Mr. Willie Walsh:

I can look at trends that have taken place during global recessions and what happens with capacity. We can continue to fly the same number of services with smaller aircraft and can continue to look to feed traffic in and out. That is the beauty of being part of a group. It gives one flexibility in a downturn one does not have in isolation. Members should picture the scenario in which Aer Lingus operates these 23 slots and gets into a global recession in isolation. It will face a huge decision in which it either continues to operate those slots, potentially unprofitably, or it gives up the slots for no consideration. If Aer Lingus does not operate them, under the rule known as the 80:20 use-it-or-lose-it rule, the slots would be lost and would go back into the slot pool to be distributed to other airlines. Why did Aer Lingus continue to operate those slots during the deep recession? It was for two reasons. First, they were profitable and could sustain margins going through that recession. Second, if Aer Lingus did not operate them, it would have lost them for no consideration. Why would we do anything different? Does the Senator honestly believe we would look at it in a different way? Does the Senator think we simply would stand back and give up slots everybody states have huge value? We would continue to operate them because we would wish to continue to operate them in the long term. We are a long-term player in this business and we wish to provide additional support to Aer Lingus that will give it comfort through a recession. That was absolutely critical to the survival of Iberia during the recession it faced and the restructuring it needed. Everything we are talking about is positive for Aer Lingus in good times and is especially positive for Aer Lingus in bad times.

On costs, I disagree with the Senator because if one takes the London to Madrid route, where British Airways and Iberia operate together, fares did not rise. Costs did not increase for the consumer. They did not increase because it is a competitive market in which one has other options. Were we to try to drive up the prices, the Senator can be damn sure that Mr. O'Leary would be in to offer services to fly one to plenty of other airports in London and to provide one with connectivity that would force us to compete. It is a competitive market in which one does not have that ability. If we did, we would not operate with the margins we have today but would be operating with significantly higher margins, like other businesses.

It is a brutally competitive business and will continue to be so. That competition will always benefit the consumer. The consumer has much more choice today than they ever had in the past. That is great credit to Michael O’Leary for being the revolutionary he is in changing the airline industry. The Senator’s concerns are not valid because we would commit to continue to operate those slots. We would be crazy not to. If we did not operate them, we would lose them.