Sunday, 14 February 2010

Cancer ain't me says Matt Clarke

A further reply from Matt Clarke of Infratil who now confirms that Infratil did remove the monitors - although they didn't.

Just embarrassing.

And he points the finger squarely at the Gang of Four of Samuel, White, Latchford and Ezekiel for removing the monitors.

After 3 years of fudged information TDC were still removing air monitors as late as July - and the last announcement of night flights.

No monitors. No data. No pesky public health problems.

What were our MP's and councillors doing allowing the removal of noise and air monitors (and not replacing them) at an airport slated for expansion?

Allowing the cancer rate to rise and hope the jobs would compensate for the early deaths?

What other pollution problems are they trying to cover up?

Still no clean up schedules for Thor mercury - a factory supposedly closed 20 years ago - nor any information on clean up at Pegwell and Richboro some of the most polluted water in Britain, nor the gasworks with arsenic and cynaide deposits in the soil.

Mere silence except self-serving excuses on the cancer rate:

--- On Thu, 11/2/10, Matt Clarke Date: Thursday, 11 February, 2010, 10:30

Hi Tim,

The noise monitors were owned by consultants and taken away> following the administration of the former airport owners.> > Infratil replaced them soon after my arrival. We have also subsequently provided TDC with a third mobile monitor.

Even if no noise or air quality monitoring took place at> the airport (and I repeat, it does), I do not see a case for> endangering the public - the movement level at the airport> is extremely low, with airport activity having a negligible> effect on local air quality (as evidenced by the tests,> which can be verified by the TDC), with the majority of any> pollution appearing to be caused by road/sea traffic.

Again, TDC controls the pollution monitoring, the airport> funds it. Infratil did not ever take away or change> air quality monitoring systems - we do not control> them. TDC administers the system and reports directly> to the KIACC - this setup is deliberate to ensure no> difficulties with gamekeeping poachers.

Our liaison at TDC is Penny Button regarding the> environmental monitoring.> > I believe your logic is flawed regarding any link between> lung cancer rates and airport operations. You note> that the cancer rate is higher in Thanet than in other> locations - most if not all of the locations with lower> rates of cancer have far busier airports than Thanet's, with> many having airports more than 100 times busier.

The> cause of any cancer issues would appear to lie elsewhere.> > Again, all flights operating between 2300 and 0700 are> reported to the KIACC and TDC. All operate within the> s106 agreement, which expressly provides for such movements,> with contributions made to the community fund for aircraft> above noise quota count 4. This is in compliance with> the s106 agreement, not in breach of it.> > Regards,> Matt

RE: Airport Comments
Friday, 12 February, 2010 15:33
"tim garbutt"

"Matt Clarke"

Hi Matt

We're agreed: Infratil removed the noise monitors that were in place.I have a letter confirming that from Rowland Gunn.

You previously said Infratil didn't remove the monitors at an airport scheduled for expansion. You're indulging in mere wordplay to avoid that unpleasant fact.

The current system with monitors in the back garden of Infratil employees and TDC removing monitors as the airport expands is flimsy to say the least.

Infratil have provided 3 mobile monitors to TDC? When were/are these operational?

Your points on the airport not causing pollution or cancer are ludicrous.

The repeated 106 breaches are ignored: why did Infratil instigate training flights in breach of the 106? The criteria on night flights and QC4 ie jumbo jets and above is equally ludicrous.

As you've pointed out TDC bear some of the burden for failing to provide accurate and tight monitoring - clearly both Infratil and TDC have been in close cahoots in minimising fines, announcing night flights etc - but in my opinion Infratil both under your operation and previously are clearly and deliberately endangering the public with both air, noise and water pollution.

These facts aren't in dispute merely your self-serving interpretation of them.

Again the public response of "disbelief and shouts of rubbish from the floor" seems the best summary of your arguments.

Your return to NZ and undoubted collapse of Infratil and Manston heralds a better day for Kent.

Sadly our incompetent politicians and civil servants remain.

Kindest regards


No comments: