Far better contingency planning and preparedness must be put in place by UK airports, and by the airlines that use them, to prevent the kind of chaos that unfolded at Gatwick Airport on Christmas Eve 2013. The problems that unfolded were not new and the whole event should be a wake-up call for airports across the UK to improve their operational resilience. Airports must ensure that their contingency planning is good enough to ensure that future disruption will be met with well-drilled arrangements that are familiar to airport operators, airlines, and other contractors, and which put passenger interests first. If our largest airports cannot demonstrate they can do this then the Civil Aviation Authority must act. Passengers must also be promptly reimbursed for the extra costs they face as a consequence of disruption. The Committee welcomed a key conclusion from Gatwick's own review of the events on Christmas Eve that the airport should appoint passenger champions at each of its terminals. Similar arrangements should also be put in place at other major UK airports. Further recommendations include that airports should: develop (in consultation with airlines) much clearer operational protocols and guidance on the threshold conditions that will trigger the cancellation or postponement of flights; negotiate robust agreements with airlines (which carry formal responsibility for passenger welfare) for reclaiming the costs of looking after passengers during periods of disruption. Government should also push for amendments to a proposed new EU regulation on passenger compensation to include electronic means of alert and information dissemination

The Committee examined a number of case studies during its inquiry including the Mersey Gateway Project, the Tyne Tunnels and proposals for new crossings in East London and the Lower Thames. The Transport Committee says a short-term approach to planning key infrastructure projects has left many estuary areas in the UK with inadequate transport capacity and poor connectivity: "A lack of cross-river capacity limits local and national economic growth so we call upon the Government to take a far more long-term approach when planning new bridges and tunnels. The Government must rectify that weakness as soon as possible. Important infrastructure projects, such as the Mersey Gateway Bridge, have the potential to generate economic growth by linking workers to jobs and consumers to retailers." The Committee welcomes proposals to build a package of new river crossings in east London and believes these developments are "long overdue."

Proposals for reforms for the EU as a whole are likely to find a more favourable reception than possible requests for further 'special treatment' for the UK. The Committee is sceptical that other Member States would be willing to renegotiate existing EU law so as to allow the UK on its own to reduce its degree of integration, especially where this could be seen as undermining the integrity of the Single Market. Other Member States appear to want the UK to remain an EU Member. Closer Eurozone integration is a potential risk to the position of the UK and other non-Eurozone states in the EU. However, the December 2012 agreement on the Single Supervisory Mechanism for banking regulation shows what the UK can achieve to protect its position. The Eurozone is in any case far from a homogenous bloc and the expansion and closer integration of the Eurozone does not therefore necessarily render the UK's position in the EU impossible or worthless. This report does not examine whether the UK should remain in the EU or withdraw. However, it agrees with the Government that, if the UK were to leave the EU, the current arrangements for relations with the EU which are maintained by Norway or Switzerland would not be appropriate for the UK. If it is in the UK's interest to remain in the Single Market, the UK should either remain in the EU, or launch an effort for radical institutional change in Europe to give decision-making rights in the Single Market to all its participating states