Dáil debates

Thursday, 28 May 2015

Aer Lingus Share Disposal: Motion (Resumed)

 

11:10 am

Photo of Michael McNamaraMichael McNamara (Clare, Labour) | Oireachtas source

Where is Irish Sugar now? Where is the sugar division? When I was canvassing for the Labour Party recently, I saw its rusting remains on the outskirts of Carlow town. In fairness to the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, I appreciate that he took time very late last night to meet with me with his officials to seek to allay my concerns. I thank him for that courtesy. I understand the Minister has been in extensive negotiations with the European Commission's Directorate General for Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Markets Union in the run up to this announcement and that it has no objection to the proposal. In fact, it may have indicated that it is willing to accept it. However, the deal has yet to be examined by the Directorate General for Competition, which took the cases against the UK and Spain to which I have referred.

I assume that a letter of comfort will be sought, but even if it is obtained, it is only a letter from one Commissioner for the duration of one Commission. That is all. Letters of comfort have been delivered in the past notwithstanding which infringement proceedings have been taken. Furthermore, I am not so concerned about Commission proceedings given that the Commission has ultimately accepted the status quowhich gives the Government a degree of control over slots. My greater concern is on the enforceability of the "B" share mechanism and whether a Minister could in future enforce it against IAG. If a British or Spanish court or the ECJ were to find it contrary to EU competition law or a domestic court were to find it contrary to domestic competition law, it would not be possible to enforce the "B" share rights. I mention the UK's Competition and Markets Authority in particular because Heathrow is located in Britain and has the experience of having its own golden share held by the British Government struck down as being unlawful. Furthermore, the UK's Competition and Markets Authority has shown considerable teeth in its dealings with Ryanair. It has shown more teeth than the Irish Competition Authority generally demonstrates unless, of course, it is raiding the IFA offices on foot of concerns about below-cost selling by multiples.

Turning to the deal itself, it is undoubtedly very good news for Dublin Airport. I have studied IAG's 34 page indicative offer in detail and it has a lot of specifics for Dublin Airport, which is set unambiguously to become Ireland's gateway hub for international traffic. Mr. Willie Walsh, the CEO of IAG, which is one of the largest aviation companies in the world, was clear about this at the joint committee. It would be churlish at this stage to fail to acknowledge that Mr. Walsh is one of the greatest Irish businessmen of his generation. His negotiation of this deal has been masterful, but his only duty is to his shareholders. For him to have any other considerations would be unlawful. Looking at the deal, one thing is clear, namely, Dublin Airport is approaching capacity and will soon need a new runway. Passenger numbers last year stood at 21.7 million and this year numbers are expected to exceed 24 million. IAG alone is projecting an increase in passenger numbers of 2.4 million as a result of this and other airlines are also seeking to increase their passenger numbers. The Commission for Aviation Regulation has stated that a new runway will be allowed when passenger numbers reach 25 million. That is next year, but where is the runway? Is it going to be allowed? Who is going to fund it?

When a second terminal was to be funded at Dublin Airport, Aer Rianta International was brought into the Dublin Airport Authority group by Fianna Fáil to fund it. This, of course, is the same Fianna Fáil that objected to Aer Rianta International being in Dublin Airport after having brought it into the Dublin Airport Authority group. Fianna Fáil does not have a great deal of credibility on this issue when it objects to the sale of a 25% shareholding, having sold a 75% shareholding. It is not so much warning that we should close the stable door after the horse has bolted, rather it galloped the horse out the stable door and is now looking back over its shoulder having had an unfortunate demise. In now warning that the stable door should be closed, it is a little bit late.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.