospitals been filled with immigrant workers for many years? You bought your house in a flight path live with it ! r6keith
  • Score: 0

9:08am Sat 20 Mar 10

r6keith says...

Spot on Norfolk, SAEN lies is one of the reasons I decided to stand up support the expansion of the airport.
Spot on Norfolk, SAEN lies is one of the reasons I decided to stand up support the expansion of the airport. r6keith
  • Score: 0

9:11am Sat 20 Mar 10

Campbell's dad says...

re Norfolk . Rochford.

45 not 6 redundantcies, a fact from "Cumberland News" the local paper for Carlisle Airport, dates 29 jan 2010. Yes they are talking about land rights etc. but Stobarts did make 45 redundant, unless the newspaper got it wrong.
re runway widening. No i am not an airport runway engineer, if i was I may be one of the few locals to get a job out of the airport. But all I am saying is a prediction passed on the way these things happen. they want a wider runway to allow for the heavier jets. I doubt if we will see the new cleaner Airbus & Boings, but more likely the older heavy jets. I hope I am wrong, but the number of For Sale signs in the Anne Boleyn estate suggests I am not alone in my fears.
re Norfolk . Rochford. 45 not 6 redundantcies, a fact from "Cumberland News" the local paper for Carlisle Airport, dates 29 jan 2010. Yes they are talking about land rights etc. but Stobarts did make 45 redundant, unless the newspaper got it wrong. re runway widening. No i am not an airport runway engineer, if i was I may be one of the few locals to get a job out of the airport. But all I am saying is a prediction passed on the way these things happen. they want a wider runway to allow for the heavier jets. I doubt if we will see the new cleaner Airbus & Boings, but more likely the older heavy jets. I hope I am wrong, but the number of For Sale signs in the Anne Boleyn estate suggests I am not alone in my fears. Campbell's dad
  • Score: 0

9:59am Sat 20 Mar 10

southendmechanic says...

maybe the houses by the Anne Boleyn estate are being sold now due to the fact the housing market is crawling back to life. Maybe the house prices will be better than they could have been due to the fact that the new station will prove popular with commuters who want to live next to a station? Its is all MAYBE but then again that was the word that was missing from every statement put out by SAEN. The real affected people have been cheated your campain was taken over by enviroment campainers who like myself dont live under the flight path and the streets which border onto the airport.
They made up so many facts and became such a pain with their ever changing policys that Stobarts could never have got a happy settlement for both sides. The safe gaurds put in to reduce night time flights (they could have had cargo all night) and showed their intentions for passenger flights by building the station passenger terminal and control tower.
maybe the houses by the Anne Boleyn estate are being sold now due to the fact the housing market is crawling back to life. Maybe the house prices will be better than they could have been due to the fact that the new station will prove popular with commuters who want to live next to a station? Its is all MAYBE but then again that was the word that was missing from every statement put out by SAEN. The real affected people have been cheated your campain was taken over by enviroment campainers who like myself dont live under the flight path and the streets which border onto the airport. They made up so many facts and became such a pain with their ever changing policys that Stobarts could never have got a happy settlement for both sides. The safe gaurds put in to reduce night time flights (they could have had cargo all night) and showed their intentions for passenger flights by building the station passenger terminal and control tower. southendmechanic
  • Score: 0

10:32am Sat 20 Mar 10

Norfolk says...

Campbell's dad
Just to put the record straight about Carlisle, Stobart Rail laid off 45 people who they had hoped to use on construction of their new HQ adjacent to Carlisle airport, at a time of year when Network Rail work is reduced. They couldn't do this because legal wrangling means they cannot yet start work on the HQ building. They were not "airport support staff" as it has nothing to do with staffing levels at Carlisle airport itself, where it is true to say six people were made redundant. You name me any airport which has not shed jobs during the worst recession for decades.
At Southend they don't "want a wider runway to allow for the heavier jets". That is simply untrue, as is your assertion that you "doubt that we will see new cleaner Airbus & Boeings". Rest assured that you will, together with your wish that you will be proven wrong also being granted.
Campbell's dad Just to put the record straight about Carlisle, Stobart Rail laid off 45 people who they had hoped to use on construction of their new HQ adjacent to Carlisle airport, at a time of year when Network Rail work is reduced. They couldn't do this because legal wrangling means they cannot yet start work on the HQ building. They were not "airport support staff" as it has nothing to do with staffing levels at Carlisle airport itself, where it is true to say six people were made redundant. You name me any airport which has not shed jobs during the worst recession for decades. At Southend they don't "want a wider runway to allow for the heavier jets". That is simply untrue, as is your assertion that you "doubt that we will see new cleaner Airbus & Boeings". Rest assured that you will, together with your wish that you will be proven wrong also being granted. Norfolk
  • Score: 0

12:26pm Sat 20 Mar 10

jolllyboy says...

Apart from being sick of all the talk about the airport, which was a foregone conclusion, it should be remembered that nearly all the employment will be in the Business/Retail parks due to be built not the airport. If they are built that is. Look at the Tesco site in Central Southend – on hold!
Unfortunately I noted that Stobart have sold a Distribution Centre up north, plus part of an inland port area. Said to be to enable them to fund what they wish to do at Southend. Wonder where they will build a new Distribution Centre then, having said they would not here. High value cargo – not.
The flights anticipated will still also be restricted in destinations. Add to that the fact that all regional flights are more expensive. I anticipate that within a decade Southend Council will realise how naïve they are being and will regret having teamed up with this big business partner. The influence that Stobart will have will be incredible.
One of the best seaside towns in the country – don’t make me laugh. Did Anna mean planes on beach? Well you certainly will see them. Meantime I don’t shop near Gatwick, Stansted or Heathrow when I fly so I don’t anticipate a million or two passengers with suitcases shopping in our Town Centre. The idea of flying is that you leave the country. Rose-tinted glasses I think. There is not enough here to interest visitors for more than one or two days. The encroachment on our green areas is a sad day for the town. As for roadworks and congestion – you ain’t seen anything yet!!!!
Having done Cuckoo Corner, Victoria Circus and that ridiculous bus lane round Queensway, also progress Road, work will be needed at the Bell and Kent Elms Corner. Oh happy days! My children have already left – I think it’s time for me to follow and leave you all to it.
Apart from being sick of all the talk about the airport, which was a foregone conclusion, it should be remembered that nearly all the employment will be in the Business/Retail parks due to be built not the airport. If they are built that is. Look at the Tesco site in Central Southend – on hold! Unfortunately I noted that Stobart have sold a Distribution Centre up north, plus part of an inland port area. Said to be to enable them to fund what they wish to do at Southend. Wonder where they will build a new Distribution Centre then, having said they would not here. High value cargo – not. The flights anticipated will still also be restricted in destinations. Add to that the fact that all regional flights are more expensive. I anticipate that within a decade Southend Council will realise how naïve they are being and will regret having teamed up with this big business partner. The influence that Stobart will have will be incredible. One of the best seaside towns in the country – don’t make me laugh. Did Anna mean planes on beach? Well you certainly will see them. Meantime I don’t shop near Gatwick, Stansted or Heathrow when I fly so I don’t anticipate a million or two passengers with suitcases shopping in our Town Centre. The idea of flying is that you leave the country. Rose-tinted glasses I think. There is not enough here to interest visitors for more than one or two days. The encroachment on our green areas is a sad day for the town. As for roadworks and congestion – you ain’t seen anything yet!!!! Having done Cuckoo Corner, Victoria Circus and that ridiculous bus lane round Queensway, also progress Road, work will be needed at the Bell and Kent Elms Corner. Oh happy days! My children have already left – I think it’s time for me to follow and leave you all to it. jolllyboy
  • Score: 0

12:58pm Sat 20 Mar 10

BASILBRUSH says...

jolllyboy wrote:
Apart from being sick of all the talk about the airport, which was a foregone conclusion, it should be remembered that nearly all the employment will be in the Business/Retail parks due to be built not the airport. If they are built that is. Look at the Tesco site in Central Southend – on hold!
Unfortunately I noted that Stobart have sold a Distribution Centre up north, plus part of an inland port area. Said to be to enable them to fund what they wish to do at Southend. Wonder where they will build a new Distribution Centre then, having said they would not here. High value cargo – not.
The flights anticipated will still also be restricted in destinations. Add to that the fact that all regional flights are more expensive. I anticipate that within a decade Southend Council will realise how naïve they are being and will regret having teamed up with this big business partner. The influence that Stobart will have will be incredible.
One of the best seaside towns in the country – don’t make me laugh. Did Anna mean planes on beach? Well you certainly will see them. Meantime I don’t shop near Gatwick, Stansted or Heathrow when I fly so I don’t anticipate a million or two passengers with suitcases shopping in our Town Centre. The idea of flying is that you leave the country. Rose-tinted glasses I think. There is not enough here to interest visitors for more than one or two days. The encroachment on our green areas is a sad day for the town. As for roadworks and congestion – you ain’t seen anything yet!!!!
Having done Cuckoo Corner, Victoria Circus and that ridiculous bus lane round Queensway, also progress Road, work will be needed at the Bell and Kent Elms Corner. Oh happy days! My children have already left – I think it’s time for me to follow and leave you all to it.
Here we go again with the freight rubbish. If so sick of all the talk, why add so much rubbish?

Direct quote from Stobart group website...." £61m is satisfied by a cash payment of which the majority will be used to repay existing borrowings with RBS and Barclays, significantly reducing the core debt in the balance sheet of the company at 28 February 2010 to around £45m.  This will allow the Group flexibility in securing the optimum debt structure for future asset developments, including the commenced capital expenditure programme at London Southend Airport."

Stobart developed the site sold and have sold the centre to Tesco, they now have a distribution contract from that site for Tesco. It is not due to happen at Southend, just because it happened there.
Now Thurrock next to the M25 that would make a good Stobart distribution centre.... Oh guess what?

Its sad that the antis have decided to demonise Stobart group. Why so much aggression towards a successful company that is willing to invest in a business in Southend?

The Post office have and will have more freight on the local roads, but that seems to be ok for you.

For the area to reap the financial benefits of an airport (as Southampton doe's), you don't need 2million passengers all stopping in Southend. Its called a ripple effect.
Businesses that support airport operations will grow. Conference facilities will benefit. Hotels will benefit. And a proportion will stay in the area.
Just now with the station and Control tower construction, the towns economy is boosted by around£1m per month.
[quote][p][bold]jolllyboy[/bold] wrote: Apart from being sick of all the talk about the airport, which was a foregone conclusion, it should be remembered that nearly all the employment will be in the Business/Retail parks due to be built not the airport. If they are built that is. Look at the Tesco site in Central Southend – on hold! Unfortunately I noted that Stobart have sold a Distribution Centre up north, plus part of an inland port area. Said to be to enable them to fund what they wish to do at Southend. Wonder where they will build a new Distribution Centre then, having said they would not here. High value cargo – not. The flights anticipated will still also be restricted in destinations. Add to that the fact that all regional flights are more expensive. I anticipate that within a decade Southend Council will realise how naïve they are being and will regret having teamed up with this big business partner. The influence that Stobart will have will be incredible. One of the best seaside towns in the country – don’t make me laugh. Did Anna mean planes on beach? Well you certainly will see them. Meantime I don’t shop near Gatwick, Stansted or Heathrow when I fly so I don’t anticipate a million or two passengers with suitcases shopping in our Town Centre. The idea of flying is that you leave the country. Rose-tinted glasses I think. There is not enough here to interest visitors for more than one or two days. The encroachment on our green areas is a sad day for the town. As for roadworks and congestion – you ain’t seen anything yet!!!! Having done Cuckoo Corner, Victoria Circus and that ridiculous bus lane round Queensway, also progress Road, work will be needed at the Bell and Kent Elms Corner. Oh happy days! My children have already left – I think it’s time for me to follow and leave you all to it.[/p][/quote]Here we go again with the freight rubbish. If so sick of all the talk, why add so much rubbish? Direct quote from Stobart group website...." £61m is satisfied by a cash payment of which the majority will be used to repay existing borrowings with RBS and Barclays, significantly reducing the core debt in the balance sheet of the company at 28 February 2010 to around £45m.  This will allow the Group flexibility in securing the optimum debt structure for future asset developments, including the commenced capital expenditure programme at London Southend Airport." Stobart developed the site sold and have sold the centre to Tesco, they now have a distribution contract from that site for Tesco. It is not due to happen at Southend, just because it happened there. Now Thurrock next to the M25 that would make a good Stobart distribution centre.... Oh guess what? Its sad that the antis have decided to demonise Stobart group. Why so much aggression towards a successful company that is willing to invest in a business in Southend? The Post office have and will have more freight on the local roads, but that seems to be ok for you. For the area to reap the financial benefits of an airport (as Southampton doe's), you don't need 2million passengers all stopping in Southend. Its called a ripple effect. Businesses that support airport operations will grow. Conference facilities will benefit. Hotels will benefit. And a proportion will stay in the area. Just now with the station and Control tower construction, the towns economy is boosted by around£1m per month. BASILBRUSH
  • Score: 0

1:12pm Sat 20 Mar 10

j-w says...

campbells dad, I believe the runway extension is to the length it is (1799m usable) as that is the maximum length that is required because of the width regulations (due to the church) so in future widening the runway will make no difference to the type of aircraft that can use the runway as the length will then prohibit larger aircraft.
campbells dad, I believe the runway extension is to the length it is (1799m usable) as that is the maximum length that is required because of the width regulations (due to the church) so in future widening the runway will make no difference to the type of aircraft that can use the runway as the length will then prohibit larger aircraft. j-w
  • Score: 0

1:58pm Sat 20 Mar 10

r6keith says...

jollyboy.
I only agree with one of your statements the last one why dont you take your own advice ?
jollyboy. I only agree with one of your statements the last one why dont you take your own advice ? r6keith
  • Score: 0

2:32pm Sat 20 Mar 10

vanilla ice says...

southendmechanic wrote:
hey when my dad brought the house in 1972 as an investment property for the family (4 years before my birth) it was 5,000 pounds or there about. Dont think i will loose much on that ;-) anyway i dont need to move got 4 bedrooms and like it here. Who am i to stand in the way of people having employment and a future, Worrying about house prices is selfish and just proves people paid over inflated prices to start with.
As you stated the house only cost your Father 5,000 and you don’t think you will loose much on that, and as there is no mention of you taken out a mortgage so it seems the house didn’t cost you a penny and was probably willed to you, unlike the people in the area who would have had to work hard to pay a mortgage and didn’t have the help of government handouts that you get, you seem to get a lot of pleasure out of the fact that your neighbours and anybody else who brought a house in the area above a certain figure is brain dead, including the people I presume who agree with your line of thought and hang on every word that you utter on these posts, they no doubt will be happy to know you are also in his thinking thick as planks and below his intellectual level. Soon everybody will have watch house prices falling which you quite arrogantly imply is no concern of yours, but it might be to a lot of other people who would like to move to a better environment but haven’t got the resources, and this is before the Airport expansion, and watch in the coming weeks when windows are left open to enjoy the warmer weather or when they want to relax in gardens or local parks, you will have to put up with the permanent drone of local aircraft while adding to the pollution but that’s the price we locals are told we have to pay for the so called improvements, and now we have the flights of City Airport traffic above the area from 6.45am, that most London Boroughs who are affected are fighting against, but Southend & Rochford Councils are quite happy on our behalf to except it, as they wouldn’t want themselves open to a charge of hypocrisy, but still they don’t live here do they.
[quote][p][bold]southendmechanic[/bold] wrote: hey when my dad brought the house in 1972 as an investment property for the family (4 years before my birth) it was 5,000 pounds or there about. Dont think i will loose much on that ;-) anyway i dont need to move got 4 bedrooms and like it here. Who am i to stand in the way of people having employment and a future, Worrying about house prices is selfish and just proves people paid over inflated prices to start with.[/p][/quote]As you stated the house only cost your Father 5,000 and you don’t think you will loose much on that, and as there is no mention of you taken out a mortgage so it seems the house didn’t cost you a penny and was probably willed to you, unlike the people in the area who would have had to work hard to pay a mortgage and didn’t have the help of government handouts that you get, you seem to get a lot of pleasure out of the fact that your neighbours and anybody else who brought a house in the area above a certain figure is brain dead, including the people I presume who agree with your line of thought and hang on every word that you utter on these posts, they no doubt will be happy to know you are also in his thinking thick as planks and below his intellectual level. Soon everybody will have watch house prices falling which you quite arrogantly imply is no concern of yours, but it might be to a lot of other people who would like to move to a better environment but haven’t got the resources, and this is before the Airport expansion, and watch in the coming weeks when windows are left open to enjoy the warmer weather or when they want to relax in gardens or local parks, you will have to put up with the permanent drone of local aircraft while adding to the pollution but that’s the price we locals are told we have to pay for the so called improvements, and now we have the flights of City Airport traffic above the area from 6.45am, that most London Boroughs who are affected are fighting against, but Southend & Rochford Councils are quite happy on our behalf to except it, as they wouldn’t want themselves open to a charge of hypocrisy, but still they don’t live here do they. vanilla ice
  • Score: 0

2:43pm Sat 20 Mar 10

evilc says...

The above comment is utter crap house prices around Heathrow are very high and sought after by workers at the airport.

And it has made no difference to the Queen who lives under the flight path and she is always sitting in her garden.
The above comment is utter crap house prices around Heathrow are very high and sought after by workers at the airport. And it has made no difference to the Queen who lives under the flight path and she is always sitting in her garden. evilc
  • Score: 0

3:36pm Sat 20 Mar 10

Ken_McDonald says...

I am saddened to learn that Southend has innocently set off down this slippery slope. Only too well aware of the generally adverse impact Stansted Airport has already had on a wide surrounding area, thousands of residents and every local council for miles around have spent the last eight years fighting proposals to make our 'local' airport even bigger.

Please feel free to take some of our noise, pollution, road and rail congestion and low-paid jobs, but your children may regret your current enthusiasm for 'progress'.

Ken McDonald
Stansted
I am saddened to learn that Southend has innocently set off down this slippery slope. Only too well aware of the generally adverse impact Stansted Airport has already had on a wide surrounding area, thousands of residents and every local council for miles around have spent the last eight years fighting proposals to make our 'local' airport even bigger. Please feel free to take some of our noise, pollution, road and rail congestion and low-paid jobs, but your children may regret your current enthusiasm for 'progress'. Ken McDonald Stansted Ken_McDonald
  • Score: 0

4:10pm Sat 20 Mar 10

southendmechanic says...

vanilla ice wrote:
southendmechanic wrote: hey when my dad brought the house in 1972 as an investment property for the family (4 years before my birth) it was 5,000 pounds or there about. Dont think i will loose much on that ;-) anyway i dont need to move got 4 bedrooms and like it here. Who am i to stand in the way of people having employment and a future, Worrying about house prices is selfish and just proves people paid over inflated prices to start with.
As you stated the house only cost your Father 5,000 and you don’t think you will loose much on that, and as there is no mention of you taken out a mortgage so it seems the house didn’t cost you a penny and was probably willed to you, unlike the people in the area who would have had to work hard to pay a mortgage and didn’t have the help of government handouts that you get, you seem to get a lot of pleasure out of the fact that your neighbours and anybody else who brought a house in the area above a certain figure is brain dead, including the people I presume who agree with your line of thought and hang on every word that you utter on these posts, they no doubt will be happy to know you are also in his thinking thick as planks and below his intellectual level. Soon everybody will have watch house prices falling which you quite arrogantly imply is no concern of yours, but it might be to a lot of other people who would like to move to a better environment but haven’t got the resources, and this is before the Airport expansion, and watch in the coming weeks when windows are left open to enjoy the warmer weather or when they want to relax in gardens or local parks, you will have to put up with the permanent drone of local aircraft while adding to the pollution but that’s the price we locals are told we have to pay for the so called improvements, and now we have the flights of City Airport traffic above the area from 6.45am, that most London Boroughs who are affected are fighting against, but Southend & Rochford Councils are quite happy on our behalf to except it, as they wouldn’t want themselves open to a charge of hypocrisy, but still they don’t live here do they.
vanilla i take it you have a house with a morgage and live in the affected area. Was the airport there when you brought this house? i would think it was,it was when my house was brought. As for your jibe about benefits you have been mislead as i claim DLA for a permently disable son who is epileptic and autistic.
The house was left to me yes along with other assets in southend to give me a big of a start as i left the army 8 years ago after 8 and a bit years in with a young family and my parents wanted me close by. Anyway back to house prices you only loose money if you move. You have been listening to Denis Walker and the SAEN lot too much as they put so many worries into peoples lives over this issue. Stobarts are not building large warehouses locally and are not going into a distribution centre in southend (i should know this from my dealings at dartford with them)
They would never have done the changes they have done if they were going to put freight as the core money maker.
[quote][p][bold]vanilla ice[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southendmechanic[/bold] wrote: hey when my dad brought the house in 1972 as an investment property for the family (4 years before my birth) it was 5,000 pounds or there about. Dont think i will loose much on that ;-) anyway i dont need to move got 4 bedrooms and like it here. Who am i to stand in the way of people having employment and a future, Worrying about house prices is selfish and just proves people paid over inflated prices to start with.[/p][/quote]As you stated the house only cost your Father 5,000 and you don’t think you will loose much on that, and as there is no mention of you taken out a mortgage so it seems the house didn’t cost you a penny and was probably willed to you, unlike the people in the area who would have had to work hard to pay a mortgage and didn’t have the help of government handouts that you get, you seem to get a lot of pleasure out of the fact that your neighbours and anybody else who brought a house in the area above a certain figure is brain dead, including the people I presume who agree with your line of thought and hang on every word that you utter on these posts, they no doubt will be happy to know you are also in his thinking thick as planks and below his intellectual level. Soon everybody will have watch house prices falling which you quite arrogantly imply is no concern of yours, but it might be to a lot of other people who would like to move to a better environment but haven’t got the resources, and this is before the Airport expansion, and watch in the coming weeks when windows are left open to enjoy the warmer weather or when they want to relax in gardens or local parks, you will have to put up with the permanent drone of local aircraft while adding to the pollution but that’s the price we locals are told we have to pay for the so called improvements, and now we have the flights of City Airport traffic above the area from 6.45am, that most London Boroughs who are affected are fighting against, but Southend & Rochford Councils are quite happy on our behalf to except it, as they wouldn’t want themselves open to a charge of hypocrisy, but still they don’t live here do they.[/p][/quote]vanilla i take it you have a house with a morgage and live in the affected area. Was the airport there when you brought this house? i would think it was,it was when my house was brought. As for your jibe about benefits you have been mislead as i claim DLA for a permently disable son who is epileptic and autistic. The house was left to me yes along with other assets in southend to give me a big of a start as i left the army 8 years ago after 8 and a bit years in with a young family and my parents wanted me close by. Anyway back to house prices you only loose money if you move. You have been listening to Denis Walker and the SAEN lot too much as they put so many worries into peoples lives over this issue. Stobarts are not building large warehouses locally and are not going into a distribution centre in southend (i should know this from my dealings at dartford with them) They would never have done the changes they have done if they were going to put freight as the core money maker. southendmechanic
  • Score: 0

4:39pm Sat 20 Mar 10

karateman1964 says...

Max Impact wrote:
karateman1964 wrote: 1 of the best Resorts in the country..dont make me laugh..the place is a dump. It will take more than an Airport to save Southend.
Whats Southend got to do with you in Poole? Poole where the old go to... This is superb news but lo and behold FC1967 starts his moaning. Still two bad days for the treehuggers Yesterday Priory Cresent to day the airport, What a superb week for those of us that wat to see progress in Southend.
Wow sounds so exciting maybe its not a dump afterall..im packing my bags on on my way back this minute.
[quote][p][bold]Max Impact[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]karateman1964[/bold] wrote: 1 of the best Resorts in the country..dont make me laugh..the place is a dump. It will take more than an Airport to save Southend.[/p][/quote]Whats Southend got to do with you in Poole? Poole where the old go to... This is superb news but lo and behold FC1967 starts his moaning. Still two bad days for the treehuggers Yesterday Priory Cresent to day the airport, What a superb week for those of us that wat to see progress in Southend.[/p][/quote]Wow sounds so exciting maybe its not a dump afterall..im packing my bags on on my way back this minute. karateman1964
  • Score: 0

5:41pm Sat 20 Mar 10

vanilla ice says...

evilc wrote:
The above comment is utter crap house prices around Heathrow are very high and sought after by workers at the airport.

And it has made no difference to the Queen who lives under the flight path and she is always sitting in her garden.
Oh Its Evilc, that master of hypocrisy with more gems, who in previous posts didn’t care how many thousands people were put out of work in pubs and entertainment industry and hundreds of pubs closers, which was a direct result of the smoking ban as he was all for it, so the jobs lost didn’t concern him but he was forever telling us how many jobs his so called non polluting Airport might create, perhaps Evilc you could try standing in a hanger with a jet engine running and the doors closed for a short time, then give us an update. And before you ask I don’t smoke.
[quote][p][bold]evilc[/bold] wrote: The above comment is utter crap house prices around Heathrow are very high and sought after by workers at the airport. And it has made no difference to the Queen who lives under the flight path and she is always sitting in her garden.[/p][/quote]Oh Its Evilc, that master of hypocrisy with more gems, who in previous posts didn’t care how many thousands people were put out of work in pubs and entertainment industry and hundreds of pubs closers, which was a direct result of the smoking ban as he was all for it, so the jobs lost didn’t concern him but he was forever telling us how many jobs his so called non polluting Airport might create, perhaps Evilc you could try standing in a hanger with a jet engine running and the doors closed for a short time, then give us an update. And before you ask I don’t smoke. vanilla ice
  • Score: 0

9:19pm Sat 20 Mar 10

openspace says...

It seems that many people who oppose the Airport expansion must be newcomers to the town who cannot remember the busy days of the 60's when there were many commercial flights from our airport. The planes then were noisier and had a slower rate of climb, making more noise over a longer flightpath. Modern, faster, quieter and more fuel efficient planes will undoubtedly have less impact than then, even if flights increase beyond the 60's level, ( possibly unlikely ). Residents who live in very close proximity to the airport should not be too shocked if the aiport expansion is successful, it was, after all, always entirely possible that this would happen at some stage. Perhaps the same people would protest if they found traffic noise a nuisance after puchasing a property next to a main road, and then finding that there are more cars and trucks on the road.
It seems that many people who oppose the Airport expansion must be newcomers to the town who cannot remember the busy days of the 60's when there were many commercial flights from our airport. The planes then were noisier and had a slower rate of climb, making more noise over a longer flightpath. Modern, faster, quieter and more fuel efficient planes will undoubtedly have less impact than then, even if flights increase beyond the 60's level, ( possibly unlikely ). Residents who live in very close proximity to the airport should not be too shocked if the aiport expansion is successful, it was, after all, always entirely possible that this would happen at some stage. Perhaps the same people would protest if they found traffic noise a nuisance after puchasing a property next to a main road, and then finding that there are more cars and trucks on the road. openspace
  • Score: 0

8:53am Sun 21 Mar 10

vanilla ice says...

emcee wrote:
Excellent. Now, perhaps, I will be able to fly into Europe without having to go all the way to London or Stansted. Oh, and there will be more activity from the airport on my scanner :o) Can't be bad.
The protestors are often labelled as anoraks; well what do you make of one of your own, this wanabe biggles hasn’t a care about pollution raining down on his head as long as he can see the Aircraft that’s poisoning him while he noses in to their conversations. Still on the + side, if you ever see him start running I suggest you try to keep up.
[quote][p][bold]emcee[/bold] wrote: Excellent. Now, perhaps, I will be able to fly into Europe without having to go all the way to London or Stansted. Oh, and there will be more activity from the airport on my scanner :o) Can't be bad.[/p][/quote]The protestors are often labelled as anoraks; well what do you make of one of your own, this wanabe biggles hasn’t a care about pollution raining down on his head as long as he can see the Aircraft that’s poisoning him while he noses in to their conversations. Still on the + side, if you ever see him start running I suggest you try to keep up. vanilla ice
  • Score: 0

11:02am Sun 21 Mar 10

openspace says...

Having just done a little research on CO2 emissions, it seems that air travel contributes about 2% of UK CO2. Cars, 58%, trucks and vans, nearly 30%. Whilst there may or may not be valid arguments about Southend Airport expansion in other respects, it seems that comments on increased CO2 emission would be better adddressed to road users.
PS. I wonder if the anti-expansion lobby drive on our roads.
Having just done a little research on CO2 emissions, it seems that air travel contributes about 2% of UK CO2. Cars, 58%, trucks and vans, nearly 30%. Whilst there may or may not be valid arguments about Southend Airport expansion in other respects, it seems that comments on increased CO2 emission would be better adddressed to road users. PS. I wonder if the anti-expansion lobby drive on our roads. openspace
  • Score: 0

11:30am Sun 21 Mar 10

vanilla ice says...

I thought that what the road protestors were trying to get across for weeks, but you may have hit on a novel idea to bring down the pollution, shut the roads to the Airport, problem solved.
I thought that what the road protestors were trying to get across for weeks, but you may have hit on a novel idea to bring down the pollution, shut the roads to the Airport, problem solved. vanilla ice
  • Score: 0

12:15pm Sun 21 Mar 10

openspace says...

vanilla ice wrote:
I thought that what the road protestors were trying to get across for weeks, but you may have hit on a novel idea to bring down the pollution, shut the roads to the Airport, problem solved.
Not sure that your suggestion would meet with wide approval, but interesting anyway. I think. however, that the point that I was making was that road change protesters aim their comments and blame at councils. They should really be directing their comments and actions at the general public who create the need for change. Two, three and even four car families are not uncommon, whilst bus services are ignored. We are nearly all guilty of this.
[quote][p][bold]vanilla ice[/bold] wrote: I thought that what the road protestors were trying to get across for weeks, but you may have hit on a novel idea to bring down the pollution, shut the roads to the Airport, problem solved.[/p][/quote]Not sure that your suggestion would meet with wide approval, but interesting anyway. I think. however, that the point that I was making was that road change protesters aim their comments and blame at councils. They should really be directing their comments and actions at the general public who create the need for change. Two, three and even four car families are not uncommon, whilst bus services are ignored. We are nearly all guilty of this. openspace
  • Score: 0

8:08pm Sun 21 Mar 10

r6keith says...

You can chit and you can chat but its coming!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!! about bloody time too.
You can chit and you can chat but its coming!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!! about bloody time too. r6keith
  • Score: 0

8:13am Mon 22 Mar 10

Real World says...

Thanks to all the Eddie Stobart supporters here. All those claimed thousands that are going to be storming through this airport to the shores of Southend can clearly look forward to a really different class of welcome, if any of the comments here indicate the true pro characters. What utter disgraceful comments from the people who are happy to be linked to this airport.
Thanks to all the Eddie Stobart supporters here. All those claimed thousands that are going to be storming through this airport to the shores of Southend can clearly look forward to a really different class of welcome, if any of the comments here indicate the true pro characters. What utter disgraceful comments from the people who are happy to be linked to this airport. Real World
  • Score: 0

10:17am Mon 22 Mar 10

BASILBRUSH says...

Real World wrote:
Thanks to all the Eddie Stobart supporters here. All those claimed thousands that are going to be storming through this airport to the shores of Southend can clearly look forward to a really different class of welcome, if any of the comments here indicate the true pro characters. What utter disgraceful comments from the people who are happy to be linked to this airport.
Real world.
You criticise the pro comments, clearly you haven't read the anti comments which resort more to personal attacks and slanderous comments of corruption and incorrect reporting of job losses. Plus the usual scaremongering about house price falls, with no factual justification and the usual scaremongering of increased freight operations which will be restricted by law..
I suggest your attempt to slur people that are pro positive investment and progression in this town is flawed.
[quote][p][bold]Real World[/bold] wrote: Thanks to all the Eddie Stobart supporters here. All those claimed thousands that are going to be storming through this airport to the shores of Southend can clearly look forward to a really different class of welcome, if any of the comments here indicate the true pro characters. What utter disgraceful comments from the people who are happy to be linked to this airport.[/p][/quote]Real world. You criticise the pro comments, clearly you haven't read the anti comments which resort more to personal attacks and slanderous comments of corruption and incorrect reporting of job losses. Plus the usual scaremongering about house price falls, with no factual justification and the usual scaremongering of increased freight operations which will be restricted by law.. I suggest your attempt to slur people that are pro positive investment and progression in this town is flawed. BASILBRUSH
  • Score: 0

3:19pm Mon 22 Mar 10

openspace says...

Real World wrote:
Thanks to all the Eddie Stobart supporters here. All those claimed thousands that are going to be storming through this airport to the shores of Southend can clearly look forward to a really different class of welcome, if any of the comments here indicate the true pro characters. What utter disgraceful comments from the people who are happy to be linked to this airport.
Just a little annoyed with posts like this, and others which quote opinions as facts, ( perhaps like many politicians who they would probably criticise for doing the same thing ).
Let's examine a few probabilities, I won't claim them as facts.
(1) Are supporters of airport expansion Eddie Stobart fans, probably not.
(2) Would they then support any organisation developing the airport, probably yes,
(3) Would many people welcome the airport changes as a return to the successful days of the airport in the 50's,60's, probably yes.
(4) Is the extra land being used for expansion any more intrusive than the Tesco or RBS sites, ( about which little was said ), probably no.
(5) Do cheap flights make more people use air travel, probably yes.
(6) Does more disposable income encourage more flights, probably yes.
(7) Does the growth of multi-national companies lead to more business flights, probably yes.
(8) Is the avilability of local flights likely to add more flights to the UK totals, probably not, they may like me:-
(9) Use local flights if they are there, definitely yes.
(10) Take more flights, probably not.
(11) Save up to 150 miles on a round trip by car by using local flights, definitely yes.
(12) Save fuel and cut emissions, from cars, probably yes, (certainly from mine).
(13) Will this cut down on road congestion, probably yes overall, if not necessarily locally.
(14) Do many of us see benefits in a rejuvenated airport, probably yes.
(15) Do many airport protesters fly abroad for their holidays from other airports, I'll leave you to ponder that one.
(16) Would this make them hypocrites if they did, ???????
[quote][p][bold]Real World[/bold] wrote: Thanks to all the Eddie Stobart supporters here. All those claimed thousands that are going to be storming through this airport to the shores of Southend can clearly look forward to a really different class of welcome, if any of the comments here indicate the true pro characters. What utter disgraceful comments from the people who are happy to be linked to this airport.[/p][/quote]Just a little annoyed with posts like this, and others which quote opinions as facts, ( perhaps like many politicians who they would probably criticise for doing the same thing ). Let's examine a few probabilities, I won't claim them as facts. (1) Are supporters of airport expansion Eddie Stobart fans, probably not. (2) Would they then support any organisation developing the airport, probably yes, (3) Would many people welcome the airport changes as a return to the successful days of the airport in the 50's,60's, probably yes. (4) Is the extra land being used for expansion any more intrusive than the Tesco or RBS sites, ( about which little was said ), probably no. (5) Do cheap flights make more people use air travel, probably yes. (6) Does more disposable income encourage more flights, probably yes. (7) Does the growth of multi-national companies lead to more business flights, probably yes. (8) Is the avilability of local flights likely to add more flights to the UK totals, probably not, they may like me:- (9) Use local flights if they are there, definitely yes. (10) Take more flights, probably not. (11) Save up to 150 miles on a round trip by car by using local flights, definitely yes. (12) Save fuel and cut emissions, from cars, probably yes, (certainly from mine). (13) Will this cut down on road congestion, probably yes overall, if not necessarily locally. (14) Do many of us see benefits in a rejuvenated airport, probably yes. (15) Do many airport protesters fly abroad for their holidays from other airports, I'll leave you to ponder that one. (16) Would this make them hypocrites if they did, ??????? openspace
  • Score: 0

3:52pm Mon 22 Mar 10

openspace says...

BASILBRUSH wrote:
Real World wrote: Thanks to all the Eddie Stobart supporters here. All those claimed thousands that are going to be storming through this airport to the shores of Southend can clearly look forward to a really different class of welcome, if any of the comments here indicate the true pro characters. What utter disgraceful comments from the people who are happy to be linked to this airport.
Real world. You criticise the pro comments, clearly you haven't read the anti comments which resort more to personal attacks and slanderous comments of corruption and incorrect reporting of job losses. Plus the usual scaremongering about house price falls, with no factual justification and the usual scaremongering of increased freight operations which will be restricted by law.. I suggest your attempt to slur people that are pro positive investment and progression in this town is flawed.
Fully in agreement with BASILBRUSH.
BUT don't count on the truth or facts getting in the way of a good old protest by those such as REALWORLD.
Comments such as these are sometimes so ludicrous that they might have been written by professional scriptwriters, ( comedy writers, that is )
[quote][p][bold]BASILBRUSH[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Real World[/bold] wrote: Thanks to all the Eddie Stobart supporters here. All those claimed thousands that are going to be storming through this airport to the shores of Southend can clearly look forward to a really different class of welcome, if any of the comments here indicate the true pro characters. What utter disgraceful comments from the people who are happy to be linked to this airport.[/p][/quote]Real world. You criticise the pro comments, clearly you haven't read the anti comments which resort more to personal attacks and slanderous comments of corruption and incorrect reporting of job losses. Plus the usual scaremongering about house price falls, with no factual justification and the usual scaremongering of increased freight operations which will be restricted by law.. I suggest your attempt to slur people that are pro positive investment and progression in this town is flawed.[/p][/quote]Fully in agreement with BASILBRUSH. BUT don't count on the truth or facts getting in the way of a good old protest by those such as REALWORLD. Comments such as these are sometimes so ludicrous that they might have been written by professional scriptwriters, ( comedy writers, that is ) openspace
  • Score: 0

5:02pm Mon 22 Mar 10

Real World says...

Fact or Pin MMMMM!!!!
It seems that I have hit a raw nerve. Amazing I must say.
I have read all comments on this and previous reports in this paper. There are many, many flaws on the Pro side as I'm sure are on the anti side.
History repeats itself in a scary way in these circumstances.
I've already placed a bet ( a sort term bet) over the next 5 years that What Southend airport promises does not happen.
I'm looking forward to my pay day.

WAKE UP SOUTHEND!!!!!!!
Fact or Pin MMMMM!!!! It seems that I have hit a raw nerve. Amazing I must say. I have read all comments on this and previous reports in this paper. There are many, many flaws on the Pro side as I'm sure are on the anti side. History repeats itself in a scary way in these circumstances. I've already placed a bet ( a sort term bet) over the next 5 years that What Southend airport promises does not happen. I'm looking forward to my pay day. WAKE UP SOUTHEND!!!!!!! Real World
  • Score: 0

6:16pm Mon 22 Mar 10

openspace says...

Real World wrote:
Fact or Pin MMMMM!!!! It seems that I have hit a raw nerve. Amazing I must say. I have read all comments on this and previous reports in this paper. There are many, many flaws on the Pro side as I'm sure are on the anti side. History repeats itself in a scary way in these circumstances. I've already placed a bet ( a sort term bet) over the next 5 years that What Southend airport promises does not happen. I'm looking forward to my pay day. WAKE UP SOUTHEND!!!!!!!
Why is responding to posts, a quite normal process, then labelled " hitting a raw nerve". Perhaps more accurate to say that some of us " do not suffer fools gladly". Easy to say there are flaws in both pro and anti argument with no supporting facts or comments.
One or two facts for you.
(1) Southend Airport has been declining for some years but was once successful.
(2) An effort is being made to redress this decline.
(3) No-one can know if this will be successful.
(4) If it fails, as is always possible, at least someone will have tried.
(5) The development has given you the opportunity to say that you were right if it fails, something, which I am sure , will bring you great pleasure
[quote][p][bold]Real World[/bold] wrote: Fact or Pin MMMMM!!!! It seems that I have hit a raw nerve. Amazing I must say. I have read all comments on this and previous reports in this paper. There are many, many flaws on the Pro side as I'm sure are on the anti side. History repeats itself in a scary way in these circumstances. I've already placed a bet ( a sort term bet) over the next 5 years that What Southend airport promises does not happen. I'm looking forward to my pay day. WAKE UP SOUTHEND!!!!!!![/p][/quote]Why is responding to posts, a quite normal process, then labelled " hitting a raw nerve". Perhaps more accurate to say that some of us " do not suffer fools gladly". Easy to say there are flaws in both pro and anti argument with no supporting facts or comments. One or two facts for you. (1) Southend Airport has been declining for some years but was once successful. (2) An effort is being made to redress this decline. (3) No-one can know if this will be successful. (4) If it fails, as is always possible, at least someone will have tried. (5) The development has given you the opportunity to say that you were right if it fails, something, which I am sure , will bring you great pleasure openspace
  • Score: 0

9:30pm Mon 22 Mar 10

Real World says...

openspace wrote:
Real World wrote:
Fact or Pin MMMMM!!!! It seems that I have hit a raw nerve. Amazing I must say. I have read all comments on this and previous reports in this paper. There are many, many flaws on the Pro side as I'm sure are on the anti side. History repeats itself in a scary way in these circumstances. I've already placed a bet ( a sort term bet) over the next 5 years that What Southend airport promises does not happen. I'm looking forward to my pay day. WAKE UP SOUTHEND!!!!!!!
Why is responding to posts, a quite normal process, then labelled " hitting a raw nerve". Perhaps more accurate to say that some of us " do not suffer fools gladly". Easy to say there are flaws in both pro and anti argument with no supporting facts or comments.
One or two facts for you.
(1) Southend Airport has been declining for some years but was once successful.
(2) An effort is being made to redress this decline.
(3) No-one can know if this will be successful.
(4) If it fails, as is always possible, at least someone will have tried.
(5) The development has given you the opportunity to say that you were right if it fails, something, which I am sure , will bring you great pleasure
It won't give me pleasure at all actually. It's just in trying to grow the airport again will have such a negative affect on the area, I'm worried that Southend will plummet to lower depths than it has before. I just can't see the benefit in this expansion. For Southenders or the wider communities. False hopes cruel hoax comes to mind with any promises airports claim to bring.
[quote][p][bold]openspace[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Real World[/bold] wrote: Fact or Pin MMMMM!!!! It seems that I have hit a raw nerve. Amazing I must say. I have read all comments on this and previous reports in this paper. There are many, many flaws on the Pro side as I'm sure are on the anti side. History repeats itself in a scary way in these circumstances. I've already placed a bet ( a sort term bet) over the next 5 years that What Southend airport promises does not happen. I'm looking forward to my pay day. WAKE UP SOUTHEND!!!!!!![/p][/quote]Why is responding to posts, a quite normal process, then labelled " hitting a raw nerve". Perhaps more accurate to say that some of us " do not suffer fools gladly". Easy to say there are flaws in both pro and anti argument with no supporting facts or comments. One or two facts for you. (1) Southend Airport has been declining for some years but was once successful. (2) An effort is being made to redress this decline. (3) No-one can know if this will be successful. (4) If it fails, as is always possible, at least someone will have tried. (5) The development has given you the opportunity to say that you were right if it fails, something, which I am sure , will bring you great pleasure[/p][/quote]It won't give me pleasure at all actually. It's just in trying to grow the airport again will have such a negative affect on the area, I'm worried that Southend will plummet to lower depths than it has before. I just can't see the benefit in this expansion. For Southenders or the wider communities. False hopes cruel hoax comes to mind with any promises airports claim to bring. Real World
  • Score: 0

11:46pm Mon 22 Mar 10

openspace says...

Real World wrote:
openspace wrote:
Real World wrote: Fact or Pin MMMMM!!!! It seems that I have hit a raw nerve. Amazing I must say. I have read all comments on this and previous reports in this paper. There are many, many flaws on the Pro side as I'm sure are on the anti side. History repeats itself in a scary way in these circumstances. I've already placed a bet ( a sort term bet) over the next 5 years that What Southend airport promises does not happen. I'm looking forward to my pay day. WAKE UP SOUTHEND!!!!!!!
Why is responding to posts, a quite normal process, then labelled " hitting a raw nerve". Perhaps more accurate to say that some of us " do not suffer fools gladly". Easy to say there are flaws in both pro and anti argument with no supporting facts or comments. One or two facts for you. (1) Southend Airport has been declining for some years but was once successful. (2) An effort is being made to redress this decline. (3) No-one can know if this will be successful. (4) If it fails, as is always possible, at least someone will have tried. (5) The development has given you the opportunity to say that you were right if it fails, something, which I am sure , will bring you great pleasure
It won't give me pleasure at all actually. It's just in trying to grow the airport again will have such a negative affect on the area, I'm worried that Southend will plummet to lower depths than it has before. I just can't see the benefit in this expansion. For Southenders or the wider communities. False hopes cruel hoax comes to mind with any promises airports claim to bring.
" Will have a negative effect on the area", Fact or opinion ?
Since we don't know what the effect will actually be in the long run, must be an opinion.
Fair enough, we are all entitled to our opinions, ( just don't present them as facts ).
" I can't see the benefit in this expansion". never mind, some of us can.
Message seems to be " don't try anything in case it fails ". If this were the case, where would we be without people who were prepared to take the occasional risk and face failure.
It would be a sad world if we opted for the safe and predictable on every occasion. I think you also underestimate the general public, ( myself included), who do not expect every claim to be proved correct and do not believe all promises that are made. We look at them carefully and decide on our view on a balance of probabilities and carefully thought out opinion, whilst being prepared to accept failure and disappointment. In this case, a company that is prepared to invest huge amounts of money is hoping for success. We hope but do not necessarily expect to share this with them.

PS if this is a hoax, it will be a very expensive one for Stobarts.
[quote][p][bold]Real World[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]openspace[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Real World[/bold] wrote: Fact or Pin MMMMM!!!! It seems that I have hit a raw nerve. Amazing I must say. I have read all comments on this and previous reports in this paper. There are many, many flaws on the Pro side as I'm sure are on the anti side. History repeats itself in a scary way in these circumstances. I've already placed a bet ( a sort term bet) over the next 5 years that What Southend airport promises does not happen. I'm looking forward to my pay day. WAKE UP SOUTHEND!!!!!!![/p][/quote]Why is responding to posts, a quite normal process, then labelled " hitting a raw nerve". Perhaps more accurate to say that some of us " do not suffer fools gladly". Easy to say there are flaws in both pro and anti argument with no supporting facts or comments. One or two facts for you. (1) Southend Airport has been declining for some years but was once successful. (2) An effort is being made to redress this decline. (3) No-one can know if this will be successful. (4) If it fails, as is always possible, at least someone will have tried. (5) The development has given you the opportunity to say that you were right if it fails, something, which I am sure , will bring you great pleasure[/p][/quote]It won't give me pleasure at all actually. It's just in trying to grow the airport again will have such a negative affect on the area, I'm worried that Southend will plummet to lower depths than it has before. I just can't see the benefit in this expansion. For Southenders or the wider communities. False hopes cruel hoax comes to mind with any promises airports claim to bring.[/p][/quote]" Will have a negative effect on the area", Fact or opinion ? Since we don't know what the effect will actually be in the long run, must be an opinion. Fair enough, we are all entitled to our opinions, ( just don't present them as facts ). " I can't see the benefit in this expansion". never mind, some of us can. Message seems to be " don't try anything in case it fails ". If this were the case, where would we be without people who were prepared to take the occasional risk and face failure. It would be a sad world if we opted for the safe and predictable on every occasion. I think you also underestimate the general public, ( myself included), who do not expect every claim to be proved correct and do not believe all promises that are made. We look at them carefully and decide on our view on a balance of probabilities and carefully thought out opinion, whilst being prepared to accept failure and disappointment. In this case, a company that is prepared to invest huge amounts of money is hoping for success. We hope but do not necessarily expect to share this with them. PS if this is a hoax, it will be a very expensive one for Stobarts. openspace
  • Score: 0

8:13am Tue 23 Mar 10

Real World says...

openspace wrote:
Real World wrote:
openspace wrote:
Real World wrote: Fact or Pin MMMMM!!!! It seems that I have hit a raw nerve. Amazing I must say. I have read all comments on this and previous reports in this paper. There are many, many flaws on the Pro side as I'm sure are on the anti side. History repeats itself in a scary way in these circumstances. I've already placed a bet ( a sort term bet) over the next 5 years that What Southend airport promises does not happen. I'm looking forward to my pay day. WAKE UP SOUTHEND!!!!!!!
Why is responding to posts, a quite normal process, then labelled " hitting a raw nerve". Perhaps more accurate to say that some of us " do not suffer fools gladly". Easy to say there are flaws in both pro and anti argument with no supporting facts or comments. One or two facts for you. (1) Southend Airport has been declining for some years but was once successful. (2) An effort is being made to redress this decline. (3) No-one can know if this will be successful. (4) If it fails, as is always possible, at least someone will have tried. (5) The development has given you the opportunity to say that you were right if it fails, something, which I am sure , will bring you great pleasure
It won't give me pleasure at all actually. It's just in trying to grow the airport again will have such a negative affect on the area, I'm worried that Southend will plummet to lower depths than it has before. I just can't see the benefit in this expansion. For Southenders or the wider communities. False hopes cruel hoax comes to mind with any promises airports claim to bring.
" Will have a negative effect on the area", Fact or opinion ?
Since we don't know what the effect will actually be in the long run, must be an opinion.
Fair enough, we are all entitled to our opinions, ( just don't present them as facts ).
" I can't see the benefit in this expansion". never mind, some of us can.
Message seems to be " don't try anything in case it fails ". If this were the case, where would we be without people who were prepared to take the occasional risk and face failure.
It would be a sad world if we opted for the safe and predictable on every occasion. I think you also underestimate the general public, ( myself included), who do not expect every claim to be proved correct and do not believe all promises that are made. We look at them carefully and decide on our view on a balance of probabilities and carefully thought out opinion, whilst being prepared to accept failure and disappointment. In this case, a company that is prepared to invest huge amounts of money is hoping for success. We hope but do not necessarily expect to share this with them.

PS if this is a hoax, it will be a very expensive one for Stobarts.
Don't worry Stobarts will make money. Tax breaks and all the other benifits that the aviation industry get from government has made it easy for regional airports to make profit easy. It the BIG sell that Stobarts have brought to South end. I would love to be wrong. It's just that nearly every other regional airport wants to expand. It's madness. But some people will dream the dream on both sides. Lets hope we're all wrong!!
[quote][p][bold]openspace[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Real World[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]openspace[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Real World[/bold] wrote: Fact or Pin MMMMM!!!! It seems that I have hit a raw nerve. Amazing I must say. I have read all comments on this and previous reports in this paper. There are many, many flaws on the Pro side as I'm sure are on the anti side. History repeats itself in a scary way in these circumstances. I've already placed a bet ( a sort term bet) over the next 5 years that What Southend airport promises does not happen. I'm looking forward to my pay day. WAKE UP SOUTHEND!!!!!!![/p][/quote]Why is responding to posts, a quite normal process, then labelled " hitting a raw nerve". Perhaps more accurate to say that some of us " do not suffer fools gladly". Easy to say there are flaws in both pro and anti argument with no supporting facts or comments. One or two facts for you. (1) Southend Airport has been declining for some years but was once successful. (2) An effort is being made to redress this decline. (3) No-one can know if this will be successful. (4) If it fails, as is always possible, at least someone will have tried. (5) The development has given you the opportunity to say that you were right if it fails, something, which I am sure , will bring you great pleasure[/p][/quote]It won't give me pleasure at all actually. It's just in trying to grow the airport again will have such a negative affect on the area, I'm worried that Southend will plummet to lower depths than it has before. I just can't see the benefit in this expansion. For Southenders or the wider communities. False hopes cruel hoax comes to mind with any promises airports claim to bring.[/p][/quote]" Will have a negative effect on the area", Fact or opinion ? Since we don't know what the effect will actually be in the long run, must be an opinion. Fair enough, we are all entitled to our opinions, ( just don't present them as facts ). " I can't see the benefit in this expansion". never mind, some of us can. Message seems to be " don't try anything in case it fails ". If this were the case, where would we be without people who were prepared to take the occasional risk and face failure. It would be a sad world if we opted for the safe and predictable on every occasion. I think you also underestimate the general public, ( myself included), who do not expect every claim to be proved correct and do not believe all promises that are made. We look at them carefully and decide on our view on a balance of probabilities and carefully thought out opinion, whilst being prepared to accept failure and disappointment. In this case, a company that is prepared to invest huge amounts of money is hoping for success. We hope but do not necessarily expect to share this with them. PS if this is a hoax, it will be a very expensive one for Stobarts.[/p][/quote]Don't worry Stobarts will make money. Tax breaks and all the other benifits that the aviation industry get from government has made it easy for regional airports to make profit easy. It the BIG sell that Stobarts have brought to South end. I would love to be wrong. It's just that nearly every other regional airport wants to expand. It's madness. But some people will dream the dream on both sides. Lets hope we're all wrong!! Real World
  • Score: 0

9:01am Tue 23 Mar 10

openspace says...

Real World wrote:
openspace wrote:
Real World wrote:
openspace wrote:
Real World wrote: Fact or Pin MMMMM!!!! It seems that I have hit a raw nerve. Amazing I must say. I have read all comments on this and previous reports in this paper. There are many, many flaws on the Pro side as I'm sure are on the anti side. History repeats itself in a scary way in these circumstances. I've already placed a bet ( a sort term bet) over the next 5 years that What Southend airport promises does not happen. I'm looking forward to my pay day. WAKE UP SOUTHEND!!!!!!!
Why is responding to posts, a quite normal process, then labelled " hitting a raw nerve". Perhaps more accurate to say that some of us " do not suffer fools gladly". Easy to say there are flaws in both pro and anti argument with no supporting facts or comments. One or two facts for you. (1) Southend Airport has been declining for some years but was once successful. (2) An effort is being made to redress this decline. (3) No-one can know if this will be successful. (4) If it fails, as is always possible, at least someone will have tried. (5) The development has given you the opportunity to say that you were right if it fails, something, which I am sure , will bring you great pleasure
It won't give me pleasure at all actually. It's just in trying to grow the airport again will have such a negative affect on the area, I'm worried that Southend will plummet to lower depths than it has before. I just can't see the benefit in this expansion. For Southenders or the wider communities. False hopes cruel hoax comes to mind with any promises airports claim to bring.
" Will have a negative effect on the area", Fact or opinion ? Since we don't know what the effect will actually be in the long run, must be an opinion. Fair enough, we are all entitled to our opinions, ( just don't present them as facts ). " I can't see the benefit in this expansion". never mind, some of us can. Message seems to be " don't try anything in case it fails ". If this were the case, where would we be without people who were prepared to take the occasional risk and face failure. It would be a sad world if we opted for the safe and predictable on every occasion. I think you also underestimate the general public, ( myself included), who do not expect every claim to be proved correct and do not believe all promises that are made. We look at them carefully and decide on our view on a balance of probabilities and carefully thought out opinion, whilst being prepared to accept failure and disappointment. In this case, a company that is prepared to invest huge amounts of money is hoping for success. We hope but do not necessarily expect to share this with them. PS if this is a hoax, it will be a very expensive one for Stobarts.
Don't worry Stobarts will make money. Tax breaks and all the other benifits that the aviation industry get from government has made it easy for regional airports to make profit easy. It the BIG sell that Stobarts have brought to South end. I would love to be wrong. It's just that nearly every other regional airport wants to expand. It's madness. But some people will dream the dream on both sides. Lets hope we're all wrong!!
You're certainly right about all regional airports wanting to expand and probably there is a limit to the amount that will be successful. I believe that Southend has just a chance, with good rail links to the capital, even if overcrowded during rush hours. It already takes flights from main London airports on occasion when they have problems, rare, it is true, but some operators might find cost advantages in more formal and permanent arrangements.
Also, if you look at the experience of many small regional airports on the continent, cheaper airfares and lower charges than the large airports have enabled many of them to expand and thrive, at the expense of the larger city based airports. Could it happen here, who knows. It is also undoubtedly true that flights from regional airports reduce road travel, a small benefit .
[quote][p][bold]Real World[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]openspace[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Real World[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]openspace[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Real World[/bold] wrote: Fact or Pin MMMMM!!!! It seems that I have hit a raw nerve. Amazing I must say. I have read all comments on this and previous reports in this paper. There are many, many flaws on the Pro side as I'm sure are on the anti side. History repeats itself in a scary way in these circumstances. I've already placed a bet ( a sort term bet) over the next 5 years that What Southend airport promises does not happen. I'm looking forward to my pay day. WAKE UP SOUTHEND!!!!!!![/p][/quote]Why is responding to posts, a quite normal process, then labelled " hitting a raw nerve". Perhaps more accurate to say that some of us " do not suffer fools gladly". Easy to say there are flaws in both pro and anti argument with no supporting facts or comments. One or two facts for you. (1) Southend Airport has been declining for some years but was once successful. (2) An effort is being made to redress this decline. (3) No-one can know if this will be successful. (4) If it fails, as is always possible, at least someone will have tried. (5) The development has given you the opportunity to say that you were right if it fails, something, which I am sure , will bring you great pleasure[/p][/quote]It won't give me pleasure at all actually. It's just in trying to grow the airport again will have such a negative affect on the area, I'm worried that Southend will plummet to lower depths than it has before. I just can't see the benefit in this expansion. For Southenders or the wider communities. False hopes cruel hoax comes to mind with any promises airports claim to bring.[/p][/quote]" Will have a negative effect on the area", Fact or opinion ? Since we don't know what the effect will actually be in the long run, must be an opinion. Fair enough, we are all entitled to our opinions, ( just don't present them as facts ). " I can't see the benefit in this expansion". never mind, some of us can. Message seems to be " don't try anything in case it fails ". If this were the case, where would we be without people who were prepared to take the occasional risk and face failure. It would be a sad world if we opted for the safe and predictable on every occasion. I think you also underestimate the general public, ( myself included), who do not expect every claim to be proved correct and do not believe all promises that are made. We look at them carefully and decide on our view on a balance of probabilities and carefully thought out opinion, whilst being prepared to accept failure and disappointment. In this case, a company that is prepared to invest huge amounts of money is hoping for success. We hope but do not necessarily expect to share this with them. PS if this is a hoax, it will be a very expensive one for Stobarts.[/p][/quote]Don't worry Stobarts will make money. Tax breaks and all the other benifits that the aviation industry get from government has made it easy for regional airports to make profit easy. It the BIG sell that Stobarts have brought to South end. I would love to be wrong. It's just that nearly every other regional airport wants to expand. It's madness. But some people will dream the dream on both sides. Lets hope we're all wrong!![/p][/quote]You're certainly right about all regional airports wanting to expand and probably there is a limit to the amount that will be successful. I believe that Southend has just a chance, with good rail links to the capital, even if overcrowded during rush hours. It already takes flights from main London airports on occasion when they have problems, rare, it is true, but some operators might find cost advantages in more formal and permanent arrangements. Also, if you look at the experience of many small regional airports on the continent, cheaper airfares and lower charges than the large airports have enabled many of them to expand and thrive, at the expense of the larger city based airports. Could it happen here, who knows. It is also undoubtedly true that flights from regional airports reduce road travel, a small benefit . openspace
  • Score: 0

9:58am Tue 23 Mar 10

locallad1 says...

Another disastrous decision by the local council / government.

This will just add more traffic to the roads, whose infrastructure has never kept pace with increasing numbers of cars.

It will increase the number of people that want to live here and thus create more development, which undoubtedly councillors will turn a blind eye to through financial incentivisation of some degree. Development is the last thing this area needs.

It will increase the number of migrants in the town because they will be the only ones prepared to work for the crap wages on offer.

It will increase pollution both from the airport and the additional cars and lorries on the road.

It will increase noise pollution and ruin thousands of peoples lives in areas like Leigh and Westcliff.

All round we've made an area already on the road to ruin more certain of its fate.
Another disastrous decision by the local council / government. This will just add more traffic to the roads, whose infrastructure has never kept pace with increasing numbers of cars. It will increase the number of people that want to live here and thus create more development, which undoubtedly councillors will turn a blind eye to through financial incentivisation of some degree. Development is the last thing this area needs. It will increase the number of migrants in the town because they will be the only ones prepared to work for the crap wages on offer. It will increase pollution both from the airport and the additional cars and lorries on the road. It will increase noise pollution and ruin thousands of peoples lives in areas like Leigh and Westcliff. All round we've made an area already on the road to ruin more certain of its fate. locallad1
  • Score: 0

10:52am Tue 23 Mar 10

openspace says...

locallad1 wrote:
Another disastrous decision by the local council / government. This will just add more traffic to the roads, whose infrastructure has never kept pace with increasing numbers of cars. It will increase the number of people that want to live here and thus create more development, which undoubtedly councillors will turn a blind eye to through financial incentivisation of some degree. Development is the last thing this area needs. It will increase the number of migrants in the town because they will be the only ones prepared to work for the crap wages on offer. It will increase pollution both from the airport and the additional cars and lorries on the road. It will increase noise pollution and ruin thousands of peoples lives in areas like Leigh and Westcliff. All round we've made an area already on the road to ruin more certain of its fate.
More wild theories, unsubstantiated comments and personal opinions presented as facts !!.
(1) "Road infrastructure. Hasn't kept pace with vehicle growth". This is true everywhere, I think.
Remedy, knock down buildings and remove trees, (make roads bigger ). ( so that you can then complain about that I suppose ). Protest camps all round the town where road changes would be made !. Now that's an attractive prospect !!.
(2) "Increase in people living here". Really, can you support that with factual and realistic population projections.
(3) "Financial incentivisation "? . You have facts/figures, etc to back this ?.
(4) "Increase in migrants", number is already increasing due to EC membership. Proof please that airport development will increase this further.
(5) "Ruin thousands of peoples lives". Worrying statement if true but a sweeping statement with no backing other than opinion.
(6) "Development is the last thing this area needs", really??. How else do you cope with increasing population in this country, ( due to many reasons ). Put them all in other towns I suppose !!
Would be interested to know your specific proposals to cure all these problems!!!!. Easy to criticise, difficult to be constructive.
[quote][p][bold]locallad1[/bold] wrote: Another disastrous decision by the local council / government. This will just add more traffic to the roads, whose infrastructure has never kept pace with increasing numbers of cars. It will increase the number of people that want to live here and thus create more development, which undoubtedly councillors will turn a blind eye to through financial incentivisation of some degree. Development is the last thing this area needs. It will increase the number of migrants in the town because they will be the only ones prepared to work for the crap wages on offer. It will increase pollution both from the airport and the additional cars and lorries on the road. It will increase noise pollution and ruin thousands of peoples lives in areas like Leigh and Westcliff. All round we've made an area already on the road to ruin more certain of its fate.[/p][/quote]More wild theories, unsubstantiated comments and personal opinions presented as facts !!. (1) "Road infrastructure. Hasn't kept pace with vehicle growth". This is true everywhere, I think. Remedy, knock down buildings and remove trees, (make roads bigger ). ( so that you can then complain about that I suppose ). Protest camps all round the town where road changes would be made !. Now that's an attractive prospect !!. (2) "Increase in people living here". Really, can you support that with factual and realistic population projections. (3) "Financial incentivisation "? . You have facts/figures, etc to back this ?. (4) "Increase in migrants", number is already increasing due to EC membership. Proof please that airport development will increase this further. (5) "Ruin thousands of peoples lives". Worrying statement if true but a sweeping statement with no backing other than opinion. (6) "Development is the last thing this area needs", really??. How else do you cope with increasing population in this country, ( due to many reasons ). Put them all in other towns I suppose !! Would be interested to know your specific proposals to cure all these problems!!!!. Easy to criticise, difficult to be constructive. openspace
  • Score: 0

2:58pm Tue 23 Mar 10

locallad1 says...

openspace wrote:
locallad1 wrote: Another disastrous decision by the local council / government. This will just add more traffic to the roads, whose infrastructure has never kept pace with increasing numbers of cars. It will increase the number of people that want to live here and thus create more development, which undoubtedly councillors will turn a blind eye to through financial incentivisation of some degree. Development is the last thing this area needs. It will increase the number of migrants in the town because they will be the only ones prepared to work for the crap wages on offer. It will increase pollution both from the airport and the additional cars and lorries on the road. It will increase noise pollution and ruin thousands of peoples lives in areas like Leigh and Westcliff. All round we've made an area already on the road to ruin more certain of its fate.
More wild theories, unsubstantiated comments and personal opinions presented as facts !!. (1) "Road infrastructure. Hasn't kept pace with vehicle growth". This is true everywhere, I think. Remedy, knock down buildings and remove trees, (make roads bigger ). ( so that you can then complain about that I suppose ). Protest camps all round the town where road changes would be made !. Now that's an attractive prospect !!. (2) "Increase in people living here". Really, can you support that with factual and realistic population projections. (3) "Financial incentivisation "? . You have facts/figures, etc to back this ?. (4) "Increase in migrants", number is already increasing due to EC membership. Proof please that airport development will increase this further. (5) "Ruin thousands of peoples lives". Worrying statement if true but a sweeping statement with no backing other than opinion. (6) "Development is the last thing this area needs", really??. How else do you cope with increasing population in this country, ( due to many reasons ). Put them all in other towns I suppose !! Would be interested to know your specific proposals to cure all these problems!!!!. Easy to criticise, difficult to be constructive.
Are you one of those councillors taking bungs at the expense of people like me? Just take a look at Southend seafront and that monstrosity they are building near Chalkwell. It's totally out of kilter with everything else on the front and can only have been authorised by a blindfolded approval panel with motives other than looking after where we live.
Get your head out of the sand, take a look around and start sticking up for where you live. There will be no greenary left with people like you.
[quote][p][bold]openspace[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]locallad1[/bold] wrote: Another disastrous decision by the local council / government. This will just add more traffic to the roads, whose infrastructure has never kept pace with increasing numbers of cars. It will increase the number of people that want to live here and thus create more development, which undoubtedly councillors will turn a blind eye to through financial incentivisation of some degree. Development is the last thing this area needs. It will increase the number of migrants in the town because they will be the only ones prepared to work for the crap wages on offer. It will increase pollution both from the airport and the additional cars and lorries on the road. It will increase noise pollution and ruin thousands of peoples lives in areas like Leigh and Westcliff. All round we've made an area already on the road to ruin more certain of its fate.[/p][/quote]More wild theories, unsubstantiated comments and personal opinions presented as facts !!. (1) "Road infrastructure. Hasn't kept pace with vehicle growth". This is true everywhere, I think. Remedy, knock down buildings and remove trees, (make roads bigger ). ( so that you can then complain about that I suppose ). Protest camps all round the town where road changes would be made !. Now that's an attractive prospect !!. (2) "Increase in people living here". Really, can you support that with factual and realistic population projections. (3) "Financial incentivisation "? . You have facts/figures, etc to back this ?. (4) "Increase in migrants", number is already increasing due to EC membership. Proof please that airport development will increase this further. (5) "Ruin thousands of peoples lives". Worrying statement if true but a sweeping statement with no backing other than opinion. (6) "Development is the last thing this area needs", really??. How else do you cope with increasing population in this country, ( due to many reasons ). Put them all in other towns I suppose !! Would be interested to know your specific proposals to cure all these problems!!!!. Easy to criticise, difficult to be constructive.[/p][/quote]Are you one of those councillors taking bungs at the expense of people like me? Just take a look at Southend seafront and that monstrosity they are building near Chalkwell. It's totally out of kilter with everything else on the front and can only have been authorised by a blindfolded approval panel with motives other than looking after where we live. Get your head out of the sand, take a look around and start sticking up for where you live. There will be no greenary left with people like you. locallad1
  • Score: 0

3:19pm Tue 23 Mar 10

openspace says...

locallad1 wrote:
openspace wrote:
locallad1 wrote: Another disastrous decision by the local council / government. This will just add more traffic to the roads, whose infrastructure has never kept pace with increasing numbers of cars. It will increase the number of people that want to live here and thus create more development, which undoubtedly councillors will turn a blind eye to through financial incentivisation of some degree. Development is the last thing this area needs. It will increase the number of migrants in the town because they will be the only ones prepared to work for the crap wages on offer. It will increase pollution both from the airport and the additional cars and lorries on the road. It will increase noise pollution and ruin thousands of peoples lives in areas like Leigh and Westcliff. All round we've made an area already on the road to ruin more certain of its fate.
More wild theories, unsubstantiated comments and personal opinions presented as facts !!. (1) "Road infrastructure. Hasn't kept pace with vehicle growth". This is true everywhere, I think. Remedy, knock down buildings and remove trees, (make roads bigger ). ( so that you can then complain about that I suppose ). Protest camps all round the town where road changes would be made !. Now that's an attractive prospect !!. (2) "Increase in people living here". Really, can you support that with factual and realistic population projections. (3) "Financial incentivisation "? . You have facts/figures, etc to back this ?. (4) "Increase in migrants", number is already increasing due to EC membership. Proof please that airport development will increase this further. (5) "Ruin thousands of peoples lives". Worrying statement if true but a sweeping statement with no backing other than opinion. (6) "Development is the last thing this area needs", really??. How else do you cope with increasing population in this country, ( due to many reasons ). Put them all in other towns I suppose !! Would be interested to know your specific proposals to cure all these problems!!!!. Easy to criticise, difficult to be constructive.
Are you one of those councillors taking bungs at the expense of people like me? Just take a look at Southend seafront and that monstrosity they are building near Chalkwell. It's totally out of kilter with everything else on the front and can only have been authorised by a blindfolded approval panel with motives other than looking after where we live. Get your head out of the sand, take a look around and start sticking up for where you live. There will be no greenary left with people like you.
No, not tied to councils or politics in any shape or form but thanks for the suggestion, I suppose an insulting reply should have been expected. I'm just a resident of Southend for 60 years+ who happens to disagree with you. ( Some people might, you know but obviously they are all idiots with their " heads in the sand" !!!! ).

PS I note that you failed to respond or reply to any of the points I made in the original post. I repeat, criticism is very, very easy, those who are quick to condemn seldom have any positive suggestions to make.

PS The original suggestion of knocking down buildings and removing trees was made with tongue in cheek, just clarifying that in case irony is a hard concept to master.

Interesting comment about "bungs" though, presumably you can justify or prove that !!. Will be interesting to see evidence of this.
[quote][p][bold]locallad1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]openspace[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]locallad1[/bold] wrote: Another disastrous decision by the local council / government. This will just add more traffic to the roads, whose infrastructure has never kept pace with increasing numbers of cars. It will increase the number of people that want to live here and thus create more development, which undoubtedly councillors will turn a blind eye to through financial incentivisation of some degree. Development is the last thing this area needs. It will increase the number of migrants in the town because they will be the only ones prepared to work for the crap wages on offer. It will increase pollution both from the airport and the additional cars and lorries on the road. It will increase noise pollution and ruin thousands of peoples lives in areas like Leigh and Westcliff. All round we've made an area already on the road to ruin more certain of its fate.[/p][/quote]More wild theories, unsubstantiated comments and personal opinions presented as facts !!. (1) "Road infrastructure. Hasn't kept pace with vehicle growth". This is true everywhere, I think. Remedy, knock down buildings and remove trees, (make roads bigger ). ( so that you can then complain about that I suppose ). Protest camps all round the town where road changes would be made !. Now that's an attractive prospect !!. (2) "Increase in people living here". Really, can you support that with factual and realistic population projections. (3) "Financial incentivisation "? . You have facts/figures, etc to back this ?. (4) "Increase in migrants", number is already increasing due to EC membership. Proof please that airport development will increase this further. (5) "Ruin thousands of peoples lives". Worrying statement if true but a sweeping statement with no backing other than opinion. (6) "Development is the last thing this area needs", really??. How else do you cope with increasing population in this country, ( due to many reasons ). Put them all in other towns I suppose !! Would be interested to know your specific proposals to cure all these problems!!!!. Easy to criticise, difficult to be constructive.[/p][/quote]Are you one of those councillors taking bungs at the expense of people like me? Just take a look at Southend seafront and that monstrosity they are building near Chalkwell. It's totally out of kilter with everything else on the front and can only have been authorised by a blindfolded approval panel with motives other than looking after where we live. Get your head out of the sand, take a look around and start sticking up for where you live. There will be no greenary left with people like you.[/p][/quote]No, not tied to councils or politics in any shape or form but thanks for the suggestion, I suppose an insulting reply should have been expected. I'm just a resident of Southend for 60 years+ who happens to disagree with you. ( Some people might, you know but obviously they are all idiots with their " heads in the sand" !!!! ). PS I note that you failed to respond or reply to any of the points I made in the original post. I repeat, criticism is very, very easy, those who are quick to condemn seldom have any positive suggestions to make. PS The original suggestion of knocking down buildings and removing trees was made with tongue in cheek, just clarifying that in case irony is a hard concept to master. Interesting comment about "bungs" though, presumably you can justify or prove that !!. Will be interesting to see evidence of this. openspace
  • Score: 0

3:19pm Tue 23 Mar 10

openspace says...

locallad1 wrote:
openspace wrote:
locallad1 wrote: Another disastrous decision by the local council / government. This will just add more traffic to the roads, whose infrastructure has never kept pace with increasing numbers of cars. It will increase the number of people that want to live here and thus create more development, which undoubtedly councillors will turn a blind eye to through financial incentivisation of some degree. Development is the last thing this area needs. It will increase the number of migrants in the town because they will be the only ones prepared to work for the crap wages on offer. It will increase pollution both from the airport and the additional cars and lorries on the road. It will increase noise pollution and ruin thousands of peoples lives in areas like Leigh and Westcliff. All round we've made an area already on the road to ruin more certain of its fate.
More wild theories, unsubstantiated comments and personal opinions presented as facts !!. (1) "Road infrastructure. Hasn't kept pace with vehicle growth". This is true everywhere, I think. Remedy, knock down buildings and remove trees, (make roads bigger ). ( so that you can then complain about that I suppose ). Protest camps all round the town where road changes would be made !. Now that's an attractive prospect !!. (2) "Increase in people living here". Really, can you support that with factual and realistic population projections. (3) "Financial incentivisation "? . You have facts/figures, etc to back this ?. (4) "Increase in migrants", number is already increasing due to EC membership. Proof please that airport development will increase this further. (5) "Ruin thousands of peoples lives". Worrying statement if true but a sweeping statement with no backing other than opinion. (6) "Development is the last thing this area needs", really??. How else do you cope with increasing population in this country, ( due to many reasons ). Put them all in other towns I suppose !! Would be interested to know your specific proposals to cure all these problems!!!!. Easy to criticise, difficult to be constructive.
Are you one of those councillors taking bungs at the expense of people like me? Just take a look at Southend seafront and that monstrosity they are building near Chalkwell. It's totally out of kilter with everything else on the front and can only have been authorised by a blindfolded approval panel with motives other than looking after where we live. Get your head out of the sand, take a look around and start sticking up for where you live. There will be no greenary left with people like you.
No, not tied to councils or politics in any shape or form but thanks for the suggestion, I suppose an insulting reply should have been expected. I'm just a resident of Southend for 60 years+ who happens to disagree with you. ( Some people might, you know but obviously they are all idiots with their " heads in the sand" !!!! ).

PS I note that you failed to respond or reply to any of the points I made in the original post. I repeat, criticism is very, very easy, those who are quick to condemn seldom have any positive suggestions to make.

PS The original suggestion of knocking down buildings and removing trees was made with tongue in cheek, just clarifying that in case irony is a hard concept to master.

Interesting comment about "bungs" though, presumably you can justify or prove that !!. Will be interesting to see evidence of this.
[quote][p][bold]locallad1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]openspace[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]locallad1[/bold] wrote: Another disastrous decision by the local council / government. This will just add more traffic to the roads, whose infrastructure has never kept pace with increasing numbers of cars. It will increase the number of people that want to live here and thus create more development, which undoubtedly councillors will turn a blind eye to through financial incentivisation of some degree. Development is the last thing this area needs. It will increase the number of migrants in the town because they will be the only ones prepared to work for the crap wages on offer. It will increase pollution both from the airport and the additional cars and lorries on the road. It will increase noise pollution and ruin thousands of peoples lives in areas like Leigh and Westcliff. All round we've made an area already on the road to ruin more certain of its fate.[/p][/quote]More wild theories, unsubstantiated comments and personal opinions presented as facts !!. (1) "Road infrastructure. Hasn't kept pace with vehicle growth". This is true everywhere, I think. Remedy, knock down buildings and remove trees, (make roads bigger ). ( so that you can then complain about that I suppose ). Protest camps all round the town where road changes would be made !. Now that's an attractive prospect !!. (2) "Increase in people living here". Really, can you support that with factual and realistic population projections. (3) "Financial incentivisation "? . You have facts/figures, etc to back this ?. (4) "Increase in migrants", number is already increasing due to EC membership. Proof please that airport development will increase this further. (5) "Ruin thousands of peoples lives". Worrying statement if true but a sweeping statement with no backing other than opinion. (6) "Development is the last thing this area needs", really??. How else do you cope with increasing population in this country, ( due to many reasons ). Put them all in other towns I suppose !! Would be interested to know your specific proposals to cure all these problems!!!!. Easy to criticise, difficult to be constructive.[/p][/quote]Are you one of those councillors taking bungs at the expense of people like me? Just take a look at Southend seafront and that monstrosity they are building near Chalkwell. It's totally out of kilter with everything else on the front and can only have been authorised by a blindfolded approval panel with motives other than looking after where we live. Get your head out of the sand, take a look around and start sticking up for where you live. There will be no greenary left with people like you.[/p][/quote]No, not tied to councils or politics in any shape or form but thanks for the suggestion, I suppose an insulting reply should have been expected. I'm just a resident of Southend for 60 years+ who happens to disagree with you. ( Some people might, you know but obviously they are all idiots with their " heads in the sand" !!!! ). PS I note that you failed to respond or reply to any of the points I made in the original post. I repeat, criticism is very, very easy, those who are quick to condemn seldom have any positive suggestions to make. PS The original suggestion of knocking down buildings and removing trees was made with tongue in cheek, just clarifying that in case irony is a hard concept to master. Interesting comment about "bungs" though, presumably you can justify or prove that !!. Will be interesting to see evidence of this. openspace
  • Score: 0

4:46pm Tue 23 Mar 10

locallad1 says...

openspace wrote:
locallad1 wrote:
openspace wrote:
locallad1 wrote: Another disastrous decision by the local council / government. This will just add more traffic to the roads, whose infrastructure has never kept pace with increasing numbers of cars. It will increase the number of people that want to live here and thus create more development, which undoubtedly councillors will turn a blind eye to through financial incentivisation of some degree. Development is the last thing this area needs. It will increase the number of migrants in the town because they will be the only ones prepared to work for the crap wages on offer. It will increase pollution both from the airport and the additional cars and lorries on the road. It will increase noise pollution and ruin thousands of peoples lives in areas like Leigh and Westcliff. All round we've made an area already on the road to ruin more certain of its fate.
More wild theories, unsubstantiated comments and personal opinions presented as facts !!. (1) "Road infrastructure. Hasn't kept pace with vehicle growth". This is true everywhere, I think. Remedy, knock down buildings and remove trees, (make roads bigger ). ( so that you can then complain about that I suppose ). Protest camps all round the town where road changes would be made !. Now that's an attractive prospect !!. (2) "Increase in people living here". Really, can you support that with factual and realistic population projections. (3) "Financial incentivisation "? . You have facts/figures, etc to back this ?. (4) "Increase in migrants", number is already increasing due to EC membership. Proof please that airport development will increase this further. (5) "Ruin thousands of peoples lives". Worrying statement if true but a sweeping statement with no backing other than opinion. (6) "Development is the last thing this area needs", really??. How else do you cope with increasing population in this country, ( due to many reasons ). Put them all in other towns I suppose !! Would be interested to know your specific proposals to cure all these problems!!!!. Easy to criticise, difficult to be constructive.
Are you one of those councillors taking bungs at the expense of people like me? Just take a look at Southend seafront and that monstrosity they are building near Chalkwell. It's totally out of kilter with everything else on the front and can only have been authorised by a blindfolded approval panel with motives other than looking after where we live. Get your head out of the sand, take a look around and start sticking up for where you live. There will be no greenary left with people like you.
No, not tied to councils or politics in any shape or form but thanks for the suggestion, I suppose an insulting reply should have been expected. I'm just a resident of Southend for 60 years+ who happens to disagree with you. ( Some people might, you know but obviously they are all idiots with their " heads in the sand" !!!! ). PS I note that you failed to respond or reply to any of the points I made in the original post. I repeat, criticism is very, very easy, those who are quick to condemn seldom have any positive suggestions to make. PS The original suggestion of knocking down buildings and removing trees was made with tongue in cheek, just clarifying that in case irony is a hard concept to master. Interesting comment about "bungs" though, presumably you can justify or prove that !!. Will be interesting to see evidence of this.
being a resident of 60+ years is ample excuse for failing eyesight, I guess. You are also unlikely to see just how bad this area will be in 20 years time, which will be a blessing.
Is your username 'openspace' tongue in cheek given all my problems with the lack of space?
Regarding the bungs - accusations with no substantiation, but something has gone badly wrong with the system that allows planning on this scale to get through even when there is mass objection.
[quote][p][bold]openspace[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]locallad1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]openspace[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]locallad1[/bold] wrote: Another disastrous decision by the local council / government. This will just add more traffic to the roads, whose infrastructure has never kept pace with increasing numbers of cars. It will increase the number of people that want to live here and thus create more development, which undoubtedly councillors will turn a blind eye to through financial incentivisation of some degree. Development is the last thing this area needs. It will increase the number of migrants in the town because they will be the only ones prepared to work for the crap wages on offer. It will increase pollution both from the airport and the additional cars and lorries on the road. It will increase noise pollution and ruin thousands of peoples lives in areas like Leigh and Westcliff. All round we've made an area already on the road to ruin more certain of its fate.[/p][/quote]More wild theories, unsubstantiated comments and personal opinions presented as facts !!. (1) "Road infrastructure. Hasn't kept pace with vehicle growth". This is true everywhere, I think. Remedy, knock down buildings and remove trees, (make roads bigger ). ( so that you can then complain about that I suppose ). Protest camps all round the town where road changes would be made !. Now that's an attractive prospect !!. (2) "Increase in people living here". Really, can you support that with factual and realistic population projections. (3) "Financial incentivisation "? . You have facts/figures, etc to back this ?. (4) "Increase in migrants", number is already increasing due to EC membership. Proof please that airport development will increase this further. (5) "Ruin thousands of peoples lives". Worrying statement if true but a sweeping statement with no backing other than opinion. (6) "Development is the last thing this area needs", really??. How else do you cope with increasing population in this country, ( due to many reasons ). Put them all in other towns I suppose !! Would be interested to know your specific proposals to cure all these problems!!!!. Easy to criticise, difficult to be constructive.[/p][/quote]Are you one of those councillors taking bungs at the expense of people like me? Just take a look at Southend seafront and that monstrosity they are building near Chalkwell. It's totally out of kilter with everything else on the front and can only have been authorised by a blindfolded approval panel with motives other than looking after where we live. Get your head out of the sand, take a look around and start sticking up for where you live. There will be no greenary left with people like you.[/p][/quote]No, not tied to councils or politics in any shape or form but thanks for the suggestion, I suppose an insulting reply should have been expected. I'm just a resident of Southend for 60 years+ who happens to disagree with you. ( Some people might, you know but obviously they are all idiots with their " heads in the sand" !!!! ). PS I note that you failed to respond or reply to any of the points I made in the original post. I repeat, criticism is very, very easy, those who are quick to condemn seldom have any positive suggestions to make. PS The original suggestion of knocking down buildings and removing trees was made with tongue in cheek, just clarifying that in case irony is a hard concept to master. Interesting comment about "bungs" though, presumably you can justify or prove that !!. Will be interesting to see evidence of this.[/p][/quote]being a resident of 60+ years is ample excuse for failing eyesight, I guess. You are also unlikely to see just how bad this area will be in 20 years time, which will be a blessing. Is your username 'openspace' tongue in cheek given all my problems with the lack of space? Regarding the bungs - accusations with no substantiation, but something has gone badly wrong with the system that allows planning on this scale to get through even when there is mass objection. locallad1
  • Score: 0

5:02pm Tue 23 Mar 10

Last Poster says...

evilc wrote:
Fantastic News at last we are moving into the future. We have a future now, road, rail and cycle path improvement. Excellent news well done Anne Waites and others. Private enterprise generates wealth jobs and a bright future in the local area. Southend will at last move forward. Ignore all The Huggers, communist anoraks and the 'V' types they are the loud minority, that want us to go back to the square wheel.
Don't know where you think "Private enterprise" comes into all this. Money in the bank is all that is. Private enterprise created the hole in the Ocean between the UK and the USA where all the Billions and Billions of our capital disappeared. Unless you think the money just wore out. Or, could it be, when the multi billions were wiped out, someone, somewhere was making a killing? Good old private enterprise! Is your tandem new by the way?
[quote][p][bold]evilc[/bold] wrote: Fantastic News at last we are moving into the future. We have a future now, road, rail and cycle path improvement. Excellent news well done Anne Waites and others. Private enterprise generates wealth jobs and a bright future in the local area. Southend will at last move forward. Ignore all The Huggers, communist anoraks and the 'V' types they are the loud minority, that want us to go back to the square wheel.[/p][/quote]Don't know where you think "Private enterprise" comes into all this. Money in the bank is all that is. Private enterprise created the hole in the Ocean between the UK and the USA where all the Billions and Billions of our capital disappeared. Unless you think the money just wore out. Or, could it be, when the multi billions were wiped out, someone, somewhere was making a killing? Good old private enterprise! Is your tandem new by the way? Last Poster
  • Score: 0

5:12pm Tue 23 Mar 10

Time says...

Im gonna try and get a new job at the Airport when it opens, so i am really happy its going ahead!
Im gonna try and get a new job at the Airport when it opens, so i am really happy its going ahead! Time
  • Score: 0

5:21pm Tue 23 Mar 10

openspace says...

locallad1 wrote:
openspace wrote:
locallad1 wrote:
openspace wrote:
locallad1 wrote: Another disastrous decision by the local council / government. This will just add more traffic to the roads, whose infrastructure has never kept pace with increasing numbers of cars. It will increase the number of people that want to live here and thus create more development, which undoubtedly councillors will turn a blind eye to through financial incentivisation of some degree. Development is the last thing this area needs. It will increase the number of migrants in the town because they will be the only ones prepared to work for the crap wages on offer. It will increase pollution both from the airport and the additional cars and lorries on the road. It will increase noise pollution and ruin thousands of peoples lives in areas like Leigh and Westcliff. All round we've made an area already on the road to ruin more certain of its fate.
More wild theories, unsubstantiated comments and personal opinions presented as facts !!. (1) "Road infrastructure. Hasn't kept pace with vehicle growth". This is true everywhere, I think. Remedy, knock down buildings and remove trees, (make roads bigger ). ( so that you can then complain about that I suppose ). Protest camps all round the town where road changes would be made !. Now that's an attractive prospect !!. (2) "Increase in people living here". Really, can you support that with factual and realistic population projections. (3) "Financial incentivisation "? . You have facts/figures, etc to back this ?. (4) "Increase in migrants", number is already increasing due to EC membership. Proof please that airport development will increase this further. (5) "Ruin thousands of peoples lives". Worrying statement if true but a sweeping statement with no backing other than opinion. (6) "Development is the last thing this area needs", really??. How else do you cope with increasing population in this country, ( due to many reasons ). Put them all in other towns I suppose !! Would be interested to know your specific proposals to cure all these problems!!!!. Easy to criticise, difficult to be constructive.
Are you one of those councillors taking bungs at the expense of people like me? Just take a look at Southend seafront and that monstrosity they are building near Chalkwell. It's totally out of kilter with everything else on the front and can only have been authorised by a blindfolded approval panel with motives other than looking after where we live. Get your head out of the sand, take a look around and start sticking up for where you live. There will be no greenary left with people like you.
No, not tied to councils or politics in any shape or form but thanks for the suggestion, I suppose an insulting reply should have been expected. I'm just a resident of Southend for 60 years+ who happens to disagree with you. ( Some people might, you know but obviously they are all idiots with their " heads in the sand" !!!! ). PS I note that you failed to respond or reply to any of the points I made in the original post. I repeat, criticism is very, very easy, those who are quick to condemn seldom have any positive suggestions to make. PS The original suggestion of knocking down buildings and removing trees was made with tongue in cheek, just clarifying that in case irony is a hard concept to master. Interesting comment about "bungs" though, presumably you can justify or prove that !!. Will be interesting to see evidence of this.
being a resident of 60+ years is ample excuse for failing eyesight, I guess. You are also unlikely to see just how bad this area will be in 20 years time, which will be a blessing. Is your username 'openspace' tongue in cheek given all my problems with the lack of space? Regarding the bungs - accusations with no substantiation, but something has gone badly wrong with the system that allows planning on this scale to get through even when there is mass objection.
Thanks for the comment on failing eyesight, ( actually 20/20 luckily ).
No, open-space is not tongue in cheek.
To be honest, I have seen little significant erosion of green land to the south side of the A127, and no destruction of actual parks and open spaces of any significance. The other side of the A127 is a different matter, much has gone, mostly with the broad approval of many residents, ( ie all those who shop at Tesco's, Waitrose, B&Q, work at RBS, do sporting activities at Garon Park, etc, etc, etc, ( you could go on indefinitely ). This may well be regretted by many, perhaps including myself but is no different to many other towns, and given a free vote, would the public accept the destruction of all these developments and a return to green belt, unlikely I suspect despite anything you or I might want. I actually am a great supporter of local parkland and should any of our parks be threatened, ( not just very small amounts of land alongside parks ), I would be one of the first to at least put pen to paper in protest, perhaps more.

My main problem with your argument is the term " mass objection". In a town of 150,000+, how many actually protested. A very small percentage , I suspect,certainly a minority, leading to most of the actions of the local council. I do tend to agree with you about the monstrosity on the seafront at Chalkwell and feel sorry for those living behind it. Whether it is totally out of place is a matter of personal opinion, ( I am, as I said, with you on that one ), but to play devil's advocate, didn't they say that the London Eye was totally out of place when erected?. Will try to be around in 20 years so that one of us can say "I told you so"
[quote][p][bold]locallad1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]openspace[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]locallad1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]openspace[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]locallad1[/bold] wrote: Another disastrous decision by the local council / government. This will just add more traffic to the roads, whose infrastructure has never kept pace with increasing numbers of cars. It will increase the number of people that want to live here and thus create more development, which undoubtedly councillors will turn a blind eye to through financial incentivisation of some degree. Development is the last thing this area needs. It will increase the number of migrants in the town because they will be the only ones prepared to work for the crap wages on offer. It will increase pollution both from the airport and the additional cars and lorries on the road. It will increase noise pollution and ruin thousands of peoples lives in areas like Leigh and Westcliff. All round we've made an area already on the road to ruin more certain of its fate.[/p][/quote]More wild theories, unsubstantiated comments and personal opinions presented as facts !!. (1) "Road infrastructure. Hasn't kept pace with vehicle growth". This is true everywhere, I think. Remedy, knock down buildings and remove trees, (make roads bigger ). ( so that you can then complain about that I suppose ). Protest camps all round the town where road changes would be made !. Now that's an attractive prospect !!. (2) "Increase in people living here". Really, can you support that with factual and realistic population projections. (3) "Financial incentivisation "? . You have facts/figures, etc to back this ?. (4) "Increase in migrants", number is already increasing due to EC membership. Proof please that airport development will increase this further. (5) "Ruin thousands of peoples lives". Worrying statement if true but a sweeping statement with no backing other than opinion. (6) "Development is the last thing this area needs", really??. How else do you cope with increasing population in this country, ( due to many reasons ). Put them all in other towns I suppose !! Would be interested to know your specific proposals to cure all these problems!!!!. Easy to criticise, difficult to be constructive.[/p][/quote]Are you one of those councillors taking bungs at the expense of people like me? Just take a look at Southend seafront and that monstrosity they are building near Chalkwell. It's totally out of kilter with everything else on the front and can only have been authorised by a blindfolded approval panel with motives other than looking after where we live. Get your head out of the sand, take a look around and start sticking up for where you live. There will be no greenary left with people like you.[/p][/quote]No, not tied to councils or politics in any shape or form but thanks for the suggestion, I suppose an insulting reply should have been expected. I'm just a resident of Southend for 60 years+ who happens to disagree with you. ( Some people might, you know but obviously they are all idiots with their " heads in the sand" !!!! ). PS I note that you failed to respond or reply to any of the points I made in the original post. I repeat, criticism is very, very easy, those who are quick to condemn seldom have any positive suggestions to make. PS The original suggestion of knocking down buildings and removing trees was made with tongue in cheek, just clarifying that in case irony is a hard concept to master. Interesting comment about "bungs" though, presumably you can justify or prove that !!. Will be interesting to see evidence of this.[/p][/quote]being a resident of 60+ years is ample excuse for failing eyesight, I guess. You are also unlikely to see just how bad this area will be in 20 years time, which will be a blessing. Is your username 'openspace' tongue in cheek given all my problems with the lack of space? Regarding the bungs - accusations with no substantiation, but something has gone badly wrong with the system that allows planning on this scale to get through even when there is mass objection.[/p][/quote]Thanks for the comment on failing eyesight, ( actually 20/20 luckily ). No, open-space is not tongue in cheek. To be honest, I have seen little significant erosion of green land to the south side of the A127, and no destruction of actual parks and open spaces of any significance. The other side of the A127 is a different matter, much has gone, mostly with the broad approval of many residents, ( ie all those who shop at Tesco's, Waitrose, B&Q, work at RBS, do sporting activities at Garon Park, etc, etc, etc, ( you could go on indefinitely ). This may well be regretted by many, perhaps including myself but is no different to many other towns, and given a free vote, would the public accept the destruction of all these developments and a return to green belt, unlikely I suspect despite anything you or I might want. I actually am a great supporter of local parkland and should any of our parks be threatened, ( not just very small amounts of land alongside parks ), I would be one of the first to at least put pen to paper in protest, perhaps more. My main problem with your argument is the term " mass objection". In a town of 150,000+, how many actually protested. A very small percentage , I suspect,certainly a minority, leading to most of the actions of the local council. I do tend to agree with you about the monstrosity on the seafront at Chalkwell and feel sorry for those living behind it. Whether it is totally out of place is a matter of personal opinion, ( I am, as I said, with you on that one ), but to play devil's advocate, didn't they say that the London Eye was totally out of place when erected?. Will try to be around in 20 years so that one of us can say "I told you so" openspace
  • Score: 0

9:11pm Wed 24 Mar 10

wakering realist says...

Open space - the vast majority of those who objected (90% ?) were against this tragic development. In a Govt or council election it's a small minority (usually 35 - 40%) of those who bother to vote ( probably less than 20% of the eligable voters) decide who gets in. When 90% vote against the self interest of business, politicians & speculative bankers the results are ignored. Could it be that they have attended the Robert Mugabe school of applied planning procedures?
Open space - the vast majority of those who objected (90% ?) were against this tragic development. In a Govt or council election it's a small minority (usually 35 - 40%) of those who bother to vote ( probably less than 20% of the eligable voters) decide who gets in. When 90% vote against the self interest of business, politicians & speculative bankers the results are ignored. Could it be that they have attended the Robert Mugabe school of applied planning procedures? wakering realist
  • Score: 0

10:32am Thu 25 Mar 10

j-w says...

Open space - the vast majority of those who objected (90% ?) were against this tragic development.

I would have thought 100% of those that objected were against it. luckily there were many more who were for it or not bothered either way.
[quote]Open space - the vast majority of those who objected (90% ?) were against this tragic development.[/quote] I would have thought 100% of those that objected were against it. luckily there were many more who were for it or not bothered either way. j-w
  • Score: 0

10:53am Thu 25 Mar 10

openspace says...

wakering realist wrote:
Open space - the vast majority of those who objected (90% ?) were against this tragic development. In a Govt or council election it's a small minority (usually 35 - 40%) of those who bother to vote ( probably less than 20% of the eligable voters) decide who gets in. When 90% vote against the self interest of business, politicians & speculative bankers the results are ignored. Could it be that they have attended the Robert Mugabe school of applied planning procedures?
To follow this argument to it's logical conclusion, it then follows that all projects, where a small minority oppose them, should be cancelled.
Whilst the democratic process may well be imperfect, (with low voting figures and much apathy), a system driven by decisions forced by a vocal minority would be a dangerous route to follow.
PS. I don't see much point in references to Mugabe, etc .
[quote][p][bold]wakering realist[/bold] wrote: Open space - the vast majority of those who objected (90% ?) were against this tragic development. In a Govt or council election it's a small minority (usually 35 - 40%) of those who bother to vote ( probably less than 20% of the eligable voters) decide who gets in. When 90% vote against the self interest of business, politicians & speculative bankers the results are ignored. Could it be that they have attended the Robert Mugabe school of applied planning procedures?[/p][/quote]To follow this argument to it's logical conclusion, it then follows that all projects, where a small minority oppose them, should be cancelled. Whilst the democratic process may well be imperfect, (with low voting figures and much apathy), a system driven by decisions forced by a vocal minority would be a dangerous route to follow. PS. I don't see much point in references to Mugabe, etc . openspace
  • Score: 0

12:53pm Thu 25 Mar 10

openspace says...

openspace wrote:
wakering realist wrote: Open space - the vast majority of those who objected (90% ?) were against this tragic development. In a Govt or council election it's a small minority (usually 35 - 40%) of those who bother to vote ( probably less than 20% of the eligable voters) decide who gets in. When 90% vote against the self interest of business, politicians & speculative bankers the results are ignored. Could it be that they have attended the Robert Mugabe school of applied planning procedures?
To follow this argument to it's logical conclusion, it then follows that all projects, where a small minority oppose them, should be cancelled. Whilst the democratic process may well be imperfect, (with low voting figures and much apathy), a system driven by decisions forced by a vocal minority would be a dangerous route to follow. PS. I don't see much point in references to Mugabe, etc .
Further to the above, the original point was, (using your quote ), 90% of how many, 10, 100, 1,000. Does tend to make a difference.
Also, there is a significant difference to decisions made by an elected body, ( even if actually and effectively voted in by only 20%, ) and an outcome forced by a very, ( very ), much smaller and unelected lobby. As I said, the democratic process is not perfect, ( because apathy undoubtedly plays too large a part ), but wonder what acceptable alternative could be found, I wonder.!!
[quote][p][bold]openspace[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wakering realist[/bold] wrote: Open space - the vast majority of those who objected (90% ?) were against this tragic development. In a Govt or council election it's a small minority (usually 35 - 40%) of those who bother to vote ( probably less than 20% of the eligable voters) decide who gets in. When 90% vote against the self interest of business, politicians & speculative bankers the results are ignored. Could it be that they have attended the Robert Mugabe school of applied planning procedures?[/p][/quote]To follow this argument to it's logical conclusion, it then follows that all projects, where a small minority oppose them, should be cancelled. Whilst the democratic process may well be imperfect, (with low voting figures and much apathy), a system driven by decisions forced by a vocal minority would be a dangerous route to follow. PS. I don't see much point in references to Mugabe, etc .[/p][/quote]Further to the above, the original point was, (using your quote ), 90% of how many, 10, 100, 1,000. Does tend to make a difference. Also, there is a significant difference to decisions made by an elected body, ( even if actually and effectively voted in by only 20%, ) and an outcome forced by a very, ( very ), much smaller and unelected lobby. As I said, the democratic process is not perfect, ( because apathy undoubtedly plays too large a part ), but wonder what acceptable alternative could be found, I wonder.!! openspace
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree