The main item on the agenda was TAG's revised application for a doubling of weekend and bank holiday movements. This item was reached within a few minutes of the meeting opening.

Roland Dibbs, a Rushmoor councillor, got up to leave saying he saw no point in remaining any longer as he could not be present for this agenda item being a member of the Rushmoor planning committee. Which begs the question why did he turn up at all other than to bung in an expense claim and to give the impression he is a hard working councillor?

TAG refused to discuss their application, which left everyone baffled, as why, as they draw up the agenda, had it been placed on the agenda?

TAG did not get away with this for long, as they were asked questions on their application by the public.

Paul Taylor, a Rushmoor councillor and like Dibbs a member of the Rushmoor planning committee, sat through part of the cross-examination of TAG. When he got up to leave, it was pointed out for the record, that he had been present during part of the discussion.

Speaking on behalf of TAG, Sir Donald Spiers said they had not submitted a revised application. When it was drawn to his attention that Rushmoor said TAG had, he expressed surprise, and said that all TAG had done was to answer questions put to them by Rushmoor.

Another example of incompetence and maladministration by Rushmoor planning department?

The wording on the letter sent out by Rushmoor (dated 15 February 2006): 'Notification about amended and additional details'.

The letter then goes on to say: 'TAG Farnborough Airport Ltd has submitted amended and additional details ...'

Sir Donald Spiers was asked what would TAG do if their application was rejected as they were losing money. Sir Donald agreed they were losing money and the situation was not sustainable. He also added that what was driving their application, was not TAG's desire for increased profit, but the demand from their customers for weekend movements and TAG was only meeting customer demand.

As TAG say, in their detailed submission, they will hit the new limit in 2008, ie only two years away, Sir Donald was asked as they are led by customer demand, would he like Oliver Twist, be back for more in two years time.

At this point Sir Donald got quite rattled and refused to answer the question, saying he was not prepared to discuss TAG's business plans or answer hypothetical questions.

Earlier in the meeting TAG had been asked would they be seeking a relaxation of the cap of 28,000 annual movements. TAG, asked more than once, refused to answer the question.

These two points cannot be over-emphasised. TAG, given every opportunity, refused to say they would stick with either of the existing limits, or the new limits they are requesting.

As the proposed new limit would be reached within two years, the only conclusion that can be drawn, is that TAG will be back for a variation, ie relaxation, of these limits, once they are reached.

Prior to Sir Donald Spiers addressing the issue, a fellow TAG director addressed the points raised in the Rushmoor letter.

He said TAG had always intended to install electrical power to replace the diesel power units, and the installation had been delayed by the presence of temporary buildings.

On the other matters of flight routing and monitoring, this had been picked up from the objections, and TAG wished to discuss the best routes to minimise the nuisance caused.

This was picked up by the committee, and it is to be an agenda item for the next meeting to be discussed there. When routes are agreed, or a consensus reached, this will be put to the CAA for further consultation.

The so-called phased introduction of weekend flights, is simply a projection of TAG's expected growth.

Thus these are all things that TAG are offering irrespective of their planning application.

Indeed, when I made my objections to their apparent revised application, I made the point I could not see what any of this had to do with TAG's original planning application.

 http://www.heureka.clara.net/surrey-hants/tag11rev1.htm

It would appear therefore that the planning department has engaged in deliberate deception of the planning committee and the local community, giving the impression that concessions have been achieved to mitigate the application, when nothing of the sort has taken place, and as Sir Donald Spiers has said, all TAG has done is responded to the questions asked with more detailed answers.

Throughout the planning process, TAG submitted their application for a doubling of movements last October, Rushmoor head of planning has failed to properly notify (raised at the last meeting of FACC, November 2005), failed to answer questions from the local community.

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2005/11/328072.html

Geoff Marks (representing the local community) asked the committee to note that he had asked questions of Keith Holland re the application, and four months later, he was still waiting for an answer. He also drew attention to the fact that no one was present from Rushmoor to answer his questions.

We were told that the world's biggest arms fair, the Farnborough International Airshow 2006, would take place 17-23 July 2006, and that Friday would be a special youth day, to emphasise to the young the benefits of aviation! Climate change, global warming?

Questions were raised on the relaxation of CAA licensing for the Airshow and the implications for safety. TAG, even though repeatedly asked, refused to answer the questions.

Paul Taylor, who as a councillor represents the local community most at risk, said he accepted there was additional risk, but it was acceptable for the benefits to the local community. What these benefits are and why the local community should accept the associated increase risk, remains an open question.

Peter Riley was appointed as new secretary to the committee, and from who minutes, reports, agendas etc may be obtained.  wincombecottage@gmail.com

The next meeting of the committee is to look at representation on the committee. Currently local councils are over-represented and the local community under-represented. The representation should be: one third TAG and their business users, one third local councils, one third local community.

The next meeting of FACC: 6 July 2006.

Closing date for objections to TAG planning application: 17 March 2006.

Farnborough International Airshow 2006: 17-23 July 2006.

websites

 http://www.facc.org.uk
 http://www.fara.org.uk
 http://www.heureka.clara.net/surrey-hants/

reference

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

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

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

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

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

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

Keith Parkins, TAG revised application to double weekend flights, March 2006
 http://www.heureka.clara.net/surrey-hants/tag11rev1.htm

Keith Parkins, TAG submit revised application to double weekend flights at Farnborough, Indymedia UK, 13 March 2006
 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/03/335732.html

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

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