No excuses for terrible experience at airport
WE had the misfortune to use Manchester Airport early on Saturday morning.
I know that the airport authority will use the excuse that it was ‘one of the busiest days of the year,’ but basically if it cannot handle the number of passengers then it shouldn’t take the flights.
It was greed overcoming public responsibility. Terminal One was a zoo, bluntly; hardly enough room to hold the people at 5am. The belts broke down, some of the baggage labelling terminals were out of action, and the staff, whether airport personnel or airline staff, looked desperate in their attempts to get things moving. People were upset, children were crying, some of the long queues were reminiscent of a rugby scrum.
We had checked in online but it took us one hour and 23 minutes to get to a working terminal to tag our bags, and then another half-hour to get to the point where we could put the bags on a belt.
The staff were running backwards and forwards unjamming cases from the belts which kept stopping and it was all against a cacophony of noise.
And then there was security. We had already been pulled out of line because the staff knew that some people would miss flights. In our case we were shunted down the fastrack lane, but then stopped because there were not enough trays to put bags and coats into; and then our hand-luggage was pulled out for a security check. Another half-hour lost.
We had arrived at the airport THREE hours before departure and had checked in online, yet by the time we got to our gate the flight was closed. A ground-staff member ran to the plane to ask the captain whether he would accept us. He did – and thoroughly shattered by the grotesque experience, we got off to Malaga. But one of our two bags didn’t make it.
The moral of the story is simple: Manchester Airport should not take the people if it cannot comfortably process them and equipment breakdown is their problem and should not be used as an excuse.
And we will use Liverpool in future. David Snook, Littleborough
Not excited by new plans
YOUR article (How huge investment is changing the face of Rochdale, M.E.N., February 8) omitted a couple of key points, especially in respect of the proposal to build 1,000 homes, along with a 2.2km link road to the M62 and even more warehousing sites.
All of the above is to be built on 125 hectares (309 acres) of green belt land, which to put into perspective equates to 187 full-sized football pitches and is 16 per cent of the total green belt in Heywood.
How can such a large scale development be considered given the impact on the environment and its residents in an already highly-polluted area in terms of air quality, which is next to the eight lanes of traffic now on the M62?
It would be nice to know why Rochdale council has been obsessed with developing on this green belt land for 10 years now, despite a similar proposal on 55 hectares of green belt being rejected by the Secretary of State around six years ago as the council was unable to justify such use of the land. So how can it succeed with a development more than twice the size? A concerned resident for more than 10 years (name and address supplied)
Sick of views on obesity
ONCE again Harry Singleton of Ashton-under-Lyne subjects us to one of his self-satisfied maunderings concerning obesity (Viewpoints, February 9). Mr Singleton writes that he is puzzled by the fact that his local representatives are failing to march against obesity.
I suggest that Mr Singleton, himself, should shame his MP and borough councillors into action, and give them a positive lead by standing outside Tameside General Hospital – with a suitable banner – which informs any obese workers of just how much they might cost the NHS. Any like-minded busybodies could join him.
For your information I have a body mass index of 23.7.
I have little doubt that Mr Singleton will soon appear in Viewpoints again, this time riding another of his favourite hobby horses – the importance of education, and how he overcame insuperable odds to become as self-absorbed as he now appears to be.
I have been a reader of the M.E.N. since 1947 when I enjoyed the antics of Fudge the Elf and when, probably, Mr Singleton would have been at letter Z in his well-worn copy of the Encyclopaedia Britannica. A Blockley, Stockport