Airport responses 2The lengthening of Alderney’s runway would result in growth within major sectors of the island’s economic activity.   That has been the clear conclusion to be drawn following a recent Chamber of Commerce survey which showed that almost all members were in favour of Option C+ proposals.

Below is a snapshot of the many replies received.   Should you wish to read all the responses, please open the PDF document at the bottom of this page, or just  click HERE :



To stay still is not an option. Remaining in the present is, in reality, moving backwards in time.

I would advise that if the case for a longer runway were rejected, there would be fewer people and businesses being attracted here which in turn would have a detrimental financial effect on Guernsey as there would be less income to the Bailiwick coffers as the tax take reduces.

How can Alderney’s economy grow in all its sectors if our runway stays as it is? To attract families, tourists, relocation of existing business and the start-up of new business, we must have a robust and reliable air transport structure.   A new lengthened runway is the foundation to this.

Restricted improvements which only enable limited aviation options to be pursued will confine Alderney to limited growth opportunities and has the potential to initiate a decline if there is no attraction to new business and or new residents.

Now is the time to secure a longer runway, investment now is the cheapest option as it will not get any cheaper in the future, and increased growth will produce increased taxes to offset the costs.

It is rare to see politicians taking a long-term view – and very welcome in this context, as is Mr. Nico Bezuidenhout’s approach.

A double flight via Guernsey would be a huge turn-off for both prospective immigrants and holidaymakers. For my business to expand and base sales and management staff on the Island, the Island’s connectivity needs to be better.  Not being able to travel for two weeks as there is no availability is a    non-starter.  Or the trip I’m on now, I got to Southampton but because the runway was wet, I and two other passengers had our bags unloaded and then had to wait 24hrs for my luggage to arrive.  It’s just not a fit for purpose model now.

From my businesses that currently employ 18 people, I would see that grow to 25 full-time roles and 6 seasonal roles.  In pay-roll terms from £500k to £750k – income tax increase to £100K and Social Contribution £95K.  Almost a £120K increase in direct taxation receipts.  If you looked at that across   the service and support business on the island that is an increase in over £2M a year in contributions.

Unfortunately last year I needed to be transferred to Guernsey after a heart attack. I was asked if it was possible to walk up the steps into the aircraft. I had to get off the stretcher, climb steps into the  aircraft, and back onto a stretcher. The same procedure happened in reverse in Guernsey.
I was then sent to Southampton by the dedicated medical aircraft. I was put on the stretcher in the PEH and didn’t get off again until I reached Southampton hospital. I was accompanied by a Doctor  and Nurse who were provided by the Company operating the aircraft.
Alderney badly needs access to this aircraft. How many people would be able to do what I did. Some patients are unconscious, others so ill they are unable to get off the stretcher.

To have the States of Guernsey behind us, along with their own airline Aurigny, the future must be much more secure. Aurigny has justifiably come in for criticism in the past. However, here they are now, with a well thought out plan on a long-term basis. We really can’t afford to miss this.

I cannot understand why a handful of backward-looking residents should fail to see that Option C+ is absolutely essential for the future prosperity of Alderney AND be of benefit to the whole Bailiwick  in terms of increased business opportunities and tourism together with an increased tax revenue.

It is critical that we future proof now. Today’s reality is that we have a broken model which is hugely             inadequate and unsustainable for both safety and economic needs.   It seems it will cost more per annum to maintain than the projected savings with investment over 20 years if we extend

Should you wish to read all the responses, please  open/download the file below:

Airport responses 2