Tommy Broughan (Dublin Bay North, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I am grateful to have the opportunity to speak on the Bill. I have always deeply appreciated the role of Dublin Airport as the key economic driver of Dublin’s northside, in particular as I was a founder and director of Coolock Development Council, which has community centres, business centres and jobs training programmes to help people leave unemployment. We know that up to 60,000 jobs in the wider airport zone, including Dublin Bay North, in particular jobs in logistics, are dependent on the successful development of the airport. However, as the number of passengers has moved up to 30 million per annum and beyond, and the second runway is under construction, constituents in Dublin Bay North, in particular those on the north fringe, remain profoundly anxious that the airport’s role is developed in a sustainable way. This especially concerns aircraft noise and associated flight paths, which, of course, are the core subject of the Bill.

We have been told the purpose of this Bill is to provide for the implementation of EU regulation 598/2014 regarding noise-related operating restrictions at airports in the EU with a balanced approach and to designate Fingal County Council as the competent authority. Did the Minister read that regulation before he drafted this Bill? It does not seem he did. Section 13 of the regulation states: “The competent authority responsible for adopting noise-related operating restrictions should be independent of any organisation involved in the airport’s operation, air transport or air navigation service provisions, or representing the interests thereof and of the residents living in the vicinity of the airport.” The Minister has clearly failed that test of independence in this Bill. Fingal County Council, the Minister's intended competent authority, cannot be independent of the Dublin Airport Authority nor the residents of Fingal, given it is there to serve those residents and approximately 40% of its annual budget comes from the Dublin Airport Authority. There is a clear conflict of interest. Fingal County Council, the airport and the local community are closely intertwined, which is why I believe an organisation such as the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, would be a much better fit as the competent authority. The House will know there is a motion on airport noise on the clár of the Dáil in my name and that of Deputy Clare Daly, in which we call on the EPA to carry out a study in this regard.

I have listened closely to colleagues such as Deputies Brendan Ryan and Clare Daly in regard to the position of the Commission for Aviation Regulation. I would have a concern in this regard, given people in the aviation business are in the aviation business, and there could still be some kind of conflict. However, the central point is that Fingal County Council does not fit the format of an independent regulator, no matter what its excellence might be in other areas of its operations on behalf of people in Fingal. The references to Fingal County Council in section 3 and in other sections of the Bill should be deleted and replaced with references to an independent regulator.

Seven or eight years ago, in the last Fianna Fáil-led Government with the Green Party, there was a proposal for a comprehensive noise control and abatement Bill, which proposed an independent noise regulator across the whole gamut of noise. I was very supportive of it but, unfortunately, the former Deputy, Ciarán Cuffe, as was the case with many other Green Party policies, did not bring it forward when he had the chance in four years in government.

When the Minister, Deputy Ross, was in the Seanad and when he wrote, week in, week out, in the Sunday Independent, he was always a clear and ferocious advocate for independent regulators. He did not regard the Central Bank or the Financial Regulator as proper regulators and he looked at other areas where he felt there was not proper regulation. This was one of the Minister's core beliefs. While I note An Bord Pleanála is responsible for the appeals mechanism under section 10 of the Bill, we need an independent regulator. This is not independent. The Minister has to go back to the drawing board. That is what is wanted in Dublin Bay North and across the whole 20 sq. km zone of the flight paths. It is what the Minister should seriously consider, and not leave it up to us to bring it forward.

The Minister told us Fingal County Council is to receive no extra Government funding to carry out this function. In fact, section 5 proposes a levy for the airport. Is this not an even worse conflict of interest? The Minister is expecting the DAA to further fund its own county council by paying a sufficient amount to have itself monitored. It is crazy and it does not add up.

We have seen over the years how the DAA has treated the surrounding neighbourhood of St. Margaret's, the Ward, Kilreesk and other small communities that long predate the development of Dublin Airport. When I was transport spokesperson for the Labour Party a decade ago, I remember meeting Michael O'Leary and representatives of Ryanair. There was a lot of talk that Ryanair would move to Mullingar or to a new airport in the midlands. Of course, Michael O'Leary correctly said that the Collinstown plateau in my constituency is one of the most ideal places in the world for an airport, given it is so close to the ocean and gets so little fog, which means it is operational almost every day. It is a brilliant location and it has served us well, even though the Government has not progressed the metro or other public transport links. Despite the location, the treatment of the residents and the impact on their health and well-being, on house values and on businesses has not been satisfactory.

I have represented constituents on the flight path, as has Deputy Brendan Ryan, in particular those living in the area from Portmarnock to Balgriffin and on the north fringe of the city. We see the nightly process of mostly Aer Lingus and Ryanair aeroplanes gently dropping in as they arrive home. Much of the time the noise is not too bad over much of the constituency but, when the wind is from the east and they are taking off towards the east, residents are exposed to what are often quite serious noise events. When I was on Dublin City Council over the years, we urged Fingal County Council to have more monitoring stations but this did not take place.

Fingal County Council’s consultation on the noise action plan for Dublin Airport 2019-2023 makes for interesting reading, although I am not sure the Minister has read it. The sheer number and scope of submissions shows how exercised our constituents are in Dublin Fingal and Dublin Bay North about noise pollution from the airport, and how seriously the Minister should be taking this matter to ensure sustainable development of the airport.

On that point, the Minister has been invited out to St. Margaret’s and Newtown on a number of occasions, and Deputy Brendan Ryan may also have invited him to his area, but the Minister has not got back to the residents or visited them. This is something he could do in the coming weeks. If this facility was located close to his own constituency, I am sure he would have visited them many times.

The consultation submissions and Fingal County Council actions mention the World Health Organization Environmental Noise Guidelines for the European Region, published in October 2018, and Fingal County Council outlined its action as being to “seek national guidance on the WHO Guidelines” and stated that it will “change text of NAP to include reference to newly published Who Guidelines”. Point 8 of the Fingal County Council submission refers to the “increase in night time noise exposure, referring to the 380% increase in dwellings exposed to night time noise above 50dB [decibels]”, which is an amazing finding. The council also confirmed there was an increase of 40% at night time for the “noise footprint” from 17 sq. km to 24.1 sq. km. Fingal County Council’s response states that “this had a disproportionate effect", although it then refers the matter back to the DAA without any fundamental actions. The Minister's legislation does not comply with the EU regulation in terms of the appointment of Fingal County Council and it will clearly be open to challenge at EU level. This is something which could go on for years.

Deputy Clare Daly and I have drafted a motion on all of these issues which the Minister might consider. We know from recent reports that the traffic for all of our airports is heading for 35 million passengers per annum, with close to 30 million for Dublin Airport alone.

Other Deputies referred to the plans to increase the number of passengers using the airport to 50 million in order to rival and surpass Manchester and become, alongside Heathrow, the other major airport in these islands. If that is to be countenanced at all, it must be done in a sustainable way, having particular regard to noise.

My fundamental point is that local residents in Dublin Fingal and Dublin Bay North believe strongly that the economic importance of Dublin Airport and the necessity for growth can coexist with the local community where proper insulation and sound barrier technology is installed, reasonable noise controls are in place and there is a voluntary buy-out scheme for those who decide they need to leave on foot of the latest developments. We must address the regulation issue, which is the Minister's task. I ask him to recall the time previously when he railed against incompetent regulators and situations in which the wrong regulator was in the wrong place, particularly in the area of finance, and I urge him not to designate Fingal County Council. He should instead go with the suggestion of my colleague or the EPA.

See this speech in context