Ref Clr Cook et al.
A couple of technical points, the 11% minority aggregate holding by the various council's is only down to their own earlier ineptness in allowing themselves to be out manoeuvred by Peel in a call on further capital injection.
As for the £20M loss, then Peel would no doubt claim that their continued support in funding the airports continued losses on an annual basis justifiably qualifies. To just add up expenditure on tangible assets is perhaps a little naïve.
What does not cease to amaze me is the almost "hush" environment concerning detail / quantum of the BMI payment. This was of course disclosed on the airports statutory filed accounts, as Peel had little choice, though Peel would seem to deflect any enquiries as to why it also was simply "trousered" as additional revenue in that financial year which resulted in a previously unheard of operating profit in that year.
It is unfortunately not a simple task to take an aggregate view of the total loss of the airport over the period of Peels control, due to changing accounting formats, holding companies, internal charges etc. However in accepting that the £20M was injected by the Peel Group then one is effectively neutralised as to questioning this matter further.
In conclusion then without some new relevant evidence, of any "wrong doing" (Note clever corporate structures and manoeuvers can be perfectly legal !), then nothing is going to change.
Time to move on ?