SBAC (organiser of the Farnborough Airshow, the world's biggest arms fair) said Farnborough International Airshow 2004 (FI 2004) had been a huge success. Orders at $20 billion, up from $10 billion at the last airshow (these figures may have been pounds not dollars) To put the figures in context, the last airshow, following 9/11, saw a dramatic plunge in both visitor numbers and orders. SBAC admitted they are now facing worldwide competition, and the big US companies are questioning whether it is worth their while to continue to exhibit at Farnborough. [see the Sunday Times 25 July 2004 for a more critical appraisal]

A US B52 overflew Farnborough one day during the airshow. Only it didn't, it overflew nearby Blackbushe instead. How one can mistake a few cowsheds and a few light aircraft for the world's largest airshow remains a mystery. As does questions raised as to the competence of air traffic control.

To anyone familiar with the bombing by B52s in south east Asia during the Vietnam War or today's bombing in Afghanistan or Iraq, it all came as no surprise.

Members of the public who dared question the Airshow during Airshow Week or the nuisance it caused were derided by the committee.

SBAC claimed the Airshow was great for the national economy, a showcase for British aerospace industry. No one questioned this.

TAG Aviation (airport operator) produced a detailed table of complaints from the public. Half a dozen aircraft were non-complaint with TAG's takeoff or landing procedures. It would be a useful addition if TAG were to name and shame the offenders.

Complaints hotline: 01252 526001

To lodge a complaint you need the precise time, location, type of aircraft, and nature of complaint.

TAG said Farnborough had recently been voted the Best Airport in Europe. Why, was not apparent, as there is nothing at Farnborough. But maybe that is its biggest plus point. A hassle free airport – no customs, no passport control, no immigration – you can bring in who or whatever you like, no questions asked.

A presentation was given by TAG Aviation on noise. The problem is they are measuring average noise, then using the average noise for a summed annual total. This not what the public perceives or what annoys them. It is the peak noise events and how often the peak events occur.

TAG use two fixed microphones and one mobile microphone. If you want monitoring where you live, ask for the mobile microphone to be located in your garden for a few weeks. Speak to Kathy Wood at TAG.

Kathy Wood 01252 526001

TAG said they monitor NOx. No figures were given or distribution maps. Nor was it clear whether they only monitor NOx, as an indicator air pollutant or whether other air pollutants are also monitored. TAG were asked to supply numbers and distribution maps.

Run-off from the airport goes into Cove Book. TAG monitor Cove Brook, but no figures were given. They were asked to supply data.

All environmental monitoring is by TAG. It is not carried out by an independent third party.

A paper on safety was presented by Geoff Marks. The crux of the paper was that no proper safety study to date had been carried out and Rushmoor (the planning authority that granted planning consent for a business airport at Farnborough) had been negligent in failing to carry one out. Rushmoor were asked to consider the paper and to respond. It was also suggested DfT should be asked to respond.

One would have expected a discussion, some form of outcome. Zilch! No one gave a damn.

The committee were heavily criticised for this, as they were for their cavalier attitude to safety.

A question was asked regarding the adequacy of insurance were a plane to crash on the residential part of Farnborough. We are still not getting satisfactory answers.

The public used to be able to ask questions. They still can, just, but they have been pushed to the end of the meeting. They can no longer ask questions on issues as they arise. This is not acceptable.

The suspicion is that the chairman would like to see the public pushed out altogether. He keeps repeating the mantra that it is a meeting to which the public may attend, not a public meeting, conveniently forgetting that the entire rationale of the committee is consultation with the local community.

There is more expertise in the public gallery than gathered around the table. This causes acute discomfort to the committee every time a member of the public is allowed to speak.

And it is the local community that is affected by the operation of the airport.

We have a dysfunctional committee. The problem is it was never set up correctly with equal representation from airfield operator and users, local councils and local community. Local councils are over represented, the local community severely under represented.

Hart Council fought hard for two seats. They now have two seats, and contribute nothing.

Councillors are not used to sitting alongside members of the local community and having to afford them equal status. They resent it, if for no other reason than it shows them up for how useless they are. In the absence of their officials telling them how to vote, how to think, they are at a loss as what to do. When they speak, it is usually to make childish comments, nearly always attacking members of the local community.

The councillors on the committee only seem to be good for one thing, shafting the local community and showing complete contempt for the local community.

TAG are to set up a website. When it will be operational or if it will contain anything useful, is anybody's guess. The only function of the website is to communicate to the public what the committee is doing. The public are excluded from the working group looking at the website.

The meetings are still not being properly publicised. The local press were not even aware of the meeting, which may explain their absence.

People find out about the meetings through community activists and word of mouth.

To obtain committee documents – reports, minutes, agendas – please contact committee secretary Geoff Green:

01252 679986  geoff.egreen@ntlworld.com

Anyone who has taken the trouble to attend a meeting should automatically be sent the minutes of that meeting and notice and agenda for next meeting. Only it is not happening.

The committee seems to have conveniently forgotten the sole reason for its existence – consultation with the local community.

We learnt at the meeting, that the minutes are produced by the committee secretary within 48 hours, then passed to TAG for their approval. Some weeks later the minutes are circulated to the committee. It appears that all members of the committee are equal, it is just that some are more equal than others. Currently the minutes are not circulated to the local community. This is not acceptable.

DfT are to be invited to formally step in and regularise the committee, the Secretary of State asked to designate Farnborough under the relevant legislation and therefore legitimise the committee.

The underlying problem is that the committee operates in a vacuum. They forget that their only function is consultation with the local community who are affected by the operation of the airport.

With the exception of one or two members, the committee appears to lack any understanding of what their role is.

Next meeting: 2pm Thursday 18 November 2004 at BAE Systems HQ .