Think bigger to solve our air-link issues
RECENT correspondence on the need for increased air capacity to the island has, thus far, focused on potential benefits to the island. The arguments put forward have been considered and well made.
The letters published to date have, inevitably, detailed benefits and have not identified any ‘dis-benefits’: additional noise, potential compulsory land purchase, the need for a higher capacity terminal building, increased road use and the interim arrangements to cope with the disruption caused while the extensions to runway, terminal and other assets are delivered, amongst others.
Moreover, the advocates of the extension have not provided ideas for alternate sources of funding.
I recall that the Guernsey Press ran an article on a scheme to build a new runway centred on the Roches Douvres. I don’t know whether those plans are still fit for purpose, however I think the idea has merits and could provide a flexible asset for the island going forward.
The costs would be higher, but the cost benefits greater. With careful design, the story itself would bring Guernsey’s innovative approach to solution design to world attention.
Inevitably the money would have to be borrowed, though the unique position of Guernsey as an innovative finance centre could be enhanced through the design and issue of an ingenious securitised obligation; I’d propose a sukuk [Islamic bond]-type instrument, attractive to Islamic banks who tend to hold such obligations to maturity as part of their capital requirements.
In short, an extension seems like a wasted opportunity. Let’s be truly courageous and build a new purpose-built airport, associated transport links and appropriate landing aids instead.
Yours truly,
MARC A. BREHAUT
Kandel
Grandes Rocques Road
Castel.