Heathrow slots offered – at a price
GUERNSEY was offered the chance to have flights to Heathrow, but the cost of the subsidy being asked for was so high that Economic Development did not consider it worth pursuing, members heard yesterday.
Jan Kuttelwascher said the offer of the Heathrow link was made by Flybe, which owned the slots. ‘But the route subsidy being requested by Flybe was of such magnitude that we didn’t even bother asking anybody for the money,’ he said.
Speaking during the debate on air and sea route policy, he responded to a comment from Deputy Peter Roffey who had said that a return to the London airport was ‘pie in the sky’.
‘No, not true,’ said Deputy Kuttelwascher, ‘we were offered Heathrow on the Committee for Economic Development last year, at a subsidy.’
He said Flybe has slots at the airport which are limited to ‘peripheral destinations’ and Guernsey would have been considered one of these.
‘They were available. It could have been brought into effect.’
The slots were still available and even if they were sold to Virgin or British Airways, those airlines would still be under an obligation to use them for these peripheral routes, but the problem would be what aircraft they could use if they wanted to operate here.
They might be able to use a small jet such as an Embraer, since using a turboprop into Heathrow would be expensive, said Deputy Kuttelwascher.
Economic Development president Charles Parkinson said later in the discussion that other airlines had approached Economic Development to operate these slots on a ‘babysitting’ basis, where an airline that owns the slots lets them to other operators for a limited time, such as a year.
But this would cost a lot of money, he added, probably a million pounds to rent that slot.
Deputy John Gollop said that a connection to the airport would be a great asset to Guernsey.
He had spoken to a travel professional who predicted that a return ticket would cost £450, so the route would need subsiding, he said.
Deputy Parkinson said that Heathrow was primarily seen as a business destination.
Having had to travel to Gatwick and then on to Heathrow on business previously, he knew the high cost of transferring from one to the other and in light of that businesses might well be prepared to pay a £450 return ticket.
States’ Trading Supervisory Board president Deputy Peter Ferbrache said that Heathrow needed to be examined, but warned it could take a decade for the new runway to be opened.
The ATRs would be too slow for the Heathrow route, and he suggested they could be forced out of Gatwick for the same reason, meaning that jets would have to be used.
The report on and sea route policy development and investment objectives was approved by 33 votes to six, with Deputies Mark Dorey, Emilie Yerby, Shane Langlois, Lindsay de Sausmarez, Roffey and Barry Brehaut voting against.
