Mongu,
Essentially this is what the States of Guernsey have done. When the opportunity of being able to own an airline that had managed to acquire the use of much sought after take-off and landing slots at Gatwick, the natural temptation is inevitable and cannot be resisted. I generally agree that those slots should be protected by an airline or government to guarantee vital airlinks to mainland airports.
What I am against is how the States have jumped in and not considered any limitations nor long term strategy. What is to say that another £2 million will not be needed? They should of not got involved in the running and owning of an airline, simple as that.
I have no real reservations about Aurigny taking on the Gatwick route, it is excellent to see, after the BA pullout, an airline that is orientated at the island market taking over the route. However, I still think Flybe. would have probably been better on receiving those slots. For them it would be the expansion of an already very popular service. Anyhow, what strikes me as strange is that Flybe. had no consultation that the slots were up for sale, it was a case of BA just prepared to let them go (strike you as being a little odd with BA?) and selling them to Aurigny. I suspect that maybe they wanted to ensure Flybe. had a continual competitor on the route.
With the subject of the Isle Of Man, Channel Islands and the Highlands governments’ attempts to secure slots, I am in full support. They are vital, especially London, to the economy, tourism industry and general well being of islanders. As we are not part of Europe (bar the later islands) we need to seek, through the UK government, help to persuade the EU to secure a number of slots at major airports for the regions. It may take some time to be implemented but it is needed. Just for example, if I take Guernsey’s Gatwick figures for last year, 300,000 passengers, we cannot underestimate these. What would be the effects if flights were lost?
Sign In
