accept that this is the reasoning behind the decision and that it is a policy made by the airport in the best interest of the existing customers.
This may represent the best interests of operational convenience in the office but it certainly doesn't address the best interests of flight safety. Where should our priorities lie?
We must consider above all the best interests of aircraft already in flight for whom safety is an order of magnitude more serious concern than avoidance of administrative inconvenience on the ground. And the effect on ATC sectors with finite capacity which can quickly overload when by far the largest airport facility for a couple of hundred miles in all directions washes its hands of any responsibility to help out. Note that two Citations represent equal workload as two A380's on an ATC sector. And a light-twin is even more workload, as it takes longer to transit the same airspace. A blanket 'No Divs' policy excludes all non-emergency aircraft regardless of size or other circumstance. A non 'blunt-instrument' proactive case-by-case policy is required instead. Safety of flight must without exception outrank admin concerns next to the cosy ops office coffee machine.
The problem with saying that you'll still accept aircraft which declare a fuel emergency is all very well when there is only one aircraft in the sky. When there are multiple flights affected and the largest airport in the system won't play ball, the risk is one of sector overload and several fuel emergencies arising in quick succession. Remember also that ATC sector workload is not just a function of the number of aircraft on frequency. Consider the spike in workload implied as staff must suddenly coordinate re-routes and re-clearances for multiple affected flights as more and more airports report that they're now full to capacity as well or that their IRVR's have just fallen to 100M touchdown. There are no extra staff to cope with all this.
Come on, Manchester. Nobody is asking for a free-for-all. But take your share of responsibility to the extent which you
really can. If you can fit in a Dash 8 but not a B747, take a Dash 8. You could completely exclude all types below a specified size from the NOTAM's coverage. Every other major UK airport pitches in when the going gets tough; Manchester doesn't want to know. Either Manchester is getting it right on this and every other major UK airport is messing up ... or the opposite is true. I wonder which way round the correct answer lies?