Peter Power (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)

They were invited in and we listened carefully to the divergent and opposing views. The debate was constructive, even though there would never be agreement on this matter. People made their contributions and there was a good discussion at the meeting. I refer in particular to the pensioners. All Members will share a common view that irrespective of the Government's proposal, the pensioners who built up the company over many years and decades should be taken care of. This has not been the case because of the unfortunate set-up of their pension scheme.

The long-term interests of Aer Lingus, the country and the workers, are served by today's historic decision. We have a choice to make. Do we recognise what has been recognised by every other country and airline, that a completely new aviation environment exists? It is an ultra-competitive and difficult environment, an environment where ready access to capital, to aircraft and to quick decision making are more essential than anything else in the aviation industry.

Some would have us stay in the safety of the past. Aer Lingus management and workers have served the country well for many years. The old model of giant carriers, slow decision making and lack of competitiveness may have worked in the past but to stay there would be to abdicateour responsibilities and ignore new aviation practices.

The aviation business is governed by its cyclical nature and by competitiveness. I refer to Ryanair, which is a home-grown airline. Like may others I have had difficulties and problems with Ryanair. However, the people of this country have voted with their tickets and with their e-mails in ever increasing numbers. They subscribe to an airline that is extremely competitive even though it might cut a few corners here and there which people may not like. It is an airline that makes quick decisions about buying aircraft when the market conditions are right. If Aer Lingus was in a position to make the kind of decisions that it will now be able to make, it could be able to purchase aircraft and save at least €500 milliont.

The ability to survive in modern aviation is inextricably linked to the access to ready capital and flexible decision making. I would be the first to admit that the words "prevarication" and "delay" were used. This is the greatest argument in favour of what the Government is doing. If the Government takes five years to make a relatively simple decision about which people have different views, or if it takes the Government two years to tell Aer Lingus to buy a new fleet, it might not be possible to buy the aircraft or the prices might be inflated. There may be a waiting list to acquire those aircraft. It is the inability to make quick decisions that characterises State ownership. I have much faith not just in the management, but in staff, to recognise the new environment, embrace it and make the necessary decision to bring Aer Lingus forward.

On the general principles the Minister has set out, I welcome that a strategic share of at least 25.1% is being retained in the airline. We have all listened carefully to the very important arguments made on the Heathrow slots. Deputy Broughan made a passionate case arguing that we are abdicating these slots. Significant protections remain, arising from the 25.1% share and the inability to change the articles of association of the company by way of special resolution.

Even if it were possible to sell off the slots willy nilly, does anybody believe it makes sense for a commercial airline, which has seen increased commercial movement in recent years, to sell the slots? Would it make sense for Aer Lingus to do so, as the slots are among the most profitable in the company? The opposite would be true also. We should face up to the reality that if those slots were not making money tomorrow morning, even though hundreds of thousands of people are being transported from Dublin to Heathrow on them, the company would part with them quickly. If the slots caused a loss, the company would not subscribe to them.

See this speech in context