Mr. Ian Talbot:

I will try to draw together a number of issues. First, the committee can hear the arguments we are all making here. For everyone, connectivity is key, as is the lack of information on this deal.

We are an island economy which puts us in a very unusual space. Deputy Dooley pointed out that Aer Lingus was part of the oneworld alliance but that was a long time ago and the issues at play then were very different from those at play now. Ultimately, it was just Aer Lingus piggy backing off something bigger that was already in place. It was focused on Irish people being able to get a few air miles for moving on. There is potential here, as Ms Quin said, for Ireland to be a hub for transfer passengers. We have advantages that other countries do not have, such as pre-clearance, for example. Ireland is also directly on the route to the United States of America unlike Scotland, which is further north.

On the issue of job losses, I am struck by the short-term versus the long-term picture. A very short number of years ago we were told that terminal 2 was the biggest white elephant imaginable. Now, as I understand it, terminal 2 is almost operating at full capacity and I would imagine there are plenty of jobs arising from that. We have been hearing for years about the catastrophe of job losses at Aer Lingus and elsewhere but Dublin Airport is booming. As several people have testified today, Aer Lingus is a profitable company at the moment. That must mean that its routes are profitable. I believe the Dublin-London route is the second most active route in the world. If these routes have all of these people flying on them, then some airline is going to want to fly them anyway. In terms of the fear factor about job losses, I would argue that in a few years time, airports will be bigger than ever.