Schools, waste or sewage – which should be the States’ spending priority? Chamber of Commerce president Paul Luxon argues for the airport
WHO knows what foresight our predecessors had in 1939 when the airport at the Forest opened? No doubt it was a major project in comparison to the seaplanes and L’Eree aerodrome that had previously connected islanders to the outside world.
Perhaps they experienced a similar level of opposition as the current airport-investment proposals are receiving. The costs are, of course, significant and therefore difficult for us men in the street to comprehend.
However, fortunately the decision to create a proper airport was made back then and has subsequently contributed to our ability to grow into the modern, successful economy we see today.
Those politicians more than 60 years ago showed vision and courage to invest in Guernsey’s infrastructure for the long term. Over the last 20 years or so we have tended to confuse the canny Guernsey trait of cost constraint with a penny-wise, pound-foolish approach when major investment proposals have been considered.
Although successive States have generally managed our financial affairs quite well, albeit with some weakness in controlling budgets on big capital-expenditure projects, they have often baulked on the complex big projects and deferred decisions again and again – the £10m. aborted costs over the last few years of investigating incinerator options being a great example of that.
Having consistently deferred and delayed major-project decisions over the last 10 years, we are confronted with a major reinvestment and a multi-million cost to ensure the airport is fit for purpose for future generations. That cost is unavoidable and Chamber urges the States to progress the work speedily.
The proposal to extend the existing runway to 1,700m to give Guernsey a level playing field and flexibility against other destinations and in terms of being able to accommodate aircraft types used by the majority of European airlines and to attract new regional airline operators is a vital strategic requirement.
Article posted on 10th October, 2008 - 2.30pm
Loading ...
17 Article Comments
So lengthening our runway ‘has to be a priority’? Given that one of the greatest threats to our island’s economic prosperity is climate change, and that the aviation industry is the fastest growing cause of climate change, the Chamber of Commerce has some pretty short-sighted long-term priorities.
Paul Luxon is entitled to his view but hopefully most would see schools, waste and sewage as more urgent priorities.
What is needed in areas such as education is to strip out the waste in the system and to curb the sewage that is often presented to the public in the form of statements that don’t actually mean what they say.
The major benificiaries of airport expansion are the wealthy financiers who fly in and out on business. Why don’t they pay for the airport, rather than asking the ordinary people of Guernsey to forego proper sewage treatment?
Well lets hope we don’t have to rely on any of the people who have posted comments on this subject. The airport is a major lifeline for the Island and the upgrade for the runway is essential, what do you want to do wait until it is in such a state that it will be condemned by the CAA, just think about it no airport, if you think the credit crunch is bad see what would happen then, it was bad enough when there was the lightening strikes at the airport, we urgently need the runway sorting out, without it Guernsey will move into a new era ofr unemployment and financial hardship, oh it is not only for the wealthy, hundreds of people travel every day, many for medical treatment in the UK, why wait it will be twice as much in 5 years.
Beanjar
You make some good points.
As I understand it there is money put aside to repair / upgrade the existing runway.
Lengthening the runway and its cost would not be very popular when schools and essential services need money. This is another view.
Perhaps you should accept there is a valid alternative view to yours.
Isn’t this a bit chicken and egg… if we don’t provide decent education provision for our children and DO lengthen the airfield, what will we be left with in 15 years….a nice long runway for all of our not so high flying youth, or educate today and not be able to compete in the corporate real world tommorow as they won’t be able to get off the rock???
When the Heathrow link was lost in the 1990s it was stated by the finance industry to be the end of the world.
We know that the prophets of doom were wrong. Guernsey continued to develop and prosper as a financial centre.
Repairing the existing runway will ensure the continuation of flights to destinations favoured by the majority of finance employees.
Guernsey is a beautiful island with excellent boat connections. Peace, this is why I come here, by boat. Now if the airport gets bigger, I wil not return. Why not spend cash on public transport and better public boat services. Why not encourage yacht owners to provide inter island and around island boat services (sure we like to show off our boats) then we would have less traffic. NO! to Cars and planes, YES! to Yachts and Ferry boats. YES! to the simple peaceful life and good public transport.
I can just see Cobo residents who work in town travelling up the rocky west coast and around the north of the island into town in a passenger ferry in the middle of winter !
If the runway and aprons are to be upgraded ( which desperately needs doing) it would make financial sense to lengthen the runway at the same time rather than decide it is necessary in the future.
If budget airlines such as Easyjet, Ryanair etc could get their bigger aircraft into Guernsey as they do in Jersey this would help to revive our ailing tourism industry as well as bringing down fares for all of us.
I think its fair to say that with these airlines already using Jersey its very likely they would include us as part of their links.
You only have to look at the amount of tourist attractions that are prospering in our sister island to realise they have a far more healthy industry than we have - I’m sure this is due in part to their extra air links and probably cheaper fares.
I wrote a comment letter to the Guernsey Press stating why runway improvements and lengthening were essential for our Island. This was simply a reminder of detailed reports from 2001 from the Chamber of Commerce and other reputable bodies putting forward that case. Paul Luxton, Chamber President in his recent GP article amplified the case for a 1700 runway.
The need for us to sort our airport runway out is for the whole Guernsey economy, not just the financial sector, and it is now more important than ever for our future that we are able to have a diversified economy. The runway extension is to serve all our needs, not just finance workers, and we do need to able to fly to a wider variety of destinations, particularly in the UK , and to be able to be safe for a broader range of aircraft.
Tony Webber
Immanent peak oil is going to make air travel the preserve of the super-rich - there will be far fewer flights - a longer runway is therefore pointless. Peak oil also means that the global economy will no longer be able to grow. In these circumstances, the finance sector will very likely shrink faster than the wider economy will shrink. Climate change directly threatens the low lying parts of Guernsey.
Priority investment should go to new (renewable) energy infrastructure on and off the Island, this could provide a new income stream to help replace the shrinking one from finance. Infrastructural investment should also go to securing local food.
Any other critical infrastructure, currently at sea level, that is needed to provide essential services to Guernsey needs to be moved to higher ground.
There is no point in lengthening the runway as this will not encourage the 150-180 seat market airlines to operate here ….to make the route pay you have to sell the vast majority of the seats….this will not happen, Guernsey does not have the population base to support these aircraft…..The airlines are struggling to fill most of their seats as it is on aircraft in the 50 to 120 seat market.
All i can say is for people to use what we already have before its gone….The Paris, Dublin, Geneva and Zurich are good examples…an excellent service but if they keep carrying such low passenger figures despite relatively cheap fares they will be gone forever……
I would have thought the priority was ensuring that the Landsbanki depositors receive a full return of their deposits.
Those who remember what happened in 1958 will remember that we had 2 large helicopters flying between the islands while the States had our hard runway built. Our land is preceious to us why do we need 2 international runways within 30 miles of each other? Surley it would be better to fly people down to Jersey as theirs is already fit for purpose. We just have ours repaired to bring it up to the standards of today.
So far as the ordinary Guernsey person is concerned the need is to ensure the extisting runway is fit for the purpose.
If the business commnunity wants /needs a longer runway for whatever reason, then perhaps they should consider paying for an extended runway themselves.
Every body loves to spend money we as an island simply don’t have