If there was no commercial case for the original DSA to operate, I fail to see how anything has changed.
Half a dozen airlines tried it and none, besides TUI, succeeded. TUI alone couldn't keep the lights on.
My concern is that a reopening could be seen as nothing more than a vanity project, burning taxpayers money to the tune of tens (if not hundreds) of millions of pounds, running at a perpetual loss. The guarantees they'd have to provide prospective airlines would be incredibly burdensome if not downright eye-watering. I understand there's a lot of local support but kind words don't pay the bills and if the yields weren't sufficient to keep the cogs turning in the past, why would it change now? Cargo is one possibility but you already have the UK's largest air freight hub less than 60 miles down the road.
I'd rather see a solid plan for viability instead of agreeing to burn shedloads of cash upfront on the basis it might work this time.
I say this as someone who used DSA regularly in the past and supported the airport as much as possible. If it's viable, I'm all for it. If it's not, let's get real.
Spending cash upfront is inevitable when setting up an airport. Some of that capital spend of course would be recoverable to some extent if it shuts down again, and some won't.
But you have to have faith in the people advising the council and the fact that they have reputable and experienced operators wanting to run it...