Vendors must not be held to ransom

REGARDING the decision to close Debenhams’ MetroCentre store.

There is always the chance Debenhams may enter into a new lease with the owners of the Metrocentre, on agreed terms, without the need (for example) to exploit opportunism and threaten to close the store unless new terms and a reduced rent were forthcoming.

Why should an honest trader within the MetroCentre be expected to subsidise any trader which threatens to close their store unless they were required to pay less rent?

Common facilities are accessible to all traders and I cannot see the logic of one massive store being given preferential treatment to others.

Of course, if we are to continue to be obsessed with climate change, local authorities would rein in (for example) free parking available within out-of-town shopping centres and require car owners who frequent the MetroCentre to pay parking charges.

By the same logic, we should question the basis on which Newcastle International Airport should agree to one set of terms for one group of airlines, such as British Airways and Emirates, who continue to pay the going rate to support all services available on the site, while agreeing to pay a substantially lesser rate to bucket outfits.

Because one airline chooses not to use security or baggage handling does not imply such an airline may incur a lesser fee. If Easyjet and Ryanair don’t wish to remain at Newcastle International Airport, the airport and region can survive.

LALAINE VERGORA-PARAS