Morning:
8°c
Britain's tourism industry has been in decline for over two years now thanks to a combination of high and increasing airport charges and the regressive Airport Passenger Duty, introduced by Gordon Brown.
This is set to increase on 1 November, even though it has proved to be a double-barrelled shot in the foot for tourism, traffic, jobs and the economy.
Passenger numbers at airports run by the UK's biggest operator, BAA, collapsed by eight million in the past year - at the same time that Ryanair grew passenger numbers by seven million.
The UK is now on course to lose 10 million passengers in 2009.
Yesterday's confirmation that BAA has reached an agreement to sell Gatwick airport should be celebrated as a victory for consumers, airport users and London tourism.
The sale is just the first step in the much-needed break-up of BAA's airport monopoly in order to restore competition and customer service.
Last year the Competition Commission called for the break-up of BAA and the sale of Gatwick and Stansted, as well as one of BAA's Scottish airports, to reverse the years of damage done by the operator's high costs and its contempt for airline users and passengers.
However, in an attempt to retain control of the London market and protect its high airport charges, BAA is disputing the Competition Commission's recommended sale of Stansted.
Ryanair fully supports the Competition Commission's findings and believes that the sale of Stansted must take place as soon as possible.
BAA has abused its power in recent years, wasting vast sums building complicated facilities that its airline customers neither wanted nor needed.
The Competition Commission's extensive investigation revealed that BAA's airport monopoly has been bad for competition and bad for consumers.
It also conclusively proved that the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) is a hopelessly incompetent regulator which has always put the needs of BAA above those of airport users.
This week Ryanair demonstrated to the Competition Appeal Tribunal that BAA inflates its costs, so that the inept CAA regularly allows passenger charges to rise - rewarding BAA's waste, mismanagement and incompetence.
The future of British air transport and tourism depends on the growth of low-fare air travel to and from London's airports.
Regional airports all over the UK are now lowering costs to attract more low-fare routes and tourists.
Yet BAA couldn't care less about attracting more passengers, because it is rewarded by the CAA regardless of whether traffic rises or falls.
Ryanair has made a written offer to BAA Stansted to double its passenger traffic over a five-year period.
BAA rejected this proposal out of hand, because it doesn't need or want traffic growth.
Instead, group director Harry Bush and the other clowns at the CAA will reward BAA with passenger-charge increases as Stansted's traffic declines.
This is not the real world: BAA is a monopoly rewarded with price increases to compensate it for its failure to stimulate growth.
This is why Ryanair, and all other airlines at Stansted, are strongly campaigning for the break-up of BAA.
Competition is the only way to ensure that consumer interests are protected from the damage inflicted by years of this high-cost airport monopoly.
Reader views (8)
Collapse in passenger numbers nothing to do with the global recession? Oh no I forgot - that's all Gordon Brown's fault as well.
- Damian, Copenhagen Denmark, 29/10/2009 19:51
Report abuse
how Could we really listen this guy? one weeks ago He was speaking at Kerry Airport during a whistle-stop tour of Dublin, and said that only Cork, Shannon, Dublin, Knock and Kerry airports have viable futures. Yesterday he said that "despite losing money in each of the five years it has been at Shannon" It doesn't make any sens at all!!!
O’Leary plays with the media by announcing something and then its opposite
- Roman, Brussels, 23/10/2009 10:42
Report abuse
Oh, Michael really!
We all know that your preference is for Ryanair to take over Stansted so that you can charge for every step taken in the building as well as every cubic centimetre of air that is breathed.
- Nobby Clark, Perth, the Scottish one, 22/10/2009 17:11
Report abuse
Ryanair? The first time I've been on a plane where the wallpaper was peeling off.Also can't be assured that the planes are fully fuelled up to reach their destination, due to fuel cutbacks. You might save a fiver, but on the other hand you might end up in the bottom of the ocean. O'Leary is a conman.
- James, Manchester England, 22/10/2009 15:55
Report abuse
What complete nonsense! Of course BAA benefit from increased numbers. Under the regulations they are allowed to charge the airlines a set amount, depending on which airport, for each passenger that passes through. If numbers fall, BAA's revenue falls. Don't believe O'Leary's nonsense. If only Ryaniar could fuel their flights on O'Leary's hot air. They'd save a fortune on fuel, and it looks like one energy source that'll never run out, unfortunately.
- Mark, London, London, 22/10/2009 13:37
Report abuse
So Ryanair can take over an airport or two, charge £1 for loo entry, 50p per sheet of loo roll, £10 for entry to immigration control, £5 per bag scan, and £2 for use of luggage trolleys. No thanks.
- David, N10, 22/10/2009 13:23
Report abuse
O Leary is right about BAA's monopoly which needs to be broken up.
- Mike, London, 22/10/2009 12:37
Report abuse
What Mr O'Leary doesn't point out is that charging money for going to the loo on poor quality budget airlines from hell also puts off tourists.
- Thomas, London, 22/10/2009 10:51
Report abuse
