Timmy Dooley (Clare, Fianna Fail)

I thank the Deputy. I would expect nothing less.

I do not have a personal hang-up about the disposal of State assets, and I do see merit in the sale of certain non-strategic State assets to deal with the debt burden. I recognise the need to inject liquidity into the economy to assist the Government in its job creation proposals and certainly, where non-strategic State assets can be employed, that is the right thing to do. The debate then comes down to what is strategic and what is not. Deputy Lawlor talked about Eircom, for example, and the necessity of retaining the copper wire network. I am not so sure the copper wire network is really a strategic component. Rather, the strategic aspect is the back office management of customers and the capacity to develop and roll out new technologies. Sadly, Eircom became a stock-market play when the State did what other states were doing at the time, which was to leverage too heavily the capacity to generate revenue from customers, which is a far more intangible asset than copper wire. Technology has moved on and we are now looking at next-generation transmission systems.

However, my point was not about telecommunications companies. We need to look at this with our eyes wide open. Let us consider the proposal to sell Aer Lingus. In my view, the portion that is retained by the State is of strategic benefit. There are difficulties with it, it is not the golden share that some might like, but it does provide the State with at least some capacity to influence its own aviation policy. Without some influence in terms of how an airline operates, the State is not in a position to ensure its broad aviation policy is controllable. We are an island nation and depend to a huge extent on our capacity to generate inward tourism and outward business because of the level of exports we have. The Government is talking about developing an aviation policy. This was alluded to in the recently published Booz & Company report about the ownership and management of our three State airports. Regional development must be an important component of that. If we are not in a position to influence in some way the activities of one of our airlines, we will put ourselves at a major disadvantage. To me, the 25% share is strategic.

Others will ask why the Government was unable to influence the activities of Aer Lingus when it sought to move those famous Heathrow landing slots from Shannon Airport a number of years ago. The Government was left on the back foot at that time because it had not appointed its complement of directors to the board and the airline made a management decision that did not go to board level. The management decision was to move the Heathrow slots around among airports on the island of Ireland, and we know the impact that had on business and tourism in the west and mid-west. We should learn our lessons from that. The last Government certainly learned its lesson, and appointed directors. We accept that directors of a public limited company must dispose of their fiduciary duties - that is a requirement - yet they can also have a mandate to consider the broader aspects of those fiduciary duties, which would involve regional development. That was achieved, and the decisions taken in Aer Lingus thereafter about issues such as landing slot allocation had to be made at board level.

If the 25% share is sold, it is my contention that the board will not contain any directors appointed by the State. They will not have the broader remit of considering regional development, tourism or our national interest in maintaining connectivity. Their only concern will be the profitability of the company. That is why I believe the 25% shareholding in Aer Lingus is of strategic importance and should not be put up for sale. The return will be minimal when we take into account the pensions hole that will have to be dealt with as part of any sale. There will be nothing left for the Government's noble aims of reducing debt and injecting capital into job creation. I am fearful that this particular aspect of the asset disposal is short-sighted and could create difficulties for us in the long term. There is also the issue of competitiveness, which I have not had an opportunity to discuss.

See this speech in context