Mr. Neil Pakey:

Okay. I will comment briefly on the great deal of progress that has been made to date. While it is clear that the legislation will not be passed until some future date, obviously we do not want to get caught cold. It is worth underlining that a great deal of preparatory work is being done on various fronts at present. Shannon Development, for example, is working on the transition.

The amendments to the Bill that we are suggesting are set out on page 6 of our submission. They are quite brief. Head 5 relates to the establishment of the Shannon group company.

We acknowledge the statement that "The Minister shall by order appoint a day to be the establishment day for the purposes of this Act as soon as practicable following the commencement of this Act". We are mindful of the major logistical exercise in achieving the date. Clearly we would like clarity on the appointed day. Given the amount of work involved, it is always helpful to understand the end date. If there is to be any delay, it would be helpful to know that as soon as possible. We urge that such a delay be no more than one quarter as otherwise costs etc. become unmanageable.

Head 9(b) deals with the functions and general duties of the group. While we agree with the principal functions as stated, they could be expanded somewhat to include promoting the development of airport traffic. We also suggest adding, "to utilise any other strategy, deemed appropriate in support of developing the Group's business interests profitably". This would ensure we are not as restricted as we are with the existing text.

Head 12(5) deals with borrowing by the group. We recommend that the borrowing facility limit for the group be set at a €100 million to allow Shannon group to deliver on the recommendations of the task force and to ensure we can be as competitive as our European peer group airport companies. As any such borrowings would be subject to business cases and ministerial consent, we should not have a more restrictive limit than our competitors, be they private or public operators. Earlier I mentioned some of the operators for which I worked in the past. They are clearly in the business of borrowing and investing in their airports and we seek the same flexibility to do that.

Head 22(2) and (3) deal with the chairman and members of the board of subsidiaries. In line with best practice we recommend that the chairman and board of the group appoint the directors of any subsidiary of the group and would also appoint the chairman of the board of any subsidiaries of the group. We believe the chairman should recommend members to the board, but the board as a whole should be the ones to appoint members.

We have a small point on head 38 on the renaming of SFADCo. The Shannon Development staff and management and those involved in the airport prefer the term "Shannon Enterprises" as the future name. That can easily be a trading name just as Shannon Heritage is the trading name of Shannon Castle Banquets and Heritage Limited. Alternatively it could be resolved in legislation to change it to "Shannon Enterprises". That is not to say that the commercial ethos of the business changes - the commercial ethos of the business is still very prevalent.

On the transferring of the grant obligations and duties of Shannon Development, with effect from the enactment of the Bill, all of the rights duties and obligations of Shannon Development regarding any grant agreement, grant letter of offer or grant approval entered into or approved by Shannon Development prior to that date shall in the case of an FDI company, transfer to IDA Ireland. We seek clarity on that point.

There is also a small point about the transfer of the Shannon College of Hotel Management to NUI Galway. That concludes my submission.