It's the railways which are subsidised not the airlines.
Try telling that to us poor suckers this side of the boarder that need to pay our taxes to airlines for "route development".
Then we have
http://www.transportscotland.gov.uk/air/Lifeline-Air-Services
Government taxation is clobbering non tax payer subsidised industry and customers have no choice but to travel on tax payer subsidised options. ie the railways.
So the message from the governement is. If you're unsubsidised, profitable and provide a product that customers want, we will tax you out of existence.
Good value eh?
Yep, it saves polution doesn't it, which is a good thing. It also means that we don't have to suffer getting treated like terrorists at airports which is also a good thing.
I think that you will find that the UK only routes have other options anyway, such as flyBe taking them on.
I don't see what point you post is trying to make. BMI baby is loss making, are you suggesting that the taxpayer keeps it going. What exactly is the social need for the routes? Taxpayers all over the EU subsidise routes which would cause social hardship if they didn't exist, but you already know this anyway. It is just you are so anti-railway you would never admit this, nor would you admit that in some instances railway is better than air for a A-B journey!
Please let me know what routes will be lost that will force people onto trains when BMI baby will close?
Looking at East Midlands
Glasgow and Edinburgh will go to flyBe, don't know about the Newquay route which I suspect will force people onto the roads
Birmingham - Aberdeen (was this BMI baby)
Edinburgh / Glasgow - Leeds / Manchester (other airlines do the routes)
It is sad to see people out of jobs, but like all industries, if the business is profitable someone else will take it on.