Imelda Munster (Louth, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this Bill. Dublin Airport is experiencing something of a boom currently, with record passenger numbers year on year. A second runway is due to be in operation by the end of 2021. While a second runway is needed at this stage, it is important that the needs of local people are respected and that flight and noise limits are imposed to ensure that their quality of life is maintained. The Minister is also looking for a third, privately run terminal to be built. He seems, however, to be on his own on that one with near universal agreement that such a development is not required at this time.

Currently we find ourselves in a frankly ridiculous situation, thanks to the Minister. In order to give effect to EU Regulation 598/2014, a noise regulator must be appointed to Dublin Airport. Because the Minister and the Department assumed that the Irish Aviation Authority would be the competent authority it seems that no arrangements were made in case the IAA did not work out. Given that the IAA is currently being split into two entities because of serious concerns around conflicts of interest in respect of its regulatory role the Minister and his Department should at the very least have been aware of this possibility.

Now we have a situation where we have missed the EU deadline and we are currently in breach of EU law. We have a contract awarded to build a new runway and no noise regulator is in place. The Government is, therefore, trying to hammer through this important legislation in a couple of weeks. Earlier this week an idea was floated to have a deadline for Committee Stage amendments before Second Stage had even begun. Thanks to objections from me and others at the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Transport, Tourism and Sport the Committee Stage will now be put back until after Christmas to allow offices adequate time to prepare amendments.

The Government has decided that Fingal County Council is the best option for a noise regulator. It appears that this decision has been taken because the council would be in a position to take up this new role faster than the other options open to the Department. This is not a good way to do business. We have to end the practice in aviation of having regulators who are financially dependent on the entities they regulate. I propose that the Commission for Aviation Regulation is a more appropriate competent authority for noise regulation at the airport. The commission satisfies the independence requirements of Regulation 598 and has existing regulatory roles in respect of Dublin Airport. It is expected to have further regulatory roles around civil aviation in the near future when the functions of the IAA are changed due to the current conflict of interest. The IAA currently regulates civil aviation safety while simultaneously making revenue from these airlines. This is a desperately poor practice, which does not happen in other jurisdictions. It does not promote confidence in the ability of the Minister to address issues of conflict of interest in the aviation sector, or to remedy issues when they are identified.

The Irish Aviation Authority (Amendment) Bill 2017 was at the committee for pre-legislative scrutiny and has not been seen or heard of since. Will the Minister say when we might see that Bill? Will we see it in this Dáil term? The Department objects to the commission taking on the role of noise regulator as it does not have the expertise currently, but the same argument could be made for Fingal County Council taking the role. The real issue is that bestowing the function upon the commission will probably be a lengthier process, but that is the Department’s own fault for delaying, and it is not an excuse for poor decision-making.

It is very poor form to try to hammer this legislation through the Dáil; we need to do this properly. Fingal County Council has been identified for reasons of convenience - that is exactly what it is - as the most suitable authority to regulate aircraft noise, not because it is the most suitable authority. I would like it noted that I am not criticising Fingal County Council. This was the Minister’s decision. The council has no expertise in this area, and I am sure it never expected to be put in this position. It is very unfair. Given the total lack of expertise in the council, can the Minister outline exactly what arrangements must be made by the council to take on this new role? What additional funding will be at its disposal? What sort of expertise will it need to bring on board?

We have an obvious issue with the conflict of interest at the council. The council collects rates from the airport and will now be responsible for noise regulation and decision-making around flight numbers. The Government is at pains to emphasise that only 8% of the council’s revenue comes from the airport. That is a shocking attitude to take as 8% is a significant funding stream and the fact that any funding for the council comes from the airport authority is reason enough, surely, for the council not to be appointed as regulator. The fact of the matter is that a public body will be collecting money from an entity over which it has regulatory powers. This is a conflict of interest and raises serious concerns about the decision to appoint Fingal County Council as the competent authority. Clearly, there is an issue around timing, in particular with the runway, but the poor governance at the Department is not a legitimate excuse for poor policy.

Some 85% of air traffic in this State comes through Dublin Airport. It is essential that the airport not be subject to regulatory uncertainty. However, the solution is not to implement an inappropriate regulator or just any regulator at all. It is absolutely outrageous that we are in this position. The sheer incompetence demonstrated by the Minister is out of this world. He has displayed incompetence in many parts of his portfolio but this latest escapade is something else. The main thing here is independence. We need a completely independent entity to take on the function of the noise regulator. This could be the commission or it could be a new entity, if that was judged to be more appropriate. This is the direction we are taking regarding the funding of civil aviation safety regulation. It makes sense and removes questions of bias or conflict of interest. The Bill has serious issues that need to be amended. I intend to address those issues on Committee Stage in the new year.

See this speech in context