Really think so many of the 'save Manston' protaganists are clueless about the consequential costs of reinstating and then maintaining an airport with very limited viability for significant commercial operations.
Take Cornwall-owned Newquay for example which costs in subsidy about £3m/annum to the council - not a huge figure compared to the estimated gross value added to the economy, nevertheless, it's a cost. But it's the huge capital costs that will hurt over the years.
Cornwall Council spent approximately £76m transforming the former military airfield to a fully compliant civil airport – of this, £49m came from European funding, with £27m coming from the Council. The European funding agreement committed the Council to having an operational airport for the next twenty years. If the airport was to close before the 20 years was up, the Council could have to repay the £49m. Kent wouldn't qualify for that type of funding anyway.
Cornwall considered selling the airport - but you can only sell an airport if there is someone willing to buy it. The Council did test the market to see if anyone was interested prior to the last unitary election, but no buyers came forward. The national context of why no-one was interested could be the reason several UK airports run by the private sector either closed
or were brought back into the public sector because they were not viable. (Cardiff and Glasgow Prestwick).
So, the 530,000 good citizens of Cornwall pay perhaps an extra £6/annum to keep the place running, but it's the great chunks of capital that will hurt periodically to maintain, upgrade and remain compliant - money that will have to be diverted from other local services - hospitals, schools etc. Do the people of Thanet really think they want to face that? Probably not when they see the numbers for the next twenty years or more.