Checkboard, my mate, Landflap has been banned and unable to thank you for your clarification (just had him on the phone before he enters the Pprune jail until release date later in December) but I too, share astonishment that the Ozie Regulators put commercial interest ahead of Flight Safety. No desire to creap the thread but it is a very interesting situation. As briefly as I can,; my first trip in LHS on 737-200 was into Malaga just after a DC10 went off the end of the rwy and caught fire. After holding pending long discussion with ATC, airfield was declared open. We were first in. Only on the ground and preparing for departure did we realise that while the airfield was "open", there was no fire cover. All fire vehicles were in attendance at the crash-site and not available for departures (or arrivals, presumably).
Big row with the Airport Director, over the phone, over Regulatory Authority etc for declaring an airfield open with no fire cover. After long delays, everyone else started up & left even though I repeatedly, over the air, asked ATC to confirm that the airfield was "open" although with no fire cover.
Tight spot for a new four-ringer eh ? Technically the airfield should have been closed to all traffic. For safety, as well, my prime consideration, I stuck it out, until ATC declared full fire cover & airfield fully operational..