‘Economic Development should resign’ – Hospitality Association
THE Guernsey Hospitality Association is calling for the resignation of the Economic Development committee, saying that it has abrogated its responsibilities in not pursuing a runway extension at Guernsey Airport.
A report commissioned by the committee cost about £305,000 and while it found that there would be a financial benefit to the island from an extension, in stepping back from the proposal, it said that this would cost £79m., plus another £23m. to upgrade the terminal.
The GHA supports the idea of an Emas – Engineered Arresting Management System – being used locally. One was being installed at London City Airport for an estimated £15m.
‘Bluntly, the process of how the Guernsey runway project has been handled surely has to be questioned,’ said GHA president Alan Sillett.
‘All the data the committee has paid to obtain supports the case for a 1,623 metre runway within the existing boundary, the cost-benefit analysis stacks up, yet despite the evidence, Economic Development refuses to make a decision.’
The GHA said it understood that the main group behind the report, Aecom, did not inspect the runway and have not been involved in any Emas installations.
Mr Sillett said the decision to ‘dump’ the runway project onto the States’ Trading Supervisory Board without discussing it with them first was an example of how the committee had become 'a failure' under president Neil Inder.
STSB president Peter Roffey has since warned that his committee would be unlikely ever to recommend an extension and suggested the matter be passed elsewhere.
Mr Sillett said this was yet another 'debacle' from the committee and States members and islanders should question if it was fit for purpose.
He described the committee's record as one of ‘inaction, prevarication and under-achievement’ and said it was 'bankrupt of ideas and any sort of conviction.
‘It outsourced development of a tourism strategy to a part-time board that doesn’t have full sector support and, in our view, is set up to fail and deflect scrutiny from Deputy Inder.'
The association also criticised the committee's record on medicinal cannabis as 'a total fiasco',
‘In short, what has this committee achieved? What has it done to boost economic growth or productivity?
'Where is the plan for growth?’ it said.
Deputy Inder declined to comment.
