What went wrong at Newquay Airport?

THE three-week closure of Newquay Airport that cost council taxpayers more than £1 million happened because of a lack of communication and risk management by council chiefs, a new report has revealed.

The now disbanded Cornwall County Council, which owned the airport, had been due to take over running the airport from RAF chiefs in November.

But because it failed to get the correct licence from the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) in time for the RAF pulling out on November 30, the airport was closed down. Thousands of angry passengers had their flights cancelled and the shutdown cost the council more than £1 million.

Yesterday, John Mills, who carried out an inquiry into what went wrong, revealed his findings before a packed press conference at County Hall, Truro.

While insisting that the council had done a "terrific" job in ensuring Cornwall had an airport, he highlighted the problems that led to the disaster.

He said the three-year transition project from a military to a civilian airport had been going well until September 2008 when Selex, the contractor installing the new control tower, reported delays to the airport project team.

"The mounting risks were being catalogued by Selex for the project team and being reviewed at their many meetings together on site, but somehow these indications of heightened risk were not finding their way into upwards reporting to the chief executive and leading elected members. The project team was in constant touch with the Selex team and, over and beyond reports received, was aware, for example, of various difficulties Selex itself was having with its sub-contractors."

The delays over the control tower meant that the airport failed to obtain the necessary licence to operate from the CAA.

Mr Mills said that although the RAF had earlier stated it would stay on at the airport until the end of December, the project team had been confident that it could meet the November 30 deadline.

By the time the airport project team realised it would not make the deadline, it was too late to ask the RAF to carry on because of overseas military commitments, including the Iraq war.

Mr Mills went on: "There was an over-reliance – an assumption that the RAF would come to the rescue. There was a relaxed view about the November 30 deadline – probably too relaxed.

"Had the RAF been asked in September to stay until the end of December, all the evidence I have seen suggests that the answer would have been positive and they would have stayed on.

"By the time the RAF was asked to stay on, which was November 21, it was simply too late."

Mr Mills would not be drawn on whether or not the airport project team had been wrong in how it dealt with the escalating delays.

He said: "The management structure was not robust in the last couple of months of the project. Although there was some excellent management, there was no single over-arching board in charge.

"There was no single table where all could express their view.

"There was weakness and some confusion and accountability.

"Risk management at a corporate level was good on paper but in practice was not very good. Communication was not good.

"The pressure towards the end of the project mounted and it was too much for the team. It all led to a major panic."

The old county council ceased to exist in April this year when the new unitary authority took over.

Speaking after the press conference, Mark Kaczmarek, cabinet member for housing, said: "The report could have been stronger – it would have been better to have someone with an aviation background carrying it out.

"I'm pleased the council stepped in to take over the running of the airport – but a council should not be in the business of running a commercial venture like an airport.

"As soon as it is a viable concern, it should be sold on."

Dan Rogerson, Lib-Dem MP for North Cornwall, later described the project as ambitious but added that contractors should have been more involved in the process.

He said: "The report reflects the reality that the council took on an ambitious project in keeping the airport alive, and there were risks attached.

"There is some evidence that those risks could and should have been shared with contractors, keeping those responsible for doing the work involved in the timetable, so that the taxpayer would be protected.

"Doubtless the council will want to learn that lesson."