Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

The hunt is On.
Sponsored by
The hunt is On.
Can you track down Scotland's wildest beastie?
 
 
Friday, 5th December 2008

Haggis Hunt is now on!

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Sign In
Register

Salmond in summit amid fears BA will quit Scotland



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 07 October 2008
By David Maddox and Alastair Dalton
ALEX Salmond, the First Minister, is to meet the head of British Airways today amid concerns that the airline is to pull out of Scotland.
The meeting with Willie Walsh, the chief executive of BA, comes after the company confirmed it is reviewing its cabin crew base at Glasgow Airport.

The base supports flights from Edinburgh and Glasgow to Heathrow and Gatwick and employs 135 people
, who would face losing their jobs.

If BA decides to axe the flights, then the company would be left with just its City Flier service from Edinburgh to the City of London Airport, and no official BA routes from Scotland.

It was revealed in August that nearly 500 of some 5,000 flights on routes between Scotland and Heathrow and Gatwick will go between October and March, as part of a 3 per cent cut across BA's global network.

The cuts were announced as BA reported an 88 per cent reduction in quarterly pre-tax profits from £298 million to £37 million.

The airline, which brands itself "the world's favourite", has been hit by rising fuel costs and competition from budget operators. BA routes between Scotland and London have made a huge loss.

And this month, BA is set to be replaced by Flybe in a tie-up with Loganair for 23 services in the Highlands and Islands.

Flybe last year also bought all of BA's 15 non-London services from Scotland.

A spokesman for BA confirmed that the cabin crew base was being reviewed.

He said: "Any decision on its future will be communicated in the first instance to staff." Mr Salmond's office said that the meeting had been arranged for some time, but added that the First Minister was aware of the concerns of BA staff and that he would be raising them.

The spokesman added: "The meeting is essentially a courtesy call and was requested by Mr Walsh. He happened to be at an event in Scotland and wanted to take the opportunity to meet the First Minister."

Mr Walsh also plans to meet MSPs and business leaders to talk about BA's Scottish future.

The Scottish Chambers of Commerce has led the voicing of concerns about the future of BA and other route providers from Scotland.

A review is also being carried out by BMI, currently compiling its winter timetable.



The full article contains 398 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

Edward,

07/10/2008 01:42:48
In the word of Lord Coe, when talking about the Scottish and Welsh FA's 'F**k em'
2

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 07/10/2008 04:57:08
Other than the loss of 135 Jobs, many of them low paying flight attendants or ground service personnel, this will have little if any impact.

Most Scots traveling through a European Hub like Schipol or Charles De Gaulle have a much better traveling experience than trying to change planes at Heathrow, which consistently is voted the Worlds Worst Airport.
3

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 07/10/2008 04:59:59
Scotland would be a much more attractive destination for the Airlines if the Central Belt was served by one Single Airport rather than splitting the traffic between Glasgow and Edinburgh.
4

TommyKaye,

UK 07/10/2008 06:40:45
Will there be a name change to Imperial Airlines or Colonial Air perhaps Air England or English Airlines might go down well in Surrey. Gordon Brown would certainly be happy with that.
5

Grahamski,

Falkirk 07/10/2008 07:41:24
4.
Talking of name changes why not change yours to bitter little loser with an inferiority complex?
6

,

07/10/2008 08:16:01
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
7

Danny Mather,

Edinburgh 07/10/2008 08:17:29
why has a connection been made between losing the based jobs in Glasgow and the complete loss of the *flights* between, Edinburgh, Glasgow and Heathrow?

Also - it is cited that BA's remaining domestic flights have made a "huge loss". Where has this been reported?
8

roughrider,

Glasgow 07/10/2008 08:20:58
4 TommyKaye.Well said pal.
Ignore the liebour london @rse sook graham on skis.
What abour sasanach air lines.
BA is a rip off.good riddance.
9

Boy Wonder,

07/10/2008 08:48:03
Let BA quit. Eck will just buy us all our own jet wings like that Frenchman has to fly around in.

Goa here I come . WOO-OO-OOHH!!
10

A Better Way,

Scottish Republic 07/10/2008 08:50:43
Grahamski are you honestly in agreement for a cut in services to Scotland and the loss of 135 Scottish Jobs.

I really hope not mate. That is just petty and smallminded.

There comes a time in everyones life where you have to choose sides. I didnt think the most ardent Unionist would sink that low. These People are simply trying to make a living for their families and British Airways was started by tax payers from the three Nations that make up the UK at the moment. Scotland is owed a return on its investment. Theres little doubt that Murphy and Brown are behind this action by BA.

It is Time to Vote Pro Scottish, Vote SNP, they actually care about Scotland and its People.
11

grahaminengland,

Ipswich 07/10/2008 08:58:58
Salmond having it both ways - can't stand being British but is upset that the flag carrier British Airways may be quitting Scottish routes.
12

Edward,

07/10/2008 09:14:25
If 'British' Airways was really serious about route development and actually being 'British' it would have , before now set up a hub at Edinburgh, serving Europe directly as well as long haul.
But they have been more interested in being London centric with their chums the BAA, ensuring that all flights out of Scotland feed into Heathrow
For long enough the Glasgow to London and Edinburgh to London routes have been a cash cow for British Airways (as well as BMI) as everyone HAD to fly to London in order to go anywhere further. But with the opening up of direct routes from Glasgow and Edinburgh by other airlines. Passengers have been presented with better options. All that British Airways have now got left are those passengers who need to fly to London and those who are not aware that there are bettr options.
With the recession upon us, can only regard that revenue for those 'shuttle' airlines will be downturning (as they say). So the next and continually blinkered, choice will be to cut back and perhaps even pullout alltogether. Thats a shame as airlines such as British Airways and BMI could have made a go of it, if they were not so stuck on flying to London!
With current open skes policy in europe, there is no restriction as to who can fly in and out for Scotland, perhaps we will se a non british airline take over the Scotland to London shuttles, such as Lufthansa.
Remember anything is possible these days, as British Airways already fly a dedicated route from Paris to New York and will do the same from Frankfurt direct to New York under their 'Open Skies' brand. So perhaps the day that Lufthansa, Air France or even SAS making Edinburgh a hub are not that far off
13

Edward,

07/10/2008 09:16:06
#11 grahaminengland,Ipswich
Its not about keeping 'British' Airways, its about retaining commercial links for Scotland, or are you too stupid to grasp that
14

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 07/10/2008 09:17:07
Does anyone fly from Edinburgh to London with BA anyway. Whenever I've flown there I've used Easyjet as does everyone else I know who does the journey.
15

Nevsky,

Moscow 07/10/2008 09:19:11
BA have been doing it for years, trying to marginalise the Scots and make them fly visa Heathrow or Manchester. Can't think of another European country where you have to fly to another country for an inter-continental flight.

Total disgrace although Manchester and Heathrow make millions from the Scots having to fly there, again at the expense of a Scottish international airport!
16

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 07/10/2008 09:20:51
PS. Slight correction. The only ones who fly with BA are those who need a connection at Heathrow. If this is a profitable route surely another airline will operate it.
17

Mr. Lachie Todd,

Edinburgh 07/10/2008 09:20:59
Commercial interests always come before anything else.

However, the massive increase in fuel has affected every carrier and, as we are now unofficially in recession, it can only get worse for companies like BA!
18

Ugly George,

07/10/2008 09:27:57
15 Nevski
"BA have been doing it for years, trying to marginalise the Scots"

So BA are the latest group to be indulging in an anti-Scottish conspiracy.

"Can't think of another European country where you have to fly to another country for an inter-continental flight."

You can get intercontinental flights from both Glasgow and Edinburgh to North America. If flights to other worldwide destinations are viable, why does another airline not start them up.
19

Resolutions,

07/10/2008 09:37:15
As already stated, if BA withdraw from Scottish flights for whatever reason, they may choose to drum up, they can hardly continue to use that name!

Heathrow, and increasingly Gatwick, are the worst possible gateways to any country and I for one, would prefer to use other options if at all possible.I know that I am not alone in that desire either.

#18 You may find that the landing charges etc at monopoly airports are causing a 'lack of competition' disincentive to other flights.

20

Nevsky,

Moscow 07/10/2008 09:50:53
18 George#

Would take considerable investment in ground crew etc so why bother. If Scots want to fly to Australia or anywhere else just provide it from Heathrow where Scots have to fly TO and let them fly from there BACK to Scotland..more money for Heathrow of course..

No incentive for any of them in Scotland, country does not even have a rail link into it's main city..what a joke!

I recall Prestwick was mooted years ago as being a natural hub for inter-continental flights but Heathrow blocked it every inch of the way...wonder why?

Scotans second-rate compared to London again!
21

Alan B,

07/10/2008 10:07:18
Another reason why a high speed rail link from scotland is necessary. (one taking less that 3hrs)

This could be very damaging to the scottish economy. Many businesses will not locate in scotland due to its poor air links.
22

Scythia,

Alba 07/10/2008 10:10:38
They are an inefficient airline anyway. As for commercial links, the free market will fill the gap - Easyjet, Ryanair , KLM ,BMI and rail.

I'm sure your readers won't miss the irony of a so-called Scottish national party negotiating the operating safeguard of the British national carrier in Scotland. Mr Willie Walsh formerly headed one of the most respected national airlines in the world before taking over - Ireland's National carrier (Aer Lingus), another strange irony.
23

Alan B,

07/10/2008 10:11:38
#Ugly George

It would help if landing charges were not charged at BAA's monopolitistic pricing. An airport authority for scotland should be aiming to develop air links for the wider good of the scottish economy. Unfortunately we have a privatised company orientated to making money out of its london airports and everything else comes second.

Air taxes also were a government policy to act as a cash cow from the london airports. It is a policy that went directly against scotlands economic interest which was to develop more direct flights. Our airlinks over the past 20yrs have been poor. although with more and more people flying it has been slowly improving. Just not nearly fast enough.
24

Alan B,

07/10/2008 10:14:16
#Scythia

Yes the irony that scotland does not have a national carrier like Aer Lingus (or Ryan Air). Part of the reason people will invest in Ireland and overlook scotland.
25

danielrober,

07/10/2008 10:25:36
Wow. What a moan show set of comments. Sales of headache and heartache tablets must be on the rise.
26

Edward,

07/10/2008 10:27:51
#20
Just a slight correction as regards ground crew.
Airlines now dont have there own dedictaed ground crew nad sub contract that out to ground handling companies. Even British Airways does this! The only staff that airlines like BA have are on the check in desks (some dont even have that). Same with catering, thats all sub contracted out.
There was a time that an airline would have their own dedicated uniformed staff from front desk all the way through to airside ground crew and catering, not any more.Nest time you fly, just look at the uniforms of the staff on landside and the trucks servicing the aircraft
y
27

Nevsky,

Moscow 07/10/2008 10:33:32
24 Alan#

Scotland doesn't even have a bloody supermarket never mind a national airline!
28

Edward,

07/10/2008 10:35:12
#23
Agree there as regards landing fees
It what keeps many airlines from flying some routes
BAA have some of the highest
A good example of how airports develop,can bee seen with Manchester. Mancheser airport is not owned by BAA, but by group of local City and Town councils, which includes Manchester city council. It operates different fee structure. Because its not part of the BAA stable, it has been able to grow and develop unhindered and is now one of the busiest airports in Europe. Its an airport that benifits the surounding councils as well as the people in the area.
BAA have had a strangle hold on Scotlands airports for too long, I would prefer if they just sold the lot and let them develop as they should freely for the benifit of Scotland and not to continue to hinder growth
29

Edward,

07/10/2008 10:45:19
#27
Actually at one time it had two
Donaldson International and Caledonian Airways
Donaldson ceased operations in 1974 and Caledonian Airways took over British United to become British Caledonian, but were squeezed and contrained by the then Tory Government, who oversaw the take over by British Airways
30

Ken S.,

Reading 07/10/2008 10:45:24
#20 Nevsky,

"..I recall Prestwick was mooted years ago as being a natural hub for inter-continental flights but Heathrow blocked it every inch of the way."

Prestwick was protected by having been granted a monopoly in Scotland on transatlantic flights.In 1990 that protection was removed and many airlines therefore moved across to Glasgow. Nowt to do with Heathrow blocking it.. unless you can produce evidence of that.

Why would BAA want to focus on Heathrow to make money, if it could in addition make money elsewhere? It wasn't a commercially attractive airport, as compared with Glasgow, which is presumably why BAA sold Prestwick in 1992.
31

Darien,

Panama 07/10/2008 10:54:40
#2 Kampung: Exactly, just coming back via one of these continental hubs. Avoid London airports like the plague. BA can get stu**ed for all I care. They've stu**ed the Scots for long enough. #30: Nevsky is correct, Prestwick should become a hub for longhaul, and no doubt would under an independent Scotland. Look at what Reykjavik has achieved. Wha cannae dae it?
32

Rasco,

Inverness 07/10/2008 11:06:12
BA has been doing this for a long time in Scotland no direct flight by BA from Inverness Lab/Lib could do nothing to stop this so no crying wolf from them.
33

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 07/10/2008 11:15:12
Darien:

A far better solution would be to build a New Airport south of Sterling. There are abandoned railway lines that run through that area that could be upgraded to provide high speed rail service directly into both Glasgow and Edinburgh.

It would also be well sighted to allow access from the existing road network as well as the potential to extend the high speed railway up north through Fife, Dundee and onward to Aberdeen and Inverness.

What Scotland needs is one Intercontinental Gateway. Easyjet has already gone on record as saying that the reason one its major hubs is not in Scotland is because the main market is fragmented by 2 grade B airports, Glasgow and Edinburgh.

The transport policy, like everything else in the UK is Londoncentric. They get Channel Tunnels and Crossrail while all the infrastructure north of the Watford Gap is left to decay. To get a transport policy that truly serves the needs of the people of Scotland will require as a minimum that it is devolved to Holyrood.
34

W U Merchant,

Aberdeen 07/10/2008 11:20:33
How many more "summits" can Salmond chair? This is all about self promotion. Scotland desreves better.
35

AJ Fife,

07/10/2008 11:38:42
Mr Salmond is, once again, showing his statesman like credentials and fighting Scotland's corner.

It must be becoming clear to all in Scotland, that Westminster is systematically trying to destroy the Scottish infrastructure and economy.

Wouldn't it be great if Mr Salmond could have Gordon Brown arrested, as a traitor, the next time he dares to set foot in Scotland.

36

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 07/10/2008 11:40:17
Sorry about that, at 34 it should have read "south of Stirling"
37

Alan B,

07/10/2008 11:44:10
#W U Merchant

"How many more "summits" can Salmond chair?"

There will be alot more work for Salmond to do to repair the neglect of scotland by successive tory and labour governments.

We all know Brown sold Scotland out for his own political career.

Unfortunately the scottish parliament does not have the powers to really deal with and fully address the failings of labour and Brown.
38

W U Merchant,

Aberdeen 07/10/2008 11:44:30
36

Come off it, AJ. You know that this is all about self promotion. Like Blair, he is preparing for the day when he departs politics and secures his sinecures.
39

W U Merchant,

Aberdeen 07/10/2008 11:46:05
38

Come off it, Alan. You know that this is all about self promotion. Like Blair, he is preparing for the day when he departs politics and secures his sinecures.
40

Alan B,

07/10/2008 11:47:43
#AJ Fife

Browns contempt for Scotland does suggest that his psycological problems have got the better of him with his bitter attempts to thwart the democractically elected scottish government. Hospitalisation is probably more appropriate.
41

W U Merchant,

Aberdeen 07/10/2008 11:49:10
41

Alan, for once I agree with you. Certify him.
42

Alan B,

07/10/2008 11:51:12
#W U Merchant

If Salmond was only interested in Salmond he would have joined a major uk party. If he had joined labour he would have been labours obvious choice to replace Smith as leader and potential pm.

Salmond however joined a party at a time where it was unlikely he would get in a position of high office.

Compare that to Brown. Brown is a clown. Incompetent and was a poor short termist chancellor that has failed the uk not just scotland. His economic incompetence is there for all to see as everything collapses round him.

43

Number 6,

Germany 07/10/2008 11:55:18
No need to worry too much about what is a dreadful airline leaving. If there is any spare capacity, another company will take it up. Good to see the First Minister showing concern over the inevitable job losses. Will Liebour's scottish detatchment, or the Toriy detatchment for that matter, raise any concerns ?. No, of course not, they will see it as right and proper that the cuts are being made in Scotland and not Englandshire.

There will be some unionista hand-wringing of course, but only if they are asked to comment., otherwise, they will do as their london controllers tell them
and keep quiet on behalf of the "Union".
44

Alan B,

07/10/2008 11:55:32
#W U Merchant

Seriously for a politician to be successful they have to be good at self promotion. Whether it was Kennedy (remember all the chat shows), Heseltine, and Salmond. A politician with charisma is liked by the media and they will use it. Tommy is another. Any politician with that xfactor would be stupid not to use it.

The question is are they competent with it. Do they have the right policies.

The benefit of Salmond at this time is he actually knows about economics. One of the most ridiculous things about the running of the uk is most chancellors have little economic experience.
45

ExpatBackinScotland,

Carnoustie 07/10/2008 11:57:59
Whenever I flew from Mexico to Scotland or the other way as an expat, I always used Schipol in Amsterdam for no other reason than the intense grilling I got at Heathrow because "I havent been back for a while". I hate that airport!

It always annoys me how Scotland is short changed with flights. Think of simply holiday flights (for one) Exeter has more destinations than Scotland!

We could and should have more direct destinations from Scotland.
46

W U Merchant,

Aberdeen 07/10/2008 11:58:31
43

Alan, again I agree with you. Brown is a dud - like so many others - but he is no self seeker.
47

W U Merchant,

Aberdeen 07/10/2008 11:59:47
45

Alan, you are wrong to compare Salmond with Sheridan.
48

W U Merchant,

Aberdeen 07/10/2008 12:04:02
45

Alan, of course he knows about economics. After all, he is an economics graduate of the University of St Andrews, is he not? The complication, however, is that he has always been an advocate of the free market (check out the websites of Madsen Pirie and the Adam Smith Institute for references) - the very same free market which has led to the present day financial chaos.
49

Alan B,

07/10/2008 12:17:04
#W U Merchant

The current financial crisis is not the free market as such. But the poor managment of a free market economy. Poor regulation.

The main root cause is the silly mortgages given out in both the US and the UK. The failure of the morgage and housing market in the US brought about the global failure of the credit markets and inter bank lending. Globalisation meant that many of the mortages were sold on to non US banks and spread the problem. Iceland were particularly bad at buying US debt.

In the UK we have completely failed to control house price inflation. That spiral got completely out of control. The huge growth in mortages were then partly funded by the wholesale credit markets which made the banks vunerable when the global credit markets (inter bank lending)dried up.

If Brown had controlled house price inflation, we would not have the huge levels of personal debt. If Brown had regualated banks properly they would not be so vulnerable to the credit market. Although without the massive house price inflation then banks themselves would not have been so exposed to that market. And finally if brown had control fiscal spending so that we were not running up huge deficits in the decent economic times then we would have a lot more flexibility now to deal with the problems.

50

W U Merchant,

Aberdeen 07/10/2008 12:23:03
50

Alan - nonsense. It is the fault of free market spivs and speculators, it is down to greed.
51

Calum10,

07/10/2008 12:24:06
Scotland does not need BA or Heathrow. Scots are already switching to other airlines and other international hubs because they offer better passenger services.

You simply would be mad to use Heathrow.
52

Ewan M,

07/10/2008 12:37:47
More anti-Scottish conspiracies here. The fact is this is the commercial economics of a private company, which happens almost daily I'm afraid.

No #10. "It is Time to Vote Pro Scottish, Vote SNP, they actually care about Scotland and its People"

Stop kidding yourself voting and marketing the SNP is not pro Scottish its pro SNP, there is huge difference, realise that.



53

Alan B,

07/10/2008 12:39:33
#Calum10

Heathrow is a good access point to Scotland. Look at it not only about how people from scotland can get out of scotland but also how they can access scotland. Scotland needs good access to Heathrow.

"You simply would be mad to use Heathrow. "

That really depends where you are flying to. If you are a business man working in south west london Heathrow is easier to access than Standsted or Gatwick.
54

Ewan M,

07/10/2008 12:40:59
#41 "Browns contempt for Scotland does suggest that his psycological problems have got the better of him with his bitter attempts to thwart the democractically elected scottish government. Hospitalisation is probably more appropriate" Alan has Labour not been elected? Your comments are normally good, but comments like that suggest you need hospitalisation.
55

Ewan M,

07/10/2008 12:41:21
#41 "Browns contempt for Scotland does suggest that his psycological problems have got the better of him with his bitter attempts to thwart the democractically elected scottish government. Hospitalisation is probably more appropriate" Alan has Labour not been elected? Your comments are normally good, but comments like that suggest you need hospitalisation.
56

Ewan M,

07/10/2008 12:41:46
#41 "Browns contempt for Scotland does suggest that his psycological problems have got the better of him with his bitter attempts to thwart the democractically elected scottish government. Hospitalisation is probably more appropriate" Alan has Labour not been elected? Your comments are normally good, but comments like that suggest you need hospitalisation.
57

democracy,

Scottish Borders 07/10/2008 12:42:06
#10 A Better Way, I note that Grahamski has never been seen since your post!?&!?!
58

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 07/10/2008 12:43:13
51 W u Merchant

"It is the fault of free market spivs and speculators"

Not many analysts accept this to be the case now. I do wish that people would not take everything Alex Salmond says as gospel. His assessment of the situation has not been accurate in this instance.
59

Alan B,

07/10/2008 12:44:27
#Ewan M

Voting snp is pro scottish if it the union is not in Scotlands national interest. I have yet to see a convincing case of why the union is in scotland interest given how badly we have done relatively to others.

The real question for the unionist parties is why do they support a union at any cost. Support for any union should be conditional on it being in the national interest. For instance you would not join the EU if it meant that your economy was going to perform badly.

As such the unionist parties really have to say at what point is enough, enough. The hope that other small countries will fail so that they can agrue for the union. The vain hope that at some unquanitifiable time in the future scotland may transform itself in the union. But how long do we wait before we simply say the union is failing scotland.
60

Ewan M,

07/10/2008 12:45:01
#41 "Browns contempt for Scotland does suggest that his psycological problems have got the better of him with his bitter attempts to thwart the democractically elected scottish government. Hospitalisation is probably more appropriate" Alan has Labour not been elected? Your comments are normally good, but comments like that suggest you need hospitalisation.

#58 He must be SO terrifed to come to his computer and dare respond, or more realistically he is just not on the forum!
61

AJ Fife,

07/10/2008 12:46:57
Ewan #55-57,

I think it's you that needs sectioning bonzo - you keep repeating yourself........
62

Arfur,

07/10/2008 12:47:01
Some of you are being very short sighted here. If BA were to stop flights between Scotland and London that means the biggest supplier of flights down there (which i use fairly often for work) will be gone. This will cause people to go to the cheeper airlines (which needed to be cheep to compete) who will eventually raise their prices, either because of demand or simply because they can.
63

Number 6,

Germany 07/10/2008 12:47:42
Have the unionista parties voiced any "concern" over these possible job losses ?.
64

JT,

07/10/2008 12:50:54
Flew to Gatwick for a wedding last summer, flight took 55 mins, getting luggage took 45 mins - we were grateful that we actually got ours. In the process of pricing up flights to New Zealand, guess I'd better cross BA off my list then!
65

Ewan M,

07/10/2008 12:55:24
Alan your opinion, not shared by the majority obviously looking at voter polls. Last opionion poll 34% support independence yet, 43% said they would for the SNP. Salmond is even convining his own supporters!!!

I think you are miles of the mark and have simply made up your mind the union is bad and independence is good. The SNP should spend less time trying to break things up and work as a Union in cohesion with the EU to improve people lives, like evidently some SNP supporters think looking at the numbers. I do remember you were talking a week back about comparing successful European ecconomies against Scotland one of which you used was Iceland!! LOL

However, I think we can both agree that we will never agree, so I going back to work.
66

Alan B,

07/10/2008 12:55:40
#Ewan M

yes the comment about Brown and his psycological problem remark was hammed up. But it was labour insiders that lead the way with that remark.

He has however been bitter towards the new scottish government.

-Remember him publically saying after the election he would not work with them. A disgrace considering.
-Remember Brown not congratulating Salmond on winning until the scottish press got hold of it and ridiculed brown. That is just manners. (Blair also did not congratulate Salmond, despite congratulating Sein Fein. compare that to the tories when blair left power)
-look at Brown withholding Barnett consequentials when he gave more money to the english prison service.
- look at Brown in relation to withholding council tax rebate. Remember all the other parties lib dems and tories agree scotland should get that money. Even labour own documation at the time of devolutin said it was part of the block grant. Giving scotland a parliament and power to vary council taxation and then withholding money if it does so is a disgrace. I would have expect much more from a scottish minister.
- remember Brown telling the uk civil service not to cooperate with the scottish government. (similar to how westminster labour with Darling refused to help the labour scottish exec to implement free personal care by withholding info). while at the same time refusing an independent scottish civil service like Irelands.
- remember the scotman reporting brown refusing to answer Salmonds phone calls.
-remember Brown refusing to change the name of scottish exec to government officially despite labur allowing it for the much weaker Welsh assembly.

As such he does display some serious character flaws.
67

Alan B,

07/10/2008 12:57:32
#Arfur

The question is will it affect the landing slots of Scottish flights to Heathrow.
68

Ewan M,

07/10/2008 13:02:49
~64 I certainly will, but name another private company who wouldn't cut loss making areas in times of ecconomic difficulty............Exactly.

I do recall British Energy yes with the name 'British' has the vast majority of jobs in Scotland as that is where a huge part of the business is. Likewise BA want to do the same as the vast majority of it's business is in London. It's just ecconimcs folks, but very sad if it does happen.
69

The_Reiver,

07/10/2008 13:03:12
Surely Salmond should be delighted at the prospect of BRITISH Airways withdrawing from Scotland?

Isn't this what his agenda is all about? Get the Brits out of Scotland eh?
70

Alan B,

07/10/2008 13:03:23
#Ewan M

I did not specifically mention Iceland. I did mention in a group the countries that make up the arc of prosperity with specific mention to Norway and Ireland. The reason i mention them was they have grown at a rate of 3.6% on average over the last decade while the uk has only done 2.8% and scotland trails with a poor 2.2%.

It is not just the past decade but the last 30yrs scotland economic growth has been poor with less that 2% on average.

Put another way

Luxembourg, Norway, Ireland, Switzerland, Iceland, Netherlands,Austria, Denmark, Sweden, Finland , Belgium

all are richer that the uk with higher gdp per capita ppp.

I do not say being a small nation will insulate you from the crisis. Both small and large nations are suffering. Ireland for instance will suffer like the UK and US due to its silly levels of mortage debt.
71

JCA REID,

Annan 07/10/2008 13:05:41
Stuff 'em! They are a rip off anyway!!
In the 1950's KLM & SAS Airlines wanted to make Prestwick their base for Trans-Atlantic operations but the Londoncentrics didn't want that - can't have parochial Teuchters doing international business!
There areplenty other Airlines willing to step into vaccuum if BA buggar off!!
72

Alan B,

07/10/2008 13:10:50
#Ewan M

"have simply made up your mind the union is bad and independence is good"

off course i have. For a long while i consider what the union should do to reform itself to work for the benefit of the whole uk. After yrs and failure of government to deal with say the north south divides etc i have completely given up on the uk reforming itself enough to work in scotlands advantage.

For me it is not a union at any price.

Plus the fact i see the eu union having superceded the reasons for a uk union. I just see the uk union as outdated, obsolete and not working in scotland interest. The fact that unionist parties are more interested in attacking "separation" (yes that immature with vocab like that) that actually putting a case for the union and actually standing up for scotland within it.

Question for you. How bad would the union have to be on scotland for you to want to go independent. Or is it a case of no matter how bad. No matter how badly we perform. No matter the evidence.

The unionist argument serious boils down to yes we have done badly (no one can deny that relative to others), but we are so incapable we would do even worse outside the union. If scotland was averaging 3% economic growth a year the argument would be very different.
73

Alan B,

07/10/2008 13:12:51
#The_Reiver

No it is about fulfilling scotlands potential. Using our resources to benefit scotland. Improving our economy so we are not trailing other small nations with the associate improvement in living standards. Improving our health record which is so tied in to the culture of economic failure.
74

Ken S.,

Reading 07/10/2008 13:18:37
How did this subject become the usual poor Scotland being done down by England? The UK government is not restricting flights. see CAA Policy
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/589/ERG_EPIA_Statement_of_Policies_Aug_2008.pdf
"...the CAA sees no good grounds for constraining competition through the licensing process. This points towards a fully liberal approach to the grant of licences to serve points outside the EU, just as now applies to routes within the EU..."

BAA (Spanish owned) and BA (no longer State owned) behave as any other commercial company, i.e. will be looking to make money wherever practicable. If BA have erred in their commercial judgement in this case then no doubt other companies will step in to fulfil the perceived consumer demand for such flights.

Same sort of commercial judgement applies to the variety of routes served by any airport (though subject to any restrictions that may be applied by other countries). CAA policy again:
"..Many international routes are subject to bilateral restrictions on designation, frequency or capacity which would prevent a British airline from exercising its licence freely. However, the CAA would not regard the absence of the necessary bilateral rights as good grounds for refusing to grant a licence application...".

#31 Darien
"Look at what Reykjavik has achieved. Wha cannae dae it?"
Reykjavik (or, more accurately, Keflavik, the international airport there)achieved 1/2 million passengers fewer than were carried just on Glasgow's top 15 international destinations during 2007. Glasgow serves somewhat more destinations than Keflavik. But don't let facts get in the way of a good whinge, along with dreams of a Prestwick that can be revived if only Scotland were free.

Iceland of course is a supreme example of a small nation whose independence from its erstwhile colonial masters has enabled it to remain aloof from all the current international economic turmoil. Not.

Independence is a fine and noble aspiration, if
75

Ken S.,

Reading 07/10/2008 13:20:27
75 Cont:
Independence is a fine and noble aspiration, if that's what you really want - but don't imagine that it's a cure-all for everything that aggravates you about your present situation.
76

Nevsky,

Moscow 07/10/2008 13:47:07
Ken S

No-one is suggesting that independence is a cure-all for anything let alone the collapse of world financial institutions; this is a banking crisis and not a constitutional one.

77

vimto,

07/10/2008 13:48:49
As salmond does not count himself or the rest of scotland as "British" why should a British company stay in such a hostile enviroment.
78

Alan B,

07/10/2008 14:00:23
#vimto

With that logic BA should not fly to Ireland or the US as they decided that independence was a better way.

79

Joe,

Clark Road 07/10/2008 14:02:15
#3..That single airport already exists in Edinburgh - Scotland's busiest.
80

vimto,

07/10/2008 14:03:30
79. Ah,but the thing is YOU ARE BRITISH!
81

Number 6,

Germany 07/10/2008 14:05:47
#76 Ken , like so many unionistas , you just don't get it. I doubt many independienties think everything is going to be rosy once out of the union. What we are looking for is the right to make our own decisions and mistakes about how our country is run.

At the moment, england is given priority over the other member nations , and that is simply not fair or just. When the dreaful Liebour party was in power North of the border, they repeatedly refered devolved matters back to London for approval and decisions.
In other words they thought by throwing the peasants a bone in the shape of their own parliment, that would keep them voting Liebour liebour Liebour. This despite Scotland officially having "Some of the most deprived areas of Europe".

Independienties happen to think we are better than that and are simply looking for self determination.
This, bizarrely , is seen by scottish Unionistas as wrong wrong wrong.. and why ? just because, because, because. Sorry we have enough of that kind of simpleton thinking and now are looking for a new way forward.

What's wrong with that ?.
82

Hannah,

edinburgh 07/10/2008 14:06:11
This story is inaccurate. British Airways has no plans to pull out of Scotland. The Glasgow base of cabin crew, may close, in January. It would mean that the routes would solely be served by London based cabin crew.
To some of the sillier comments, the Royal Bank of Scotland and Standard life (which are both scottish companies)own a huge chunk of British Airways shares. I very much doubt British Airways would in turn be foolish enough to pull out of Scotland. Edinburgh being the second financial city within the UK to London. The reason the routes are now less profitable is simple. Many executive card holders swapped to British Midland when all the BA ground staff across the UK were replaced by inferior aviance ground staff, a cheap low cost handling agent. It was a cost saving ploy once more by BA Irish boss, Willie Walsh. Hugely unpopular decision for BA card holders.
83

Alan B,

07/10/2008 14:07:23
#Ken S

The issue for Scotland is the lack of direct flights to different locations. A good transport network is required for Scotland economically.

As such cuts by an important airline like BA could be damaging to Scotland. Therefore it makes sense for the Scottish government to push Scotlands case.

In relation to BAA, you will be aware of the competition investigation into it. This shows that BAA having been monopolistic and that has been damaging.

The point for scotland is has BAA been detrimental to developing direct flight links from central scotland. As has been pointed out Manchester airport has developed well using a different model. Scotland should probably have followed that lead. Privisation is fine but to work it needs competition. Having Edin and Glas with the same owner in the private sector unregulated by Scotland has been detrimental. It means that landing chargers are charged to maximise profit (monopolistic profit) and not developed for the general interests of the economy.
84

Alan B,

07/10/2008 14:10:14
#Hannah

Advantge for business traveller using BA rather than BM (was do not know current situation)is if you missed on flight you could jump on the next one 15minutes later subject to availability. Personally prefered BM until it went down hill.
85

Joe,

Clark Road. 07/10/2008 14:11:22
#7..Perhaps it's the Glasgow BA flights at risk rather than Edinburgh's? I cannot understand why Edinburgh always get's dragged into Glasgow woes..
86

vimto,

07/10/2008 14:17:39
83. WHY, Does scotland have some sort of power over BA,if BA want to pull out of scotland they will.
87

Ken S.,

Reading 07/10/2008 14:24:44
#82 Number 6,
"..like so many unionistas .."

Who says I'm a unionista, as such. I'm happy with the concept of UK, whilst acknowledging that there is considerable scope for constitutional improvements all round. On the other hand I fully acknowledge that whether or not to stay in UK is a matter for Scotland and, if there is no mutual agreement on how UK might be improved to all our benefit, then harmonious separation and subsequent co-existence would indeed be the optimum solution.

I wouldn't bother with these boards at all if, for family reasons, I wasn't favourably disposed towards Scotland (otherwise it would be a case of 'who cares'?).

I just get a little bolshy when some folk can turn any topic into an England v Scotland thing. This particular one just didn't seem to be particularly relevant to nasty doings of the UK State!
88

vimto,

07/10/2008 14:41:04
Ken S. As a member of the English Democrats,perhaps your "caring" is a little synical.
89

Ugly George,

07/10/2008 14:42:47
84 Alan B
Is there not a move to make BAA sell either Glasgow or Edinburgh in the same way as they are being made to sello Gatwick.
90

vimto,

07/10/2008 14:56:10
88."I wouldn't bother with these boards at all if, for family reasons, I wasn't favourably disposed towards Scotland (otherwise it would be a case of 'who cares'?)"

And yet you are a member of the English Democrats,how odd!
91

Ken S.,

Reading 07/10/2008 15:04:32
#84 Alan B,
"The issue for Scotland is the lack of direct flights to different locations. A good transport network is required for Scotland economically."

If there is a commercially viable demand, then nothing stops it being met.

"As such cuts by an important airline like BA could be damaging to Scotland. Therefore it makes sense for the Scottish government to push Scotland's case"

If there is insufficient commercially viable demand (whether by BA or a competitor) but Scotland deems it important to maintain a particular level of service, then it becomes a question of subsidy - though maybe that's illegal, I know not. No different in essence from my local council subsidizing a bus route into our nearest big town, because usage is small yet service regarded as essential. --Or indeed the subsidy that used to be made (still is?)towards running of the Highlands & Islands aerodromes.


"As has been pointed out Manchester airport has developed well using a different model. Scotland should probably have followed that lead. Privatisation is fine but to work it needs competition. Having Edin and Glas with the same owner in the private sector unregulated by Scotland has been detrimental."

I agree that the BAA monopoly is wrong , whether in a Scottish or Southern English context. Comparison of Glasgow and Edinburgh with Manchester stirs vague memories of the 1960s, when I was a young office boy in the ministry when publicly-owned aerodromes were being disposed of. 'Group 1' consisted of Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted and Prestwick, the British Airports Authority being created to manage them. 'Group 2' included Glasgow, Edinburgh, Manchester, and other similar-sized aerodromes. The aim was that Group 2s would be handed over to local authorities and that duly happened. I moved on thereafter so I don't know the circumstances but Edinburgh and Glasgow were acquired subsequently by BAA. Maybe the local authorities found them irksome to run? Had that transfer not happene
92

Ken S.,

Reading 07/10/2008 15:05:39
#92 cont:
Had that transfer not happened then Edinburgh and/or Glasgow might today have been in a similar position to Manchester airport.