Michael Noonan (Limerick City, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

If any Member can point out to me any part of the section that refers to Shannon Airport, I would be pleased to hear it. There is nothing in the section that refers to a specific airport. The motivation for it was an incipient industry at Shannon Airport which the authority thought it could develop further. The second largest Russian airline, Transaero, has acquired an Aer Lingus hangar at Shannon Airport and is doing work in it. The company will go farther under certain circumstances and it is a potential investor. However, it has made no commitment as yet. The aircraft refurbishment industry at Shannon Airport has the potential to expand. In that context, it is possible other investors will come in also. IDA Ireland has stated there is quite a lot of interest in this provision. It did not state, however, there was quite a lot of interest in locating at Shannon Airport. Instead, there is quite a lot of interest in locating in Ireland.

This provision will apply at Dublin, Cork and Knock airports because I presume if one is flying in aircraft to refurbish them, one requires runways of a certain length. Accordingly, opening such a facility at a small regional airport would not be viable.

Members know my position on development. With the difficult economic state in which we are, if there are ideas that have the possibility of creating investment and jobs, I am prepared to try them out. I want to try them out in a fair way that would not disadvantage anyone. There is no disadvantage in this provision for Knock airport. If it can attract an industry that refurbishes aircraft, it will receive the tax break to develop the hangars and pads, the same as any other airport.

When the debate on this issue started on foot of correspondence from Ireland West Knock Airport, Deputies Michelle Mulherin and Denis Naughten, supported by Deputy Pearse Doherty, brought up the issue of another suite of proposals which would be specifically for Knock airport. It was a whole load of stuff to do with section 23, with which we are familiar, such as write-offs against rental income elsewhere. I am not introducing section 23 measures for Knock airport or any other place in the country.

Another amendment was proposed which I thought was interesting. The case was made by Deputies Michelle Mulherin and Denis Naughten that the section restricted the refurbishment activity to the repair and overhaul of aircraft. That is what is happening where the industry has commenced at Shannon Airport. The intention of the work being carried out on the aircraft at Shannon Airport is that they will fly and carry passengers again.

It has been pointed out that there is an opportunity for breaking down and recycling aircraft as well. In such cases the intention would be not to fly them again. There is an interest in establishing that operation in Knock and that is why we included the dismantling provision.

Deputy Naughten asked why I did not accept his amendment and why I did it this way. It is normal enough that an idea comes from an Opposition Deputy and the Minister picks it up. Then he gets advice from his Department and from the drafting services. The Minister relies on that advice and rather than accepting the amendment as drafted he tries to ensure it is absolutely legally sound and drafted properly.

See this speech in context