I have looked at these plans and I think a few questions are raised.

1- Since I believe the airport is currently for sale, I wonder if it is wise to make these plans before the sale has taken place. I believe that these plans constitute an uncertainty that can only prolong the sale process and general confusion. I think it would make far more sense to stop proposing different plans that will impact on the market value of the business. Of course once it is sold, we will then know who the new owners will be and what they propose.

2- I notice at the moment that 1500 people are employed within the environs of the airport, but that most of them are not directly employed by the workings (flights/maintenance) of the airport. It seems to me that if the runways were given over to industrial use, there could be a lot of development and employment without the environmental "disbenifits" of an industry that is currently based on burning fossil fuels and creating CO2.

3- This brings me to my last point, which is to ask whether further development centred around an industry that is based on a limited resource (fossil fuels) is strategically sound for the future of this area.

Obviously I would be opposed to any plans which allow re-allocation of greenbelt land for a strategy with such strong environmental disbenefits!



I believe that as it stands, the airport makes a profit for its owners and as they are wishing to sell, there is no pressing reason to move ahead with any of these proposals. I am unaware of local employment problems and therefore am not at all sure what is in it for Rochford, nor why there is any need for haste.

The airport seems to have arrived at its present situation due to a complete lack of strategic foresight. Let's not continue in the same vein eh?

Regards Craig Carter