Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

The only issue on which I agree with Deputy Patrick O'Donovan and the Government is the stunning and staggering hypocrisy of Fianna Fáil when it comes to this matter. For Fianna Fáil belatedly to be concerned about the sell-off of Aer Lingus, when it commenced the process when it sold three quarters of it, beggars belief and confirms the verdict of its own departing member in the past week on its political cynicism and opportunism. On that point, I agree with the Deputy. Leaving that aside, however, the decision to sell the State's remaining stake in Aer Lingus is an outrageous betrayal and an act of national economic sabotage. The Government is selling the remaining stake in what is an absolutely vital and irreplaceable national strategic asset and sacrificing it to a multinational company on the altar of neoliberal dogma, which will be deeply regretted. There is no argument that can be made that would justify the sell-off of Aer Lingus. If Fianna Fáil is good at opposition for opposition's sake, Fine Gael specialises in privatisation for privatisation's sake. That is what makes the sale so outrageous, disgraceful and unjustifiable.

The so-called assurances given by the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport on the slots, connectivity, jobs and conditions are utterly bogus. Either he is deliberately deceiving the House and the people on these matters or Mr. Willie Walsh has hoodwinked him. I am not sure which is the case. As I said, the assurances are bogus. The big question for me is why sell Aer Lingus, a company with €1 billion in cash reserves and €1 billion in tangible assets, a company that is making profits and has a growth plan and that is a vital strategic interest for an island nation with no land connections to the European mainland.

Does the Minister understand the notion of strategic asset, that something is important from the national point of view, as against the narrow considerations of a multinational company or commercial entity that thinks only about the bottom line? A multinational company of any description, managed by anybody, does not give a damn about connectivity, workers' rights or pensioners' rights. It does not give a damn about the strategic importance of the Heathrow slots to this country. That is not its business. Therefore, the idea that these concerns will be protected by a multinational company interested in making money is ridiculous.

Another issue that has not been pointed out in this debate is the fact that IAG is not even making a profit. We are selling a profitable Aer Lingus to a company that made a loss last year. Therefore, the promises of a better and securer future, of more jobs, of growth and so on are entirely speculative and based on nothing but blind hope, particularly when we consider the precarious nature of the international airline industry. What will happen if AIG goes bang, as is quite possible? What then and what about our strategic interests? We have no way to protect and maintain them or to influence the outcome if that happens, as could well happen.

On the question of the assurances, the golden share is a bogus assurance. The British Government had a golden share in BAA, but the European courts deemed it illegal and contrary to European law on competition and state aid. Similarly, the golden shares of the Portuguese Government in Portugal Telecom and Energias de Portugal were both struck down by the European Court of Justice. The golden share will not stand up. Therefore, the assurances about the protection of slots and the disposal or use of those slots will not stand up in the face of the law and commercial reality of the international airline industry.

The situation is similar in regard to the protection of people's jobs, pay and conditions. As has already been pointed out, when IAG took over Iberia Airlines, some 4,500 jobs were lost and salaries were cut by between 11% and 18%. Willie Walsh has a similar history in British Airways in regard to his attitude towards workers rights. During the strike in 2010, he threatened to bring unqualified scab labour in to scab on cabin crews who were on strike. While he was in charge of Aer Lingus, thousands of jobs were cut and he introduced and expanded outsourcing in a number of areas. I do not know if the Minister has responded yet to the revelation about the Nyras report. Did he know about it or has Willie Walsh hoodwinked him about the real agenda he and IAG have for Aer Lingus? Either way, the assurances are completely bogus and we are looking at redundancies, more outsourcing and profiteering at the expense of the workers and the pensioners and at the sacrificing of a vital strategic asset of crucial importance to this country. This sale is a betrayal and even at this stage, the Minister should back away from it. For the Labour Party to support it is beyond shameful.

See this speech in context