After Blue Islands: Why the Channel Islands Need an Integrated Air Network
First published in the Jersey Evening Post 2025-11-22
Introduction
The collapse of Blue Islands came as a shock to many islanders, but it should not have come as a surprise. For years we have depended on an aviation model that looks stable from a distance yet is structurally fragile up close. The lifeline routes that carry patients to specialist treatment, connect families, sustain tourism and support business investment have rested on a foundation of duplicated systems, parallel oversight and an optimistic belief that two tiny jurisdictions could indefinitely sustain two micro-airline environments.
We should acknowledge the emotional reality: Jersey–Guernsey rivalry runs deep. It shapes our cultural identity, our humour and occasionally our political reflexes. But rivalry has a cost, and sometimes we only understand that cost when something breaks. Blue Islands’ collapse revealed the true price of running separate aviation arrangements in a region that – economically and socially – functions as a single travel ecosystem.
This was not only a governance failure, although there were elements of that. It was also a structural inevitability. No two English towns of comparable combined population would attempt to operate two independent aviation systems. Yet for decades we have done precisely this: maintaining separate oversight, separate resilience planning, separate Public Service Obligations, and separate responses to each crisis. The result has been a cycle of emergency interventions, uncertain timetables, and islands forced into reactive positions when operators struggle.
We must use this moment to build something better.
The case for an Integrated Channel Islands Air Network
At its heart, the challenge is simple. Air travel is not a luxury for the Channel Islands; it is essential infrastructure. It enables our medical pathways, supports our economy, and keeps families connected. When that infrastructure is unstable, the consequences fall on people – especially those who need certainty most: patients, carers, essential workers and small businesses. It is not clear however that governments should be, or need to be, in the airline business.
One possible alternative would be the establishment of an Integrated Channel Islands Air Network. This does not mean the creation of a single airline. British Airways, easyJet and now Loganair add to our resilience and competition and will form part of our future. It does not require Jersey to own aircraft or replicate Guernsey’s model of state ownership. It does not diminish our independence or blur our constitutional boundaries. Instead, it recognises that when two small jurisdictions share the same risks, the same connections and the same economic pressures, the sensible approach is coordinated strategy, not duplicated responses.
The proposal I am putting forward is grounded in fiscal realism. The current approach is simply too expensive. We duplicate overheads, regulatory capacity, oversight functions and emergency support mechanisms. We plan for the same risks separately. We negotiate with operators separately. And when things go wrong, we both end up writing similar cheques in similar circumstances.
A shared, neutral structure allows both islands to maintain autonomy where it matters while cooperating where the benefits are undeniable: resilience, scheduling, Public Service Obligations and long-term fleet and contingency planning.
A statutory Channel Islands Aviation Board
To anchor this approach, we need to consider the creation of a statutory Channel Islands Aviation Board. This would be jointly mandated by Jersey and Guernsey and supported by both governments. Its purpose would be strategic, operational and forward-looking.
The Board would:
- Coordinate long-term aviation strategy across both islands
- Oversee risk planning for essential routes
- Align Public Service Obligations so medical and essential travel is protected
- Facilitate coordinated scheduling where duplication currently weakens resilience
- Support shared contingency arrangements, including access to spare capacity
- Develop a joint environmental and fleet modernisation pathway
- Provide transparent reporting to both assemblies
A statutory basis matters. It gives the Board durability, accountability and a clear mandate. It prevents aviation strategy from being determined solely by short-term pressures or individual ministerial philosophies. It allows both islands to maintain independence while working together constructively.
Protecting medical travel must come first
If there is one area where the current arrangement is most vulnerable, it is medical travel. For many islanders, reliable access to specialist care in the UK is not optional. The uncertainty that followed the collapse of Blue Islands was not merely inconvenient – for some it was frightening.
A shared approach to medical travel assurance is a necessary early deliverable. With integrated route-risk planning, aligned Public Service Obligations, and coordinated scheduling, we can build a safety net that guarantees continuity regardless of what happens in the commercial market.
Affordability and value for taxpayers
The financial argument is clear: duplication costs money. Both islands have spent heavily on supporting our air links, and we will continue to do so because they are essential. The question is whether we continue paying twice for the same resilience, or whether we use scale, coordination and shared planning to reduce long-term cost pressure.
This does not mean creating a bureaucracy. It means eliminating the inefficiencies created by operating in two small silos rather than one coherent network.
Economic, social and environmental benefits
Reliable air links are foundational to our wider economic strategy: business connectivity, tourism recovery, essential worker mobility, and the smooth operation of supply chains.
Environmental progress is also easier when islands work together. Shared fleet strategies, coordinated procurement, and unified environmental standards give operators clearer signals and reduce the burden on each individual jurisdiction.
A realistic, phased pathway
This is not an overnight transformation. It requires careful planning and measured milestones:
Within 12–18 months:
- Joint route-risk assessment
- Shared medical travel assurance framework
- Combined Public Service Obligation strategy
Years 2–3:
- Coordinated scheduling approach
- Shared contingency arrangements
Years 3–5:
- Network-wide fleet and environmental roadmap
This is both practical and achievable. It respects constitutional independence while delivering the interdependence that a modern air network requires.
Conclusion
The Blue Islands collapse was a moment of clarity. A reminder that the future we need will not come from rivalry, or nostalgia for past arrangements, but from realism and shared purpose.
An Integrated Channel Islands Air Network is not a theory. It is a necessary next step for resilient medical travel, responsible public spending, stronger economic connectivity and a more stable future for our islands.
It is time to act – together.