Showing posts with label Ferrovial. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ferrovial. Show all posts

Thursday, July 16, 2009

Nobody wants Grotty Gatwick



Few, other than the Celtic Sage himself, are prepared to acknowledge that I have the gift of prophecy but my followers the evidence is mounting up! In October 2008 I wrote in relation to the appalling privatised monopoly British Airports Authority and Grotty Gatwick Airport the following Sage-like words;

“As for BAA thinking that Richard Branson will give them £1.8 Billion before they go bankrupt for the damaged goods called Gatwick, they must be deeply delusional. Branson won’t offer anything like that and will bring in somebody with him to share the risk, He will discount the income for he’ll have to rip out half the forgettable retail clutter to make the airport work well and ease the passenger’s journey to and from the plane (the PURPOSE of an airport; make a note BAA). However the chaos which is Gatwick shows why BAA does not understand the Airport business and why this smug privatised monopoly is lacking in the core skills to run ANY UK airport. The sooner Grupo Ferrovial and the Gang of Cash Cow Gringos it has bought in the UK with its junk bond status debt goes down the better for UK PLC. Their comes a stage when it is kinder for Old Beasts to be quietly and humanely put down to end their suffering and the upset of those who have to witness their sad and jerky movements.”

http://daithaic.blogspot.com/2008/10/grotty-gatwick.html

http://daithaic.blogspot.com/2008/12/grotty-gatwick-part-2.html


Well yea, yea and yea again verily it is coming to pass although the humanitarians amongst you may not witness the humane killing I predicted, indeed in the established Spanish tradition it may turn out to be a massacre – La Matanza! For Grupo Ferrovial (Spanish Brick Inc.) is wholly dependent on the Spanish building industry and the only thing building in Spain these days are ant hills which don’t require bricks or concrete! So Spanish Brick is in desperate straits and now it can’t even flog one of its Cash Cows as the market has collapsed!!

The future of Gatwick has turned from the uncertain to the farcical after the forced sale of London's second airport was derailed by news that no one wants to buy it. Gatwick has been put up for sale after the Competition Commission ruled that BAA's monopoly ownership of it, Heathrow and Stansted is giving consumers a raw deal. However, an auction process kicked off by BAA and its Spanish owner Ferrovial appears to have fallen apart with the withdrawal from the process of the Manchester Airport Group.



The Manchester Airport Group, which also owns East Midlands and Bournemouth airports and is owned by the 10 borough councils that form Greater Manchester, has reportedly walked away after refusing to match BAA's reserve price of £1.5 billion for Gatwick. Of the original three bidders in the auction that leaves the owners of London City airport, the investment fund Global Infrastructure Partners, a joint venture between General Electric of the US and Credit Suisse which in the UK also owns the Port of Great Yarmouth and the waste company Biffa. GIP, it is understood, is also refusing to match the £1.5 billion price tag.

The third bidder, a Citigroup-led consortium, quit the bidding process two months ago. Though industry insiders believe Manchester's withdrawal may yet be a tactic to get Gatwick to drop its price, the sale of the busiest single-runway airport in the world appears to be in limbo. BAA is, in any case, appealing the forced sale of the airport. The Competition Commission ruled it must dispose of Gatwick and Stansted and north of the border, where it also enjoys a regional monopoly, either Glasgow or Edinburgh airports.


German Railways - Achtung! coming to a station near you but not visa versa!

However, Ferrovial, the Spanish Brick Company which bought BAA as a cash cow to milk, also desperately needs the money from the proceeds of a Gatwick sale. The Spanish have a £12 billion BAA debt mountain, a hangover from the hugely-leveraged £15 billion takeover of the airports group and a refinancing of those borrowings has left it with a repayments schedule of £1 billion a year.

Has the passenger experience at Gatwick improved since I slated it? Well don’t take the Sage’s word for it here is a (fair) comment left on a UK paper today;

“Gatwick is a nightmare in the summertime. Needs millions and millions spent on it to make it easier to use. Queues at check-in desks merge with each other and stretch across into those on the opposite desks making it impossible to pass through. At the incoming end the people awaiting passengers spill into the incoming passenger way. The seats that were there for people waiting to meet people have been removed to force them into the coffee shop making it very difficult for people with any sort of handicap. The walkways to and from the aircraft are far too long and not mechanised. And the queues through the security checks merge with check in and pass through traffic. About the only improvement is the car park, but even here the two park ticket machines are not adequate to clear the back up of passengers arriving to them.”


National Rail Awards - Spot the customer?

And here is the lie of the great Thatcher privatisations. Other than selling assets which we all owned at a great discount (putting up taxes for the future) there is a compelling competitive argument against creating privatised monopolies into a world where for all the pious guff about “regulation” nobody stands up for the customer. So BAA can impose its abysmal service and high charges on us, Thames Water owned by a near bankrupt German utility operator can impose above inflation charges, waste a huge amount of water whilst laughing at the derisory fines for poor customer service from the wishy, washy water regulator. On the railways the banks who bought the rolling stock companies can realise 10 times their investment in 20 months and then have the brass neck to sponsor “National Rail Awards”, an orgy of mutual industry backslapping where no customers appear to spoil the show. DBAHN, the German State Railway (and the successor of the company which ran the trains to Auschwitz and Treblinka to facilitate war crimes and genocide) can buy Chiltern Railways, EWS Freight and Wrexham and Staffordshire whilst no British company can invest in German Railways or Utilities, probably because Germany (like France) appreciates the efficiency of National Networks or indeed State Sponsored banks and a proper Post Office / Bank.


Richard Bowker - I'm off to sell railways to the Arabs!

And National Express under the incredibly self serving and self promoting Richard Bowker can walk away from the East Coast Mainline which it took over using a Special Investment Vehicle (SIV) after it took over from GNER’s SIV registered in Bermuda after they bid too much for the franchise to the Strategic Rail Authority whose head at the time was one Richard Bowker! Am I missing something here or am I just too simple a Sage?


Baroness Shriek - 46, single, poor social skills, beloved of Gordon, never run anything practical, first rate mind!

So the Great British Taxpayer will not just be impoverished for years to come by paying for monopoly profits, incontinent Bankers with short memories but also for the good work of Shriti Vadera and the other “First Rate Minds” who have ensured that Britain will be paying a premium for privatisation for years to come. Or to put it another way we will be paying money for nothing and have the economy dragged down because of Treasury Geniuses who have never even run a lemonade stall. Against this dismal perspective the fact we won’t have to deal with BAA / Spanish Brick and their abusive monopoly is only a small grain of comfort!

Thursday, January 8, 2009

TaraWatch makes Complaint against Ireland to UN High Commissioner for Human Rights



Irish Mail on Sunday - Sunday, 2 January 2009


TAX-PAYERS face paying hundreds of millions of Euros if a series of new challenges against the M3 motorway succeed, campaigners warned last night. Lawyers representing anti-M3 protesters trying to save the Hill of Tara from the motorway have lodged a complaint with the United Nations against the Irish government. This has been lodged with the UN’s Commission on Human Rights on the grounds that construction of the motorway through such an historic site breaches both the Irish people’s right to enjoy their culture and live in a healthy environment. Such tactic has proved successful in the past, for example in 1980s in cases taken against the Australian government over inappropriate development of sacred cultural sites.

The UN approach is being backed by writer Seamus Heaney and artists Jim Fitzpatrick and Louis Le Brocquy, who have both donated paintings to be auctioned off to raise funds.

TaraWatch lawyers are also to challenge M3 contractor Ferrovial’s involvement in the UN Global Compact (UGC) - the ethical practices charter the company signed up to in early 2000. A similar challenge took place in 2007, when a Ferrovial motorway-building project through an EU Special Protection Area was halted after an EU Court of Justice challenge. The Spanish-based construction company is one of 5,000 firms and organizations from over 130 countries worldwide who have committed themselves to ten UGC principles. These cover good corporate practice, human rights, the environment and anti-corruption. Ferrovial has described its commitment to the UGC principles as being ‘one of the pillars of its corporate responsibility policy.’

All of the challenges under way by TaraWatch’s legal team - which includes legal experts from Trinity College Dublin and the Human Rights Centre at NUI Galway - have previously proved successful in legal challenges to the development of other historic sites around the world. They are the latest in a series of moves by protesters against the controversial €800m motorway that cuts through the Hill of Tara, which runs between Navan and Dunshaughlin, in Co Meath. Last March one of the protests saw Lisa ‘Squeak’ Feeney chain herself to an underground tunnel in a bid to stop work on a section of the M3 at Rath Lugh. Other celebrities to lend their opposition have included actor Stuart Townsend and his wife Charlize Theron, and Tudors star Jonathan Rhys Meyers.



TaraWatch Lawyer Vincent Salafia said last night: ‘This new series of legal challenges stand a very realistic chance of success, especially as this approach has worked elsewhere before. ‘It’s not too late for the government to get the M3 re-routed, and at a relatively low extra cost. ‘But if it perseveres, and Tara gets World Heritage Status, it’s tax payers who are going to end up having to cover the extra costs involved in a future re-routing. ‘In the UK, the estimated cost of re-routing a road at Stonehenge hit more than €500m.’

Another strand of TaraWatch’s bid to save the Hill of Tara is to get it listed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site. They are urging everybody to write to the Environment Minister Gormley and to ask that Tara be listed. Salafia said last night: ‘The Hill of Tara complex qualifies for World Heritage status as a natural and cultural landscape of outstanding universal value, due to its unique cultural significance, and the extent of the surviving remains. ‘Tara covers a much larger area than that the 100 acres of State-owned land on the summit of the Hill, and the M3 passes through the middle of the area to be protected.’

If the Hill of Tara is listed, then the M3 could have to be re-routed around the site – something that the UK government has had to spend millions trying to achieve. It is currently facing censured by UNESCO for its failure to relieve traffic congestion at the site. The UN’s cultural body warned the UK government it would have to sort the problem – caused by holiday traffic – when it awarded Stonehenge World Heritage Status in 1986. A road passes just 150 yards from the stones and plans to solve congestion with a dual carriageway in a tunnel were recently scrapped by the UK government because of the estimated €500m cost. However, the government’s failure to comply with UNESCO’s warnings more than 22 years ago have already cost of €30m in failed road development surveys and it faces having Stonehenge taken off the list of World Heritage Sites, which will cost the country in terms of prestige and tourism revenue.

The Irish government faces a similar problem if the Hill of Tara – which is on the World Monuments Fund’s latest List of 100 Most Endangered Sites - gets World Heritage Status. Ireland signed up to the World Heritage Convention in 1991, and in doing so, committed itself to protecting and conserving national and international world heritage sites. It also undertook to maintain a Tentative List of potential sites for World Heritage Site nomination, and to nominate national heritage sites on this list to the World Heritage Committee for World Heritage listing. The last time it produced such a list was in 1992.

The Hill of Tara, which is considered the ceremonial and mythical capital of Ireland, is the centrepiece of a large archaeological landscape with hundreds of significant sites. It is said to be the location of St. Patrick’s conversion of the Irish to Christianity in the early fifth century. It is also the coronation site of Irish kings between the sixth and twelfth centuries.

For more information please email info@tarawatch.org

http://www.savetarapetition.net

Thursday, December 18, 2008

Grotty Gatwick - Part 2



Well, as the Celtic Sage has predicted the abysmal airport operator BAA is being forced to sell part of its privatised monopoly of the British airport industry. The Competition Commission has said it will require BAA to sell Gatwick, Stansted and Edinburgh airports. The decision is subject to a final consultation, with the final decision due in February or March. There are substantial reasons why the regulators, and more importantly, the travelling public are unhappy with BAA – a cash cow subsidiary of the troubled Spanish Brick manufacturer, Grupo Ferrovial which also owns Amey plc, a British contractor and major investor in Tube Lines, one of the London Underground infrastructure companies.

BAA has controlled Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted airports for more than 40 years and has owned Edinburgh and Glasgow airports since the early 1970s. The Competition Commission is concerned about a lack of competition between airports in the south-east of England and central Scotland, and says BAA's common ownership of airports there is largely to blame. It believes this has contributed to a poor level of service to passengers and airlines as it reduces incentives for improvements.

BAA has already put Gatwick up for sale with an estimated price tag of £1.8bn (€1.94bn), but it had hoped that by doing so it would be able to keep Stansted, where Ryanair is the biggest customer. The two airports will have to be sold to different buyers under the Competition Commission's ruling, a move that will please Michael O'Leary.

Chairman of the enquiry into ownership of the airports, Christopher Clarke, said that under separate ownership, the new operators of Gatwick, Stansted and Edinburgh airports will have "much greater incentive to be far more responsive to their customers, both airlines and passengers". BAA handles 91pc of passengers in south-east England, where overcrowding and the chaotic opening of Terminal 5 at Heathrow led lawmakers and airlines to demand the company's break-up. The Competition Commission said it's also planning measures to require more investment at the London airports and will make recommendations on a new system of regulation.

BAA, it says, has been slow to develop new routes at some airports and has been sluggish in its approach to investing in new terminals and pushing for extra runways. It contrasts this with the performance of other airports, such as Manchester and London City, which it says have been more responsive to customers' needs and have managed to both expand and have lower charges.



Despite this summer's outcry about airport standards BAA airports are still continuing to treat travellers with such disdain. The airports have a 27-point list of performance standards they are supposed to uphold for airlines but BAA has had the audacity to ask for this set of standards to be put on hold for the opening of Terminal 5. With that lack of accountability passengers are going to be left completely in the lurch.

But now it turns out that, as I predicted in October, Gatwick is worth nothing like the figures quoted and BAA is touting the possibility of selling it with a go ahead for a second runway despite entering into a binding agreement with Sussex County Council not seek to construct a second runway for 40 years. As I said then;

“As for BAA thinking that Richard Branson will give them £1.8 Bn before they go bankrupt for the damaged goods called Gatwick, they must be deeply delusional. Branson won’t offer anything like that and will bring in somebody with him to share the risk, He will discount the income for he’ll have to rip out half the forgettable retail clutter to make the airport work well and ease the passenger’s journey to and from the plane (the PURPOSE of an airport; make a note BAA). However the chaos which is Gatwick shows why BAA does not understand the Airport business and why this smug privatised monopoly is lacking in the core skills to run ANY UK airport. The sooner Grupo Ferrovial and the Gang of Cash Cow Gringos it has bought in the UK with its junk bond status debt goes down the better for UK PLC. Their comes a stage when it is kinder for Old Beasts to be quietly and humanely put down to end their suffering and the upset of those who have to witness their sad and jerky movements.”

http://daithaic.blogspot.com/2008/10/grotty-gatwick.html

BAA, which is now trying to sell the airport in Sussex, has sent confidential documents to potential buyers including one headed "Gatwick builds a second runway”. The revelation is likely to reignite the debate over whether Stansted, Gatwick or Heathrow should be the first to have another runway.



The Competition Commission, which in effect pushed BAA into selling Gatwick, has said that the Government should not be too restrictive and should consider "the ambitions of the new owner of Gatwick airport, including the possibility of a second runway after 2019". BAA signed a deal with West Sussex County Council in 1979 promising not to construct another runway for four decades. However, at least one bidder - German firm Hochtief AirPort - is said to want to re-open negotiations to start work on a second runway before 2019.

A third runway at Heathrow, if given the go-ahead, is not expected to become operational before 2020 at the earliest. Developing Gatwick instead is likely to affect fewer residents and to have less of a pollution impact. Around 26,000 more residents would suffer aircraft noise above 54 decibels, according to experts, compared with 118,000 under the Heathrow expansion blueprint.

The package BAA is sending to bidders for Gatwick includes a map with a second runway around two thirds of a mile south of the existing one and just 400 metres from residential areas of Crawley. It also explains how Gatwick's capacity could be expanded from 45 million passengers a year to 80 million, compared with the 67 million who used Heathrow last year. Other organisations interested in buying Gatwick - the second largest in the country - include the Manchester Airports Group, the German airports firm Fraport, Vancouver Airports Authority and US pension funds.

The Competition Commission does not go far enough and BAA should be broken up in its entirety. It is a virtual monopoly created to fatten up the airports when Thatcher’s government sold them off and the taxpayers of Britain have been cheated on two counts – In the assets being sold at an undervalue as part of the great privatisation rip off and then in the subsequent years when airport users have paid a premium price for an inferior service as BAA turned the airports into tacky and unwanted shopping malls before flogging the lot at a ridiculous valuation to the Spanish Brick company. Now that the game is up they in their desperation are shown to have deliberately lied that approving terminal 5 at Heathrow would not lead to a demand for a third runway. Similarly the sell offs of Gatwick and Stanstead will only make sense for BAA if they build second runways at both airports.



Either credit crunched BAA should be taken back into the Public Sector so the airports can be run in the public interest or they should be sold off (with the increased value from extra runways going to the taxpayer) to people who have expertise and a feel for the business and who realise that the primary purpose of an airport is transport not a wonderful “shopping and dining” experience. Good riddance to bad rubbish I say, good riddance to BAA and its well paid army of oily lobbyists and slick PR wallahs!

Friday, October 31, 2008

Grotty Gatwick


Gatwick South Terminal



The UK's second-largest airport, Gatwick, has been put up for sale by its owner BAA. The move comes four weeks after the Competition Commission said BAA may have to sell three of its UK airports because of market dominance concerns. Several firms are said to be interested in buying Gatwick, which has been valued at £1.8bn by regulators. The Airport unit of Spanish builder Grupo Ferrovial provides a poor service and has failed to plan for extra capacity, the UK Competition Commission said, recommending it be stripped of London's Gatwick and Stansted airports and either Glasgow or Edinburgh in Scotland. On top of this BAA has been again fined for the poor service at Gatwick, a total of £3.26 million for consistently failing to meet standards for cleanliness, directions, seating and pier services.

"Despite this performance improvement, acceptable standards have not yet been achieved," the CAA said.

Potential bidders for Gatwick include Australian company Macquarie, Germany's Fraport, and the owners of Manchester airport. Virgin Atlantic said it would also be interested in bidding as part of a consortium. "We are delighted that BAA has ended the uncertainty over Gatwick's future," said Steve Ridgway, Virgin Atlantic chief executive. "Virgin Atlantic would relish the opportunity to bid for Gatwick as part of a consortium and inject our customer service expertise into any future running of the airport."


However there were misgivings at the Unite trade union, whose national officer, Steve Turner, said: "It simply beggars belief that a 'For Sale' sign can be hung across the country's second largest airport. "Gatwick is a core component of the national infrastructure and an essential part of the UK's aviation sector, yet it is to be flogged off with little care for the wider social impact." In a statement, BAA said it had decided to begin the process of selling Gatwick "immediately". The Civil Aviation Authority has just increased the amount Gatwick - where 35 million passengers passed through in 2007 - can charge in landing fees. But it is operating on one runway and approaching full capacity.

Budget airline Easyjet said Gatwick was a "local monopoly" and called on any reform of airport regulation to "put the needs of customers first". And sector rival Ryanair said: "This morning's announcement... is just the latest attempt by the BAA monopoly to get itself off the hook of the Competition Commission's recommendations."

London Gatwick airport is the UK's second largest airport and the world's tenth busiest international airport, carrying more than 35 million passengers each year. In 1931 what is now known as London Gatwick airport was a private airfield owned by Home Counties Aviation Services. Serious development was later carried out and the first terminal, together with taxiways and aprons, was opened in 1936. Passengers arriving by train could walk into the airport through subways and covered walkways.


Gatwick's 1930 Terminal - Art Deco and the "round" terminal design to maximise aircraft parking space which has been copied the world over

During the war Gatwick, which was used as a Royal Air Force base, expanded further by acquiring a local racecourse. However, when it was returned to civil use in 1946, it was still basically a grass airfield. In 1953 the Government decreed Gatwick as London's second airport. The old airport was closed for major redevelopment. When it officially reopened three years later, Gatwick had been transformed into a modern facility with a 2000 feet runway, a terminal incorporating a rail station and a covered pier linking terminal with aircraft, the first of its kind in the UK.

Charter traffic became big business in the 1980's with more than a million passengers then using Gatwick. The terminal was extended and two more piers built. Gatwick still ranked only fourth busiest among UK airports but British United Airways, then the main operator, was steadily introducing scheduled services. In 1978London Gatwick Airport became a transatlantic gateway. By the time Delta, Braniff and British Caledonian started up their routes to the USA; Gatwick had already extended its runway to handle the long haul jets and further improved the terminal. Passenger traffic hit the 10 million mark in the 1990's and continued to grow at a phenomenal rate, reaching over 35 million in 2007. The South and North Terminals opened as Gatwick established itself as Britain's second busiest airport and an international player. Gatwick is anxious to build a second runway to meet growing demand, but there is strong opposition from local residents and environmentalists.

BAA is to airports what Coca-Cola is to the soft drinks industry: it pretty much owns the lot. All the big airports such as Gatwick, Heathrow, Stansted, Manchester, Glasgow, Aberdeen and more, are owned by the giant firm. However, things might all be about to change and the disastrous year that the aviation industry has had in the UK might be about to knock the school bully off his perch. The muscle that BAA yields promoted an investigation from the Competition Commission, which concluded that such a monopoly on the industry was not healthy and that it might be forced to sell off some of its airports.



Financial pundits from investment houses and other rarefied places speculate as to whether the owner of 7 of the UK's airports has any chance of sorting out its debts. Ferrovial took on £10 billion worth of debt to buy BAA last year, and now those money turkeys are coming home to roost. Going cap in hand to its shareholders raised £500 million but even that can't save the ailing company. Now hacks are speculating that if BAA cannot sort its finances out in the next two months, bondholders will be able to take their £3 billion investment back, potentially bankrupting the company. These Bondholders are worried as Grupo Ferrovial’s debt has been downgraded to junk bond status by Standard and Poors, so not much comfort there!



The airport is split into two terminals, North and South. South Terminal is the larger one, and holds the train station and majority of the shops, including Gatwick Village shopping arcade with practical shops such as Boots (UK pharmacy chain like Guardian) and W H Smith (general store selling books, newspapers, sandwiches, drinks etc.). This is accessible before heading through to departures. The entrances are beyond the check-in desks. Also, there is a sky train linking the two terminals 24/7, and the terminals are quite close together, unlike Heathrow T4, so it's perfectly possible to catch a bus or train to South, even if you fly from North. Most, if not all National Express bus services that serve the airport call at both terminals anyway.

Once upon a time, Gatwick Airport was modern. Now it is looking very tired and dated. Most European capitals have modern airports, but at this airport there are only the shops and bland sandwich bars that are up-to-date. The arrivals/baggage collection area is antiquated and due for a makeover. The car parking is very expensive, and you should always factor this in to any air fare, as it may cost more than the flight! The toilets are poorly ventilated, and they are smelly, and are only basically cleaned. The owner (BAA) seems to give priority to shopping, and often basic infrastructure, i.e. walkways, lifts and the small shuttle are out of order!


Southern and Gatwick_Express Trains at Victoria

But first you have to get to Gatwick and this can seriously dent your perspective of your bargain flight. As already noted car parking can be seriously expensive with Short Stay Parking at the Terminal being £20.90 a day and Long Stay being £9.00 a day for the first 6 days. Gatwick does have a dedicated train service in the Gatwick Express which is well and separately run and uses dedicated modern rolling stock, a sharp contrast to the alleged Stansted Express which has 20 year old clapped out commuter stock and whose title alone should be grounds for prosecution under the Trade descriptions Act. The Gatwick Express leaves every 15 minutes (During weekdays) from Platforms 13/14 at London Victoria station and takes 30 minutes to Gatwick. It also runs (normally hourly) through the night so it can both get you home from a late flight and out to an early flight unlike the Stansted Express which can do neither. That is the good news; the bad news is that it is eye wateringly expensive for a 30 minute train journey. A single First Class Ticket will cost £25.60, almost £1 per minute. What do you get other than a generous seat in a somewhat utilitarian interior for this? Well last time the trolley came around while we were still in Victoria. “Coffee or Tea, Sir” said the smartly attired attendant. Well I thought al least you are getting something for the inflated ticket price. “Coffee, I replied.” “Thank you sir that will be £2.20.” So that is the value added perception for the expensive fare, you get absolutely nothing with it! And if I had wanted biscuits that would have been 80p extra! There are cheaper alternatives using Thameslink (which goes from Bedford to Brighton via Luton thru' Eurostar at Kings X / St Pancras and Luton) and Southern Trains stopping service from Victoria which takes 45 minutes.



Getting to the airport disabled access from the platforms to the airport is good with lifts serving all platforms and step free access into the terminal. However from here on in the airport does not live up to the somewhat corny slogan used by BAA “Getting your journey off to a flying start.” Firstly what was the gateway to the Departure area is no longer used and a gaggle of annoyingly named PSA’s (Passenger Service Assistants) direct you into a somewhat awkward chicane nearby. Here you are kept in a slow moving queue for no other reason than they take a digital photo which is electronically matched to your boarding card. This is again checked when you board at the gate resulting in longer queues in both places. Is this a Government security requirement? Well no actually the only reason for doing this and delaying customers (not to mention intruding on their privacy) is to allow BAA to mix domestic and international passengers in the terminals giving them more shopping “opportunities”, just what passengers say they always want at airports?

Then instead of going on the flat you have to go upstairs on an escalator to a cramped security area. If you are mobility impaired (i.e. 10% of the population) you have to ask and you are directed to another area which is something of a walk but hey-ho, disabled people just love walking!



The security area is basic with no assistance offered to disabled people, no solid chairs with armrests for older people to sit in and, more importantly, get out of. Passengers are being asked to take off socks but no covers are being offered and of course there is no way to sanitise a carpeted surface. Lucky for BAA most of these infections will be apparent when the self loading cargo are abroad. Still, it makes you wonder why local councils employ Environmental Health Officers when such a blind eye is turned to lack of basic hygiene. How does the CAA continue to licence transport facilities which continue to laugh in the face of Phase 3 of the Disability Discrimination Act 1998? Does the CAA feel no moral obligation to ensure the law of the land is respected and disabled and older people are treated with respect? What is the paradigm here “let the wobbly people sue us?” The area is crowded, queues are long and there is the usual chaos associated with the scarcely trained minimum wage staff employed by ICTS whose disgraceful lack of standards at Birmingham Airport were exposed by the BBC’s Panorama programme.

Recently BAA have come under fire from a senior Labour MP who took a seven-inch knife on to a plane at Gatwick. Former health minister Gisela Stuart told a Commons debate on the airport that she mistakenly had the knife in her hand luggage when she went on holiday to Corsica on 3 August 2008. Ms Stuart discovered the knife with a three-inch blade on arrival and asked her office manager in Birmingham to get in touch with Gatwick to tell them of the security breach. The MP for Birmingham Edgbaston was told on 22 August that security staff were being retrained. Ms Stuart also highlighted the report that EU inspectors smuggled replica bomb components past security at Gatwick this year and doubts whether security at the Sussex airport has been adequately improved.



The Daily Mail Newspaper reported the week after I went through this “security” shambles;

“Replica bombs were smuggled into Britain's second busiest airport inside hand luggage during a safety inspection, it has been claimed. Gatwick Airport staff apparently failed to recognise the artificial explosives even though a bag containing one device was allegedly identified as suspicious by an X-ray scanner but returned to its owner after the guards did not realise what it was. The alleged breaches occurred during a European Commission inspection this month.” – Daily Mail, 19 October 2008.

So reassured we then enter airside and the reason for the awkward arrangements became obvious for you emerge into the enlarged Food Court built on top of Gatwick South’s shopping area. You have no less than 14 catering outlets but this is Clone Town Britain on steroids, there is no shape or form, or indeed any attempt at design or theme to the catering area. What you have is a large shed with a hole in the middle for escalators and around it wall to wall shop fronts and signage of chain catering, bar and fast food outlets. It is not relaxing as so little area is devoted to seating or general circulation and the constant din of bad music played through bad speakers. There is no possibility of escaping from this as each outlet has the same nonsensical piped music playing inside. An insight into how the shed engineer (I can’t believe there was an architect involved) has thought about having a sense of enclosure, quiet areas and an opportunity to relax before your flights can be gained from noting that the only (crowded) seating area is in front of the fruit machines and games area so you have continuous noise, pings and kerrangs from the machines.


Gatwick Airport Security Lines

Then the self loading cargo, who had to go upstairs to security, now have to go downstairs to the crowded and chaotic “shopping opportunity” area for the gates are on this level. You go through “holes in the wall” to the gates through drab corridors. Here you see broken lights, bad signage, stained carpets, grubby walls, closed loos and out of order travelators before you arrive at your gate. Instead of being roomy and open plan this is dingy and enclosed because, wait for it, they have to check your photo against your boarding card. This takes three people but hey ho you are paying for it and the retail wallahs who run the Grupo Ferrovial debt servicing operation known as BAA feel these awkward arrangements and lack of straight lines for customers who, let's face it, just want to catch a plane, are worth it to increase “footfall” and passenger “dwell time” to “maximise” the value of its “retail estate.” Indeed! There only approach to airport design and management is, if there is a spare space stuff something retail into it!


The Gatwick ambience!

So there you are 180 people waiting in an area with 40 seats and I feel like getting a cold drink at non-Ryanair prices to bring onto the plane. I needn’t have bothered for in an uncanny reflection of the Airport the only vending machine in our passenger holding pen is out of order. Then it is time for the self loading cargo to shuffle with defeated resignation down the stairs (yah, boo sucks to the wobbly people the lift was not working and no assistance was offered) where they are then held for 5 minutes before shuffling resignedly onto the plane. Take off never seemed so good for we were leaving Gatwick behind in the conviction that anywhere else must be an improvement.

Thankfully I didn’t need to re-enter Britain through the shabby Gatwick Gateway. Dublin Airport was a wonderful contrast, bright and modern with good, well trained and polite security and a real sense of place which said Ireland is proud of its capital city and its airport is proud to give a positive impression to visitors. The shopping and catering is excellent and showcases the country, as it should in any major airport. Even coming in through utilitarian Luton was excellent. The airport contrasts with Gatwick in beeing clean, bright and with logical circulation patterns and it took me all of 5 minutes to walk off the plane and into the public area of Luton.

As for BAA thinking that Richard Branson will give them £1.8 Bn before they go bankrupt for the damaged goods called Gatwick, they must be deeply delusional. Branson won’t offer anything like that and will bring in somebody with him to share the risk, He will discount the income for he’ll have to rip out half the forgettable retail clutter to make the airport work well and ease the passenger’s journey to and from the plane (the PURPOSE of an airport; make a note BAA). However the chaos which is Gatwick shows why BAA does not understand the Airport business and why this smug privatised monopoly is lacking in the core skills to run ANY UK airport. The sooner Grupo Ferrovial and the Gang of Cash Cow Gringos it has bought in the UK with its junk bond status debt goes down the better for UK PLC. Their comes a stage when it is kinder for Old Beasts to be quietly and humanely put down to end their suffering and the upset of those who have to witness their sad and jerky movements.

Tuesday, June 3, 2008

Heathrow achieves International Recognition.


Giovanni Bisignani

It is not just the Celtic Sage who condemns Heathrow Airport and the cartels which make it an expensive horror story for its abused users but it has now achieved wider recognition. Heathrow Airport has now been described as “a national embarrassment” by the head of the International Air Transport Association (IATA). And the Civil Aviation Authority - the watchdog designed to keep a check on Britain's airports - was named and shamed as “the world's worst regulator”. The criticism comes at a bad time for the indebted Spanish brick company Ferrovial which owns airport operator BAA, which could soon be forced to sell one of its three London airports as the Government looks to break its monopoly. BAA currently runs seven UK airports.

Yesterday's criticism of Heathrow - Europe's busiest airport - and the CAA was made by Giovanni Bisignani, head of the IATA at its annual conference in Istanbul. IATA represents the interests of more than 240 airlines worldwide. Giovanni Bisignani says service levels at Heathrow are a “national embarrassment” Mr Bisignani's comments come with UK airport and aviation bosses still dealing with the fallout from the shambolic opening of Heathrow's £4.3 billion Terminal 5.

He told the conference: “This year's Worst Regulator Award goes to the UK Civil Aviation Authority. Look at Heathrow; service levels are a national embarrassment but still the CAA increased charges by 50 per cent over the last five years and plans 86 per cent for the next five. Could anyone in this room ask for a fare increase of 86 per cent? Nobody. That only happens in "Monopoly-land".'

The CAA said it “agrees that passengers and airlines deserve better service than BAA has provided” and was beefing up penalties as an incentive for it to improve. BAA said it was “committed to improving services for passengers”. Last month BA boss Willie Walsh told MPs that the opening of Terminal 5 had been “a disaster” but said the airport had been “a national embarrassment for years”.

Britain's World Class Airport

The Celtic Sage particularly echoes the criticism of the Civil Aviation Authority and its totally useless “consumer” organisation ATUC – the so called “Air Traffic Users Council.” ( http://daithaic.blogspot.com/2008/04/up-up-and-away-with-baa-no-2.html ) which has been totally ineffective in enforcing EU Law No. 261 on Air Passenger Rights and in particular the rights of Disabled Passengers who are treated in a discreditable manner by most Airports and many airlines. This is something the Celtic Sage will return to in more righteous detail but in the meantime the farcical situation of the ineffectual CAA which has a close symbiotic relationship with the aviation industry pretending to protect the abused consumers of British Airports including the internationally recognised Heathrow Sinkpit must stop and an independent and effective consumer protection body be set up to act as the National Enforcement Body for EU Law 261.

Meanwhile take a bow Spanish Brick Company, BAA and Heathrow Airport on IATA’s World Class recognition of your efforts! It will take more than Tony Blair’s former spin doctor, Tom Kelly, who is now BAA’s Head of Public Affairs to spin them out of this one!

Thursday, May 29, 2008

Save the St. Reatham One!


The St. Reatham One - 29 May 2008

The Celtic Sage has long cast a cold eye on the abusive behaviour of British Airways (BA) and the so called British Airports Authority (BAA) to the cattle (their expression is “self loading cargo”) who have to use their quasi monopolies which have been protected from full competition by cartel behaviour of various sorts. BAA is actually a front for a Spanish brick company called Ferrovial who overpaid with nearly £1 Bn of borrowed money for what it thought was a Cash Cow to find out it neither had the management skills or resources to husband it properly and this Cow would leave messy cow pats everywhere, particularly at the inept opening of Terminal 5 where the feisty Streatham One was caught up in the opening chaos. (http://daithaic.blogspot.com/2008/03/up-up-and-away-with-baa.html )
BAA has a dominant monopoly on airport capacity in the south of England and British Airways has a dominant position on slots from Heathrow which allows it to charge 30% more for an equivalent Business Class flight to New York than is available from Paris or Amsterdam. Yup, neither BA nor BAA need lessons in how to abuse customers or screw excess profits out of their cartels.

So the Celtic Sage is totally unsurprised at the behaviour of the Plods as the day after BAA reported its first quarterly loss and on the day British Airways announced increased fuel surcharges and that the rest of its flights won’t move to Terminal Five until October (thereby blocking its competitors from moving into Terminal 4) Supermodel Naomi Campbell was today charged with five offences over an alleged air rage incident at Heathrow. The charges, which include three offences of assaulting police, follow an incident last month when she was removed from a flight for Los Angeles after an alleged row over lost luggage.
(http://daithaic.blogspot.com/2008/04/up-up-and-away-with-baa-no-2.html )

In fact British Airways and BAA were so bad that they have succeeded in generating sympathy for Naomi “Anger Management” Campbell who was led off one of their planes by Police called by BA staff after she paid £6,000 for a First Class fare to Los Angeles and BA lost one of her bags which contained an outfit for a memorial service she was attending.

The alleged incident occurred on a BA flight which was due to leave for Los Angeles from Terminal 5 on 3 April. Ms Campbell will appear at Uxbridge Magistrates' Court on 20 June, the Crown Prosecution Service said. Her lawyer, Simon Nicholls said she was "bitterly disappointed" to learn she will be prosecuted. He told reporters: "She respects that decision and she hopes this matter is dealt with expeditiously."

The British Airways "First Experience" 3 April 2008

The CPS said Ms Campbell has been charged with three counts of assaulting a constable, which carries a maximum sentence of six months in prison and a fine of up to £5,000. She also faces one count of disorderly conduct likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress, which is punishable by a fine of up to £2,500, and two counts of using threatening, abusive words or behaviour towards cabin crew, which comes with a maximum penalty of £1,000.

Moments later, the Crown Prosecution Service formally announced the charges in a statement, saying: "The CPS has authorised the Metropolitan Police to charge Naomi Campbell with five offences in relation to incidents that occurred on a stationary aircraft and within Terminal 5 at Heathrow Airport, London, on 3 April 2008. "Ms Campbell has today been charged with three offences of assaulting a constable, one offence of disorderly conduct likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress and one offence of using threatening, abusive words or behaviour to cabin crew. "These are summary offences which can only be tried at a magistrates' court."

The alleged incident occurred after the supermodel was told by staff in the first-class cabin that one her bags had been lost. They told her that she would have to leave the flight, causing Campbell to allegedly respond with an angry tirade which led to police being called. Reports claimed she had yelled "a***holes. You are all a***holes" at police and described BA staff as "bloody fools" as she allegedly lashed out verbally and physically. Female staff reportedly collapsed in tears as the incident escalated. After armed officers arrived, she was eventually taken off the plane in handcuffs. Although there has been no official confirmation, BA is understood to have imposed a lifetime ban on Campbell.

Well there are two issues hear where you may feel we should be supporting the Streatham One as an unlikely martyr figure for passenger rights and protection of passengers from an expensive publicly funded Constabulary (You know the one you don’t see on the streets, who don’t respond to burglaries, who replaced Police Stations with call centres, etc;) which has abandoned its statutory independence to become attack dogs for an abusive Transport Industry.

1. Why did the Police (armed officers no less) feel they had to become involved in a civil dispute between a customer who paid £6,000 for a service and an inept airline which failed abysmally to deliver the promised service to Naomi Campbell. Now Naomi is feisty and the Celtic Sage is aware of her reputation with Irish lads (take a bow Adam Clayton from U2!) but did she really put burly armed Constables in flak jackets waving handcuffs and pepper sprays in fear? And exactly who was being harassed having paid a premium rate to get to Los Angeles for a memorial service (Note; generally, people are only buried / cremated once) to be told by the airline that SHE would have to leave the plane because THEY had lost a bag (Indeed they lost thousands of bags) SHE had entrusted to THEM for safe keeping!

We wuz scared, Your Honour!

Why do the Police feel able to use draconian security legislation applying to airports to intimidate passengers who simply want to go from A to B?

2. Why are ALL airline customers at such a disadvantage when airlines use unfair contract terms to ignore the clear contract to get them and their luggage from A to B. Here is what BA’s website promises all who pay through the nose for their “First Experience.”

• Effortless travel
• A queue-less, personalised and stress free environment to check in your baggage
• Choice and control
• “Your secluded “demi-cabin” guarantees space and privacy
• Continue relaxing within our arrivals lounge
• Our specially trained First crew will provide you with a discreet yet attentive service, ensuring that all your personal needs are taken care of.

Well you couldn’t make it up could you; you don’t need to be a Naomi Campbell to feel harassed at the gap between the marketing guff and the reality. Perhaps the St. Reatham One should consider suing British Airways for what the law terms “unjust enrichment” by promising a service it clearly was in no position to deliver. Just as she won a legal precedent against the media over privacy maybe she can now establish another legal precedent;that merely by buying an airline ticket and entering an airport we do not agree to abandon our Civil Rights and our Consumer Rights. It is worth noting that since Naomi was harassed and abused on the 3rd April 2008 the MD of Heathrow Airport and the two British Airways Directors most closely involved in the T5 Fiasco have been sacked and BA have confirmed tha 19,000 bags have been lost permanently. Strangely, the only person arrested as a result of the fiasco has neen Naomi Campbell. Surely it can't be a case of the PLODs and the Crown Prosecution Service translating the "Public Interest" into desperately seeking publicity? This is much of what passes for Policing and the Justice System in the UK today; High Visibility; Zero Substance.

And as for the Court appearance I look forward to the evidence of a lardy armed copper in flak jacket “Well your honour, I looked at this tall, unarmed, Jamaican IC3 with a loud voice, funny accent, threatening big hair and larger than average lips and I immediately felt apprehensive for my safety. I have been off sick with diagnosed Post Naomi Stress Syndrome (PNSS) ever since and have taken to beating my wife more than normal and messing up my overtime claim.” Hopefully Lenny Henry will be in court gathering material for his next sketch! It's an opportunity too good to miss Lenny!

All together now, FREE THE ST. REATHAM ONE!!

Sunday, March 16, 2008

Up, up and away with BAA?


Last Friday 14th March 2007 when BAA opened Terminal 5 at Heathrow should have been a day of celebration for the company but on the same day a committee of MPs has called for the break-up of BAA, saying that its dominance has proved stifling for competition. BAA, owned by the Spanish brick company Ferrovial, runs London's Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted airports, Glasgow, Edinburgh, Aberdeen and Southampton.

MPs said BAA's dominance is "bad for passengers" and the aviation industry. BAA said a break-up would only delay "the provision of extra runway and terminal capacity". However the MP’s committee has stated "BAA's monopoly position in the UK airports sector is unnecessary. Indeed, it is bad for passengers and bad for the aviation industry.

BAA was bought by Ferrovial for £12 Bn, mostly borrowed as the Spaniards put in only £460 of their own money and £10.5 Bn. of this debt still sits on its balance sheet. The real winners were BAA’s former shareholders who happily accepted their absurdly inflated bid. Now Ferrovial with the connivance of the so called regulator, the CAA, is saddled with these huge debts which it would like us, the travelling public to pay off. The company serves almost 150m passengers a year but in the past year has been attacked by the public and airline industry alike for its mismanagement of airport operations with third world style camp outs in its terminals and horrendous security queues.

The criticism of BAA is that it should have predicted the predictable and planned accordingly but basic infrastructure has been dismal such as the inadequate luggage handling system at Terminal 4. It also turns out that Terminal 5 has been built as a result of a succession of broken promises by BAA which has consistently lied about its intentions over the years.

BAA’s recently departed managing director Stephen Nelson admitted to MP’s that, 12 years ago BAA had given public assurances that proved to be false, saying that a third runway would not be needed.

In 1995 BAA stated in its official newsletter: “BAA has said repeatedly that Terminal 5 will not lead to a third runway. BAA has said repeatedly THERE WILL NOT BE A THIRD RUNWAY. And BAA has been proved right. The Secretary of State has accepted the BAA view. The issue has been settled; people’s concerns have been met. What now of those who claimed BAA was not telling the truth?”

In 2001 BAA and the Government accepted the recommendation of the planning inspector who approved Terminal 5 that the number of flights at Heathrow should be capped at 480,000. However, despite those BAA assurances in 1995, ministers now support a third runway and a plan was published in November that would increase the capacity to 702,000 flights.

The double standard has led to a rash of broken promises on Heathrow. Terminal 4 was approved in 1978, subject to a cap on annual traffic movements of 275,000. Two years later BAA recorded 287,000 movements and 376,000 in 1990. When Terminal 5 was approved in 2001, the planning inspector and BAA stated that a third runway would be “totally unacceptable”, and set a new cap of 480,000 movements. But by 2003 a White Paper aimed at 700,000.

But BAA has not misled the public on its own but has had a collusive relationship with central government with its current head of Public Affairs being Tom Kelly, former press secretary to Tony Blair. Take the current Heathrow greenwash first. Ministers repeat the mantra that “Heathrow's expansion will only go ahead within strict environmental limits”. But they know full well that the absence of legal standards on noise leaves communities defenceless. New EU air-quality standards had looked like an insuperable hurdle to a third runway, but are being fudged with ropey claims that road traffic emissions will fall. Two weeks ago the Advertising Standards Authority ordered British Airways to withdraw the claim, made by its CEO in an e-mail to Executive Club members, that the third runway would reduce carbon dioxide emissions because aircraft would no longer have to waste fuel queuing to take off or land. This flatly contradicted Whitehall models, which assume that the new runway will raise CO2 emissions by 2.6 million tonnes a year from the 200,000 extra flights. When I lived on the Great West Road in Hounslow directly under the landing approach a mile from the airport the houses had triple glazing and soudbox ventilators to cope with the environmental fall-out. Walking outside you inhaled air that smelt and tasted of Avjet, as modern aircraft are particularly inefficient at burning fuel when the engines are throttled back for landing.

Secondly, take the arguments about capacity. BAA's figures demonstrate clearly that Heathrow is not full. Not remotely. The appendix to the government consultation on the third runway states that 67 million passengers used Heathrow in 2006, and that this could rise to 122 million if a third runway were built. But it also shows that 95 million people could use Heathrow if “maximum use were made of existing runways”. At one stroke we are looking at a deception, perhaps the greatest ever perpetrated on the British people by the optimistically named Department for Transport. For BAA itself is telling us that 28 million more people could use Heathrow without a new runway and without breaking the cap on flights.

How? By using larger planes and filling more seats. Jeff Gazzard, of Airport Watch, says that if Heathrow were not allowed to expand, it could spur the airline industry to invest more rapidly in larger aircraft like the A380, on which some are already hedging their bets. Bigger planes would not solve climate change, although they would reduce local pollution. The point is that we have been told that Heathrow is full when it is not. That kind of distortion suggests that the DfT has ceased to function as an arm of government and has become a mere subsidiary of BAA.

The justification is the importance of aviation to the economy. It would be foolish to argue that air travel is not important to business. But some of the mythology is misleading. The growth in air traffic is overwhelmingly from leisure travel, not business. More than 80 per cent of international travellers at UK airports, and 60 per cent at Heathrow, are holidaymakers. Outbound tourism outstrips inbound, creating a whopping £18 billion balance of payments deficit. Only this week, the Travelodge chain of hotels called for an end to unfair tax breaks for budget airlines, which it said were “the single biggest cause of decline in traditional [UK] tourism resorts”. It is one thing to treat the air industry as a special case; it is quite another thing to distort the facts. And here the Government's collusion with the industry is a problem.

No where does this collusion seem more dramatic than with the unfit for purpose “watchdog” the Civil Aviation Authority, the CAA, and its passenger watchdog, The Air Users Council which has been so inept in enforcing air passengers rights under EU Law. 261 that the EU has threatened enforcement action against them and Ryanair actually give passengers a leaflet saying the law is stupid and they won’t comply with it. I must remember this defence the next time I’m stopped by a police officer! I’m sure I would receive a succinct response.

Anybody who has used Heathrow’s clapped out facilities over the past 5 years has helped pay for the gleaming new Terminal 5 but as it is reserved for British Airways customers they will not have the benefit of it if they fly with another airline. Despite this they will get to share the burden of a 23.5% increase in airport charges next month as in a dramatic award for failure the CAA has allowed BAA to double charges over the next 5 years. What does BAA have to do other than sit back and count the cash?

As for Terminal 5 when the Queen opened this terminal of broken promises on Friday this was a “soft” opening with a hand picked and screened audience lest Her Majesty, Government Ministers and BAA’s exceptionally talented and remunerated management be exposed to the gratitude of the travelling public. It will start to open to real people on the 27th March. One surprise is that 54% of gates will not have air bridges and consequently step free access as provided for under phase 3 of the Disability Discrimination Act which became law in October 2006. Indeed under our wonderful regulator disabled people are effectively excluded from UK airports unless they book “assistance” in advance, which is not what the Act says. Perhaps the Government could pursue its “Respect” agenda by respecting its own laws and ensuring its regulator enforces them?

Thursday, February 28, 2008

Europe's worst airport?



The reputation of the Amalfi Coast precedes any trip with visions of La Dolce Vita, the stupendous beauty of the coastline and a magical and simpler Italy as seen in “Il Postino”. The reputation is not without some truth but the truth of today’s Amalfi Coast is somewhat more complex. The complexity begins with the probability that you will access Amalfi by flying into Naples Airport. This exercise in chaos is owned by our old friends B.A.A. who are in turn owned by Ferrovival, the Spanish brick company.

The previous year Naples had won the title of “Worst Airport in Europe” and from what I could see it was fighting hard to keep the title. Terminal 2 at Naples demonstrates BAA’s advanced sense of humour. It is a former cargo warehouse which has lost none of its ambience a mile from the airport to which the charter flight cattle are bussed. It has no luggage trolleys (either side!) and the “management response” when you mention this at the Information desk is to make a tannoy announcement which they have pre-printed in 12 languages that “there is a shortage of trolleys for operational reasons.” Indeed.

The ambience of the airport does not convey La Dolce Vita. There are not even proper air-conditioned buildings. We are talking about just a collection of pre-war aircraft-hangers in the middle of the one of the most heavily populated, poorest areas of Naples. Rubbish, barbed-wire fences and concrete covered in graffiti. Passengers are shipped in and out on coaches with no logical system or thought. Staff seem either too busy to help or would rather help their fellow Italians on domestic flights. Even the short runway is so full of potholes and rubbish that the pilots have to use all their skill and experience to take-off and land safely. The whole airport needs to be demolished and re-built outside the city.

Proudly wearing our “We saw Naples Airport and didn’t die” badges we made our escape from this proud gateway, but in dread of the thought that we had to come back through it in another week.

This is the spin on the airport website which promises happiness in the future:

" GESAC, the Naples International Airport Management Company, is committed to an important programme of airport development. By December 2008, new infrastructure will be completed which will make Naples airport more functional, safe and efficient."

Dammed with their own faint praise then that the current set up is not particularly functional, safe or efficient. Time will tell but let me tell you - the current crew are part of the problem with their years of experience of managing chaos and failure. Don't just replace the buildings!!