Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Labour)

The Labour Party welcomes and supports the thrust of this Bill concerning the ratification of the Eurocontrol convention and the most recent protocols. The recent protocols are primarily concerned with increasing co-ordination of air traffic control in Europe, which we support. The Bill allows for Irish ratification, thereby updating the functions of Eurocontrol to achieve European air traffic management, revising its institutional structure and allowing greater majority voting. We support these measures and do not seek to slow passage of this Bill through the House. We note it will not take effect until all contracting parties have signed it.

Issues have been raised about this legislation, discussed in the Seanad and referred to by Deputy Olivia Mitchell. Opposition spokespersons and the Minister have had representations from various interests in the industry. To date, the concerns raised in correspondence have been referred to but not addressed.

Industries are concerned that the Bill does not delete existing regulatory provisions that are not applied elsewhere and because of that Irish industry is at a competitive disadvantage. The measures envisaged in the Bill have the potential to render Ireland less attractive as a place to bring aircraft. The maintenance and repair business is highly competitive and we accept that Ireland is a relatively high cost base from which to deliver these services. The proposed legislation would compound the industry's difficulties and draw business away from Ireland to other European jurisdictions who are less inclined to confer extraordinary collection powers on Eurocontrol. Many different interests in the industry hold the view that the legislation, if enacted, will make it easier for Eurocontrol to take action against its customers, putting Ireland in the position of going further than any other country in providing Eurocontrol with powers to seize and dispose of aircraft.

The legislation would undermine Ireland's claim to support the aerospace industry. As Eurocontrol is already highly successful in collecting unpaid fees the industry questions whether further assistance is needed from the State. The Labour Party believes genuine concerns are being expressed as the ratification of the convention does not require measures envisaged in the Bill, as was acknowledged in the Seanad. It is difficult to understand why the Minister wants to go further than other European countries. No adequate explanation has been given for this.

The Minister, the previous Minister and replies to various parliamentary questions suggested negotiations would be held with those who express concerns about the impact of this legislation on the industry. While some communication has taken place nothing has come of these discussions. The Minister has not explained this.

It is not solely leasing companies that have raised these issues. Airbus, Boeing, SR Technics, Royal Bank of Scotland and the Federation of Aerospace Enterprises in Ireland raised concerns with the Opposition and the Minister. They have followed the debate closely since it began in the Seanad. The reasons for changing the law have been outlined by the industry. The main problem is that those supporting the changes have been given no idea why the Irish Aviation Authority and the Dublin Airport Authority have argued against the removal or dilution of the existing powers.

In his opening comments, the Minister of State merely stated that having consulted both bodies, it was decided not to make any changes to the legislation. However, he did not explain the thinking of the IAA or the DAA regarding the matter and how the concerns expressed by the industry, which seem to be genuine, can be allayed. There is no justification for failing to address those issues. In summing up, the Minister of State might explain precisely what concerns the IAA and the DAA have regarding diluting the existing powers which are considered too draconian.

No argument can be made that aircraft engines and equipment should be immune from seizure and sale. For effective collection, an operator's aircraft should be liable to be detained and sold where the operator has not paid his or her charges. It seems to come down to who is being asked to bear the risk. The risk is seen to arise as a result of the lax credit control by Eurocontrol and Dublin Airport Authority. Both bodies have powers to sue airlines which do not pay to recover the debt with interest.

It is also important to bear in mind that regional airports, such as Kerry, Sligo, Knock and Galway, operate without the benefit of the 1998 Act statutory detention rights enjoyed by the three DAA airports. If such statutory detention rights are so beneficial to the three main State airports business, it seems the legislation also potentially creates an unjustified and uneven playing field for competition between all Irish airports. The point was made that Ireland would not be alone in making a declaration or reservation when ratifying the 1997 protocol. I understand Spain decided to ratify with reservations and had no difficulties in doing so from a procedural view.

Those in the industry, which has been successful, point out they do not always operate from the most competitive cost base. Extremely large numbers of people are employed in the industry here. In fairness to them, they deserve a clear explanation from the Minister why they are expected to compete in an uneven environment where they operate under much stricter controls than their competitors. They should also be told the precise concerns of the Minister, the IAA and the DAA in respect of removing those existing tight controls. Eurocontrol is seeking a belt and braces approach to credit control. The Bill goes much further than the other European states with which our industry competes. I ask the Minister for clarification. In the absence of clarification I reserve my right to table amendments on Committee Stage.

See this speech in context