Michael McNamara (Clare, Labour) | Oireachtas source

Given the congestion that is approaching, what will happen if IAG cannot continue to grow its numbers at Dublin Airport? I presume a new runway in Dublin will attract the same controversy and difficulty as the proposal for a new runway at Heathrow. The fact that there is no new runway at Heathrow is one of the main reasons IAG is interested in Dublin in the first place. While it may well offer opportunities for Shannon and Cork, and I certainly hope it does, that is only if IAG is interested in Dublin and Shannon. It is not that clear. There is very scant and aspirational information contained in the indicative offer about Shannon. It says IAG will "aspire to enhance". The document says that growth opportunities with tourism and business interests will be pursued and that future support will be provided for existing airlines. It is a lot shorter on detail in respect of Shannon than in respect of Dublin. Aer Lingus does not have a history of any commitment to Shannon except where it has been forced by the Government through the Government shareholding.

It is one thing to have a golden share if one can enforce it, but we have great confidence generally in free markets. Free markets are a very good thing and I am not advocating state control of the economy or anything like it, but when Fianna Fáil privatised Eircom, we were told it would be a wonderful thing. It was going to be able to attract the finance necessary to develop a world-class telecommunications network. At the time of the privatisation, we had a world-class telecommunications network in this country, but now one cannot get broadband in the largest town in my constituency.

Companies and offices cannot get broadband to grow their businesses. Throughout the rest of rural Clare, there is no broadband. I appreciate the efforts of the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Alex White, in that regard. It is announcement after announcement and strategy after strategy but he is effectively powerless. All he can do is telephone the companies and ask them what they would like to do. Without a shareholding in the company, it is not possible to direct them to do anything.

Delegates from Eircom come in here regularly with briefings for Deputies and tell us when certain exchanges will be upgraded. The following year they come in and say they got it wrong but that they will be upgraded. That is all we can do because it is a private company. I do not think the privatisation of Eircom has affected Dublin, Cork or perhaps Limerick, but it is affecting Ireland and its economic development. We remain an island nation. I do not need to point that out. It is one thing to privatise an airline on mainland Europe when it is possible to get a train from, say, Paris to Moscow overnight, but we are uniquely dependent on our connectivity and that is a major concern for me.

When Willie Walsh attended the transport committee he had very little concrete information on Shannon but he did say that Aer Lingus was in the business of selling seats. He said that it was able to profitably sell seats from Shannon to north America and Heathrow and that it would therefore continue. The Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform said something similar yesterday when he said, "Everybody in Aer Lingus knows that jobs and profitability, which are connected, are ultimately determined by the sale of seats. That is the only constant in the airline business". In Shannon we know that is not enough. Notwithstanding full flights leaving Shannon for London Heathrow, the flights were pulled. Almost like a dog who saw a bone in the water and went for it, Aer Lingus opted to operate out of Belfast. It thought it would make a bit more money in Belfast and Shannon was left high and dry. That had a detrimental impact. I have no doubt, regardless of the bona fides of Willie Walsh or Mr. Kavanagh, that profit and profit alone will drive this. That is what the markets are about, which I welcome, but connectivity is key to the future of this State.

I welcome the commitment by Aer Lingus to enter into registered employment agreements with its workers, even if the legislation which will underpin them is not yet in place. I look forward to supporting the Minister of State, Deputy Gerald Nash, when he brings the necessary legislation through the House. I also have confidence in the last-minute commitment by Aer Lingus this morning that there would not be compulsory redundancies. I understand the CEO said that on the airwaves. I welcome that statement and I have no doubt it has been made because of the work of the Labour Party in government. However, I hope the CEO has in turn received the same guarantees from his employers, his future employers and their future employers, and that he will be in a position to honour what he said today. We know that there are no certainties in the shifting world of aviation consolidation. Indeed, from the time it first mooted its interest in Aer Lingus to now, there has been a suggestion that IAG itself might be subject to a takeover bid.

I thank the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport for the courtesy he has shown me and the work that has been done to meet the Labour Party's concerns. However, many questions remain outstanding. I have questions which remain unanswered and, in that context, I am not prepared to gamble with what I believe is key to the economic development of this State, all of this State. As we enter 2016 with talk of developing all parts of the country equally, connectivity is key, particularly connectivity to the mid-west. I do not have confidence in the guarantees as they currently stand. On that basis I regret that I will not be able to support the Minister in the motion this afternoon.

See this speech in context