OAD is barking up the wrong tree here.
No deal with local airport owners across Europe by Ryanair has been arrived at without the consent of both parties - or do Ryanair simply hold a gun to the heads of the owners in order to have their dastardly way? In other words, it takes two to party.
I really do believe that any subsidies offered by local tourist organisations are outweighed by the volume of traffic/passengers deposited in the local area. Let's talk about one area I know, which I fly to regularly using Ryanair.
Carcassonne is a lovely little town in Southern France. If you choose to drive there, it's a day and a half from most parts of the UK - that's if you knew where it was! And why would you go there unless you had studied the local area and decided it was exactly right for you?
Fly there with Ryanair to see whether it takes your fancy and stay for a week. You would as an individual, bring a value of say 125 euro per day (a modest amount) to the local economy - 875 euro over a week. Now multiply that by say 160 passengers per flight, and (I estimate) 30 flights per week. Total is 4.2m euro per week. I suspect that any politician worth his salt would be wowed by that kind of result, while being totally unable to replicate it!
This is an area which was mainly agricultural until Ryanair decided, with the help of the local tourist agency, to start using an underused resource (a reasonable airport) in a place which offers all kinds of interesting things for visitors to do.
The results from this iniquitous arrangement are as follows; an improved airport which I think now serves eight locations across Europe; an economy which has benefited enormously from a mutually acceptable commercial arrangement; jobs at Ryanair, the Airport and in local businesses.
And when this turns out to be such a bad arrangement, any party to the agreement can I'm certain, walk away from the deal.
I might add that I have no relationship with Ryanair apart from that of a satisfied customer.