Paul Le Blond FCILT, Chair, CILT Aviation Forum and David Parish CMILT, Deputy Chair, CILT Aviation Forum  were amongst numerous key industry witnesses from the likes of the Civil Aviation Authority, Airport Operations Association and the British Air Transport Association.

Louise Ellman MP chaired the inquiry and began the discussion with highlighting the Department for Transport and European Commission definition for small airports; airports that have ‘fewer than five million passengers per annum’. She asked witnesses whether this was a reasonable definition and Paul Le Blond responded that this was a simple and straightforward definition and that he would not suggest any other categorisation. 

However John Spooner, Chairman, Regional and Business Airports Group, stated that ‘our group believes that three million is the threshold number,’ He continued to tell the witnesses that ‘it is possible to be profitable at about three million passengers a year, particularly if you have a good mix of property income and general aviation traffic…’ 

Louise Ellman MP went on to discuss whether distance form competitor airports was a factor for smaller airports and Ian Osborne, Group Director for Regulatory Policy, Civil Aviation Authority, responded that Leeds Bradford is a healthy distance from its competitors and noted that very many of the small airports that have suffered are uncomfortably close to a larger rival. 

Several of the witnesses commented on the benefit of having a base operator like Jet 2 at LBA and Flybe at EXT. 

Paul expressed that there are more airports close together in the North East of England than elsewhere and Ian Osborne pointed out that the UK has more regional airports than any other European country. 

The evidence also illustrated that codeshares give passengers the sense that even at smaller airports they are connected in one stop over to a global world. 

Nathan Stower, Chief Executive, British Air Transport Association, commented: ‘The most important thing is that customers have choice. You have Flybe and EasyJet flying domestic services, but also flying to hub airports on the near continent. Flybe now has seven codeshares, and you can fly from Inverness to Orlando touching one point but not touching London. You can go from Exeter to Hong Kong from Manchester and on with their codeshare partners. That is a very clear model.’

Another question discussed was: ‘How many of the 40 or so airports are dependent on public subsidy of one description or another?’ Paul Le Blond FCILT responded that: ‘Two classic examples are Cardiff and Prestwick owned by the respective Governments.’ Paul followed on to state: ‘Airports are entirely dependent upon the airlines to provide the services. If your airline does not want to provide services, there is very little you can do about it.’

He continued: ‘There are a lot of new airlines that start and there are a number of airlines that stop….It is an industry that exploits opportunities when they arise. I do not think there is anything more that the airline industry can do, unless the airport is able to somehow provide some sort of subsidy for it.’

Ian Osborne noted that the airports that are in difficulty are not those that would leave passengers high and dry if they shut. In the highlands and islands arrangements have been made because it is essential. He claimed the ones that get into difficulties are the ones that are very close to another thriving airport so from a passenger point of view it does not make an enormous difference. 

Louise Ellman MP posed the question of whether there are any alternative to aviation taxes that the group would like to suggest? Paul Le Blond FCILT argued very strongly against either VAT or fuel tax. 

Questioning then moved on to expansion at Heathrow or Gatwick and Louise Ellman MP asked ‘If there was expansion at either Heathrow or Gatwick, would that necessarily mean there were more connection slots that went to airports in the regions?’ Ian Osborne responded that it would depend on how the capacity was released, which is a key question to which the Airports Commission will apply its mind.’ He went on to say that the role of declaring capacity is currently delegated to airports themselves in the UK and that in that case capacity slots will be released at a pace that sustains the overall economics, because it is not in any of the commercial players’ interest to drive down values.

Paul suggested a remedy: ‘It is entirely legitimate for any condition of any planning permission, or any permission for additional runway capacity, to include a reservation or ring-fencing for slots for domestic flights. The number of slots required for a double daily service to a reasonable number of small airports would be a very small proportion of any additional capacity created. It is entirely legitimate for that ring-fencing to happen. That is, if I may say so, an entirely different matter from whether those services would be operated and commercially viable, but it is legitimate for them to be reserved – ring-fenced. 

The Chair then asked the CAA if this suggestion was possible to implement and Ian Osborne said he would consult and respond in writing to the committee. 

CILT contributed positively to the debate and Paul Le Blond FCILT gave his evidence in a calm and considered way ensuring the important points CILT had already stated in the written response were expressed and discussed.