Matthews calls on Hazel Blears to request public enquiry into Lydd Airport Planning Application

Neil Matthews, Liberal Democrat Parliamentary Spokesman for Folkestone and Hythe, has written to Hazel Blears, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, asking her to refer the current Lydd Airport planning applications to the Government Office of the South East for a public enquiry.

The Lydd Airport planning applications are timetabled to be considered by Shepway District Council early in the New Year. Neil commented:

"With so many of our District Councillors, from all political parties, openly declaring where they stand on these planning applications, I can foresee the Monitoring Officer keeping a close eye and rein on how they conduct themselves at the decisive Council meeting when the expansion plans are discussed."

"Under the current rules, Councillors who 'nail their colours to the mast' and have openly declared their views on the airports plans have 'fettered their discretion'. And having done this they wont be able to vote!"

Neil has written to the Hazel Blears, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, asking her to intervene. He says:

"I have pointed out to the Secretary of State, if Shepway District Council continues on this course of action of wanting to decide the airports plans itself, the rules will not allow some Councillors to vote.

"I don't think this is open government and it is not democratic. Adding this scenario to the fact that expert advice will be needed to unravel and explain the finer legal points the RSPB, Natural England and others have flagged, the only proper way to proceed is by public enquiry. I hope Hazel Blears will see my point."

When Neil attended a public meeting at Lydd Airport earlier this year, he called for a public enquiry then. Neil said:

"The complexities of the legal status of the many special natural areas and reserves around the airport can only be properly discussed in such a forum.

"A Council Chamber where only the small number of unfettered Councillors are able to vote, coupled with the fact the necessary experts would not be present, is just simple bad government."

The full text of the letter to Hazel Blears:

The Right Honourable Hazel Blears MP

Secretary of State at the Department for Communities and Local Government

Department for Communities and Local Government

Eland House, Bressenden Place, LONDON SW1E 5DU

26th October 2008

Dear Hazel,

Early next year Shepway District Council [Folkestone & Hythe] will consider planning applications for the expansion of London Ashford Airport [Lydd Airport] in Kent - planning refs Y06/1647/SH and Y06/1648/SH. In December 2006, the owners of Lydd Airport submitted two planning applications to extend the runway and build a new terminal building to increase capacity from its current level of under 4,000 passengers per year to 500,000. They have a stated ambition to raise that figure to 2 million passengers per year in the future.

These applications have been the source of much public debate and have led to many organisations openly declaring their objections or approvals to the proposals. Clearly, the applications, if approved, will cause, inter alia:

• disturbance to birds from increased air traffic
• disturbance to the internationally important birdlife in the area from bird strike hazard management measures - these measures could include scaring birds away from parts of the SPA
• direct land take from the SAC, including the filling in of ponds used by protected great-crested newts
• severe restrictions on any habitat improvements or extensions that benefit birds, because of powers provided to minimise risk to aircraft
• damage to rare SAC lichen communities from increased air pollution from air and road traffic
• climate change impacts from increased flights at the airport
• increased traffic on local roads
• decreased uptake of current tourist and holiday facilities
• noise level increases

My purpose for contacting you now, is to ask you call in the applications. I do so because the Council will not be able to fully undertake its duty as the local planning authority. Many District Councillors, because of the very nature of the open debates in the press and elsewhere, will not be able to vote. Councillors, from all political parties, have 'nailed their colours to the mast,' 'fettering their discretion' and are thus prevented from voting. To continue allowing a Council to function under these circumstances is not good for openness or democracy.

Even though this is grounds enough, there are also many legal points to consider throughout the applications' papers that will need subject specific expert advice in their explanations. From your call-in, I would hope the Government Office of the South East would recommend to you a public enquiry is the only proper course of action to take under the circumstances.

I respectfully ask you give this your immediate attention.

Yours sincerely,

Neil Matthews