Originally Posted by
AndrewH52
Fine. Don’t provide revenue support but why not adopt the US approach where airports are recognised as essential infrastructure and so can qualify for federal funding for runways, terminal and security improvements and other technical kit. U.K. airports carry the full burden with very limited state aid. Not having to do so would reduce the pressure enormously.
Can see what you mean, and I think there should perhaps be funding on hand to help smaller airports invest in the necessary equipment with changing regulations - assuming that isn’t already available. However I think the U.K. airport market and that of the US is pretty incomparable. Obviously in places like the US and Australia, where cities are perhaps separated by thousands of miles, the only viable transport option is air travel. Not really the case in the U.K. where most of the more heavily populated areas are within an hour to an hour and a half of at least one airport. To that end I don’t believe DSA is a vital part of the national infrastructure, in the case of South Yorkshire there is MAN, LBA, EMA and HUY within relatively easy reach.
I do think a national airport framework should have been developed (airport at Burtonwood and Ferrybridge in the case of the M62 corridor), but this idea was abandoned decades ago in favour of local governance determining their own airport provisions. Alongside privatisation and market driven growth, this has left Yorkshire in an unenviable position relative to the rest of the U.K.
Not sure what is going on behind the scenes, but I think Oliver Coppard is spot on when he says that DSA should be taken on by another private investment organisation if it is to remain open.