asitis

We need to reign in the empire builders, and turn the whole ethos back to being a well run , regional airport with limited passenger numbers. From the moment we started to think we were an international hub nothing but problems have arisen ! We have spent millions but have no more passengers and fewer flights ! The author of the 2006 report doesn't like to say he told you so, but he told you so LOL !!!!!

Certainly nothing for local careers !

Those ships have long sailed, particularly the ILS upgrade, that could only refer to the lights and the gantry is history !

Heading for another COMINDARA perhaps !

Nothing to add Chief Minister ............. and of course Ashy for his medical expertise ! I also understand they are forming a fast action response team to deal with anything arising !

God help us here we go again. Firstly there are people who shouldn't be in charge of negotiating something with anyone ! secondly an illustration of my points about open skies. Someone will have to explain to me, why the shipping company (of course we own it now) has to be protected at all costs, as there is not enough trade to support two companies, and both would probably go down the tubes, and the airport where there is probably pro rata even less trade, but anyone can come in ? seems nonsensical to me ! I agree we certainly didn't want an Aurigny situation as Government can't run anything, but I maintain it should have been possible to have light touch regulation and maintain exclusive routes in an arms length deal with someone. There are enough idle Dash 8's lying around and crews to fly them ! For goodness sake the patient transfer contract could have been used to our advantage with some "out of the box" thinking. It does seem we have no clear strategic plan in respect of the airport and its services, and already are allowing operators to piss off others at their whim. Perhaps we are still drinking at the fantasy font of approaching 2 million passengers per annum and gearing up for the happening. No one appears to have a clue how to run an airport, priorities are spend on new shiny things, fail to ensure staffing issues are addressed particularly in ATC, propose ever more outrageously expensive fantasy expansions oh and lastly " do we need some aeroplanes ?". For gods sake recruit someone who has a clue and quickly !!

If any failed candidates are to be considered I would like Paul Quine to be considered. He lost in a tight race to David Cretney and has an enquiring and sceptical mind and is not too bothered who he upsets to get to the answer.

Apparently HM The Queen received his recommendation ....... she shredded it !

I had heard that, but rumours abound, so what the truth is it would be interesting to know !

Presumably someone / or some people, signed the contract that has got us where we are ! Do we know who they are ? and if so they should be asked to provide a full and frank explanation of their actions.

The developers will only fit gas boilers ! another protectionist racket. Government are good at this sort of stuff, we bought a company for 120m which was probably worth a fraction of that price in a few months, and here's another we are effectively bailing out !

I am an aviator not an accountant, so I don't pretend to understand the economics. However the phrase "small market" which is entirely true, is completely the opposite of what an open skies policy would ideally be suited to, common sense seems to say ! Suitable aircraft flying protected routes ( with service level guarantees and price controls) would seem to require less subsidy than trying to run a non economic service based solely on subsidy alone ! What is needed is some business acumen and strategy at the airport, not the joke management we have been subject to for the past few years !

Probably another Teflon Don !

We need someone in charge of the airport and its development who isn't a profligate bullshitter, with little knowledge of aviation or local weather conditions. There has been lots of investment in the airport since 2006, with very little of it aimed at improving its suitability in poor weather. The thrust of investment has been in new shiny things for the 1.75 million passengers per annum to see and use, indeed the latest talk is about new terminals moving fire stations, relocating this and that etc etc ! Weather and diversions are inevitable given the airport's locus on the island, but had the planning process in 2006 been seen for what it was ( mostly bullshit) money could have been used more wisely to minimise the amount of inconvenience to people. As it was we tried to enter the fantasy land of Heathrow on Sea and now find that money we have already blown is not actually helping operations. Can the next appointment please be an aviation professional who has a proven track record in Aviation, not in reality TV or Bullshit !! For gods sake we spent 7 years trying to approve a bloody radar !

The shredders will be working overtime !