Lucinda Creighton (Dublin South East, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I do not agree with much of what Deputy Noel Grealish has said, but I am in complete agreement about the contempt that has been shown to the House in how this matter has been handled over the past couple of days. It is unfortunate that there is no opportunity to engage in a proper and full question and answer session with the Minister. The matter should go to the Joint Committee on Transport and Communications.

I never enjoy the nonsense that goes on here about Dáil sitting days and whether we should sit. However, I find it hard to understand why we are not sitting next week. I do not believe it would cause anybody too much concern if we were to sit in order that this matter could receive proper and full attention by the Joint Committee on Transport and Communications if only to provide comfort and answer some of the questions that have been legitimately raised by a number of Deputies. This is yet another example of how the Government is deliberately downplaying and reducing the impact and relevance of this House, the elected Chamber of Deputies, which is unfortunate particularly given that the Government has such a large majority.

Having said that, I wholeheartedly favour the sale of the Government's 25% stake in Aer Lingus. I do not believe nostalgia is a substitute for good business decisions. In recent months I have heard a considerable amount of misty-eyed tales about flying transatlantic, the green uniforms and so on. We live in a globalised economy and we live in the real world. Aer Lingus is not the largest carrier in this island, that fall to Ryanair. Ryanair has a business model that thrives on competition and on offering choice to consumers. Ryanair has singlehandedly transformed the opportunities for Irish customers. It has made air transport accessible to people who otherwise would not be able to afford it. It has opened up the world to Irish citizens. It means that the many tens of thousands of Irish emigrants who live in other parts of Europe and the world are able to afford to travel to come home to see their families and their families are able to travel to see them. Competition is to be welcomed and we do not have anything to fear.

We must remember that we are not discussing the privatisation of Aer Lingus. That happened in 2006 when it was floated on the stock market. The Government's 25% shareholding is quite meaningless and the days of Ministers dictating commercial policy to the board of Aer Lingus are rightly over. It is not the business of the Government to dictate to an airline company.

As a nation we need to prioritise securing the future of Aer Lingus and the future of air travel for our citizens. In the debate so far there has been an absence of concern for Irish air travel customers. The focus of the debate, certainly from the Government benches has been far more about protecting the electoral concerns of certain, primarily Labour Party, Deputies, rather than discussing the best interest of the State and its citizens. That is unfortunate. Aer Lingus should not be the plaything of parties that are concerned about their potential performance or otherwise in the next general election. It is misguided and misses the point of what this is all about. Certain Government Deputies have not showered themselves in glory in recent weeks and months.

This represents a reality check for us. We live in a global economy in which cumbersome state companies that do not evolve and are resistant to change fail because there is always a more nimble, efficient and dynamic alternative ready to replace them. We have already seen that with Ryanair. The risk is that if Aer Lingus refuses or is not allowed to evolve, adapt, compete and modernise in order to secure its future, it will be under severe threat in the future.

Concerns that IAG has some kind of mischievous goal to somehow reduce or downgrade Aer Lingus are nonsensical. It wants to purchase Aer Lingus because it is a viable company that has huge potential to grow and with the right investment it can grow. However, it needs that investment and that is where IAG comes in. Given that IAG is a major player, it can invest in aircraft and open up new routes. That is good for Ireland. It is good for Aer Lingus. It is good for Irish consumers. It is good for Irish air traffic customers. It is good for everybody concerned. It is good for the people who work in Aer Lingus and for the people who want to work in Aer Lingus in the future.

It makes sense. IAG has the resources to invest in stock and aircraft to which Aer Lingus otherwise would not have access. Companies that cannot invest and renew die. IAG has access to strategic alliances with other airlines across the world, something Aer Lingus has not had. As a customer of Aer Lingus, I find it frustrating that it does not have partnerships and alliances with airlines in other parts of the world. Alliances open up new opportunities, opportunities that should be embraced rather than resisted or rejected.

The only question that we, as parliamentarians, should be asking is: what is best for Ireland? What is best for Aer Lingus, as a company, to help it to innovate and grow and be dynamic in order that it can secure its future? What is best for Irish customers? The many people who lined up in the past to resist Ryanair and reduce its influence because they believed it would threaten Aer Lingus and so on have been proved wrong. Ryanair is the best thing that has happened to Irish aviation. We need to learn from the lessons of the past. We need to open our eyes to what is happening in the global economy and the global aviation sector and embrace it. I will be voting in favour of the motion, notwithstanding my genuine annoyance at how the Government has handled the matter.

See this speech in context