Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Non-Airline Forums > Private Flying
Reload this Page >

Prescott seeks to end light aviation?

Wikiposts
Search

Notices
Private Flying The forum for discussion and questions about any form of flying where you are doing it for the sheer pleasure of flight, rather than being paid!

Prescott seeks to end light aviation?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 7th January 2007 | 17:15
  #21 (permalink)  
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 806
Likes: 0
From: Maders UK
Signed up

Me too,
never trust a politician,

SB
scooter boy is offline  
Reply
Old 7th January 2007 | 17:33
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
From: Utopia
All Done
Prescott !!!!!
EL
Established Localiser is offline  
Reply
Old 7th January 2007 | 17:33
  #23 (permalink)  

Better red than ...
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Aviation Qualifications: CPL
Posts: 1,415
Likes: 0
From: Appleby-in-Westmorland Cumbria England
Painless. Get the whole familiy to contribute - could triple + the responses.

I supose this is Prescott trying to stamp out priviledge & elitism amongst the middle classes, like big mansions, secretaries, free jags & stuff ....

h-r
helicopter-redeye is offline  
Reply
Old 7th January 2007 | 17:52
  #24 (permalink)  
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 779
Likes: 1
From: Kent UK
Done. Cheers, Beags.

".....I want to make clear that the things that I do are what I would do that that thing is what the people of this country are expect at the end of the day it is a very important matter and these airfields are there for the benefit of hindsight, as I have said all along."

Didn't he say that? Oh well, he probably will!

Kev.
kevmusic is offline  
Reply
Old 7th January 2007 | 19:02
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
From: Washington DC
This won't work!

Petitions are a notoriously ineffective means of putting across a case to the government. An online version all the more so: it will be easy to ignore, not least because plainly very little effort is involved on the part of those signing their names.

What does occasionally work is enlisting the support of MPs who can take up your case with the appropriate government department. A brief, personally drafted letter (ie not a mass production round robin) is more likely to have the desired effect.

It is alleged in this case that the government had indicated that the inclusion of airfields from the draft wording of the bill was an oversight which would be corrected. If anyone can produce evidence that an undertaking was given it would make it that much harder for the government to wriggle out of this one. Anybody?
Lower the Nose! is offline  
Reply
Old 7th January 2007 | 19:40
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
From: SE England
Originally Posted by Lower the Nose!
Petitions are a notoriously ineffective means of putting across a case to the government. An online version all the more so: it will be easy to ignore, not least because plainly very little effort is involved on the part of those signing their names.
Very true. As well as signing up to the petition, write to your MP explaining the way the powers-that-be have ratted on their implicit promise

It is alleged in this case that the government had indicated that the inclusion of airfields from the draft wording of the bill was an oversight which would be corrected. If anyone can produce evidence that an undertaking was given it would make it that much harder for the government to wriggle out of this one. Anybody?
I had a letter from my MP about last year's effort and she enclosed a response from ODPM where it said that it was a drafting error and 'they would be considering reinstating the guidance (which they didn't). But, as you suggest, there was no undertaking - just an acknowledgement that the omission was an 'error'.

I replied at the time that this was no reassurance and have written back to her again asking her to get an explanation for the misleading reply she was given.
Lucy Lastic is offline  
Reply
Old 7th January 2007 | 20:33
  #27 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
25 Anniversary
 
Joined: May 1999
Aviation Qualifications: ATP+Mil
Posts: 27,400
Likes: 857
From: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Please do - I'm relaying it for someone else!
BEagle is offline  
Reply
Old 7th January 2007 | 20:53
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,929
Likes: 0
From: SoCal
Done. Good one BEagle
172driver is offline  
Reply
Old 8th January 2007 | 12:12
  #29 (permalink)  
20 Countries Visited
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 1,264
Likes: 57
From: Surrey, UK ;
Done ... and am no 3542.
Dave Gittins is offline  
Reply
Old 8th January 2007 | 12:21
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
From: France & UK
all done - 3548
VFR Transit is offline  
Reply
Old 8th January 2007 | 15:52
  #31 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
25 Anniversary
 
Joined: May 1999
Aviation Qualifications: ATP+Mil
Posts: 27,400
Likes: 857
From: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
"Sorry - it isn't a Prescott thing any more. It's now the Dept of Communities and Local Government under Ruth 'Boy' Kelly."


Hmm - I see what you mean, Lucy!
BEagle is offline  
Reply
Old 8th January 2007 | 19:02
  #32 (permalink)  
Intelligent Idiot
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
From: Cleethorpes, UK
Hmm, page not available, tried IE and Opera but no luck.
Bahn-Jeaux is offline  
Reply
Old 8th January 2007 | 20:33
  #33 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
25 Anniversary
 
Joined: May 1999
Aviation Qualifications: ATP+Mil
Posts: 27,400
Likes: 857
From: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Works OK right now - 3784 signatures as at 2132 GMT 8 Jan 07.
BEagle is offline  
Reply
Old 8th January 2007 | 20:38
  #34 (permalink)  
25 Anniversary
 
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,856
Likes: 75
From: uk
In response to me letter to my MP last February, the DPM's office wrote to assure him that the omission of the airfield exclusion was a mistake which would be rectified in the final version of the document.
I have now written to my MP again to ask him to object most strongly to being deceived by the DPM.

Last edited by pulse1; 8th January 2007 at 21:29.
pulse1 is offline  
Reply
Old 8th January 2007 | 21:01
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
From: UK
Hopefully,Ruth Kelly will have enough on her mind without worrying about airfields for now...

quote:
____________________________________________________________

Outcry as Kelly sends child to private school

FORMER Education Secretary Ruth Kelly was today named as the minister who had enrolled one of her children in an elite £15,0000-a-year private prep school.

The move, revealed yesterday, has outraged Labour MPs.
But until today the identity of Mrs Kelly - a Roman Catholic mother of four now in charge of English Local Government in the Cabinet, was unknown. Mrs Kelly has taken one of her children out of state education near her East London home and opted for a Home Counties private boarding school that makes a priority of helping pupils pass entrance exams to Eton and Harrow - two of England's top public schools.

Mrs Kelly decided there was inadequate help in local schools for the child who is understood to have reading and learning difficulties.
Her decision to take the controversial step has been strongly criticised by backbench MPs.

Norwich North's Ian Gibson said the move was "wrong" adding: "I deprecate anybody, any minister who chooses to do this."
ariel is offline  
Reply
Old 8th January 2007 | 21:14
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
From: Surrey, UK
I've signed up - from what I understand Redhill is in danger....
9238RJ98 is offline  
Reply
Old 8th January 2007 | 21:22
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
From: Not around here
Done, and the link forwarded to the other members of 'my' group.

C23
Cricket23 is offline  
Reply
Old 9th January 2007 | 17:52
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
From: Essex, UK
Added my bit!
Coke611 is offline  
Reply
Old 9th January 2007 | 21:58
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,434
Likes: 0
From: Scotland
All Done
Now can we send them all to Gruinard Island & re introduce the anthrax?
Crash one is offline  
Reply
Old 9th January 2007 | 22:33
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 537
Likes: 0
From: Northampton UK
Just signed; there are now 4453 signatures!

RC
rotorcraig is offline  
Reply


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.