Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 10: To ask the Minister for Transport the position regarding recent developments at Aer Lingus; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5537/05]

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 29: To ask the Minister for Transport when a decision on the future funding options for Aer Lingus is expected; his views on whether the delay in taking this decision is having a negative impact on the future financial viability of the airline; the outcome of his recent discussions with Aer Lingus; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9705/05]

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 125: To ask the Minister for Transport the position in regard to the future of Aer Lingus; if recent arrangements have been entered into in this regard; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9924/05]

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 10, 29 and 125 together.

I refer the Deputies to my reply to Question No. 2 today. Last Tuesday, I briefed my Cabinet colleagues on a number of key aviation issues, including the future of Aer Lingus. In the interests of the airline, I am anxious to move forward on this issue as a matter of urgency. Aer Lingus must be provided with the flexibility to grow and compete on a level playing field.

The current situation is not sustainable and restricts the airline, particularly with regard to profitable growth opportunities on long haul routes. To fund that growth and provide financial security, Aer Lingus must have access to the full range of funding mechanisms and equity capital is a critical element in that mix. Early clarity on realistic options for accessing that equity is crucial and I will bring specific proposals in this regard to Government shortly. I will continue to consult stakeholders as I move forward on this issue.

If the Government decides to embark on a sale of all or part of Aer Lingus, I will set out for the House, in accordance with the provisions of the Aer Lingus Act 2004, the general principles of the proposed sale as well as the basis for the Government's decision and the arguments for and against such a sale. I will also set out how the Government proposes to deal with important strategic issues.

Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

First, does the Minister accept that Aer Lingus has made a major contribution to the economy and the country generally as an island nation? Does he accept there is a danger that we might lose that contribution? Second, does the Minister agree that the staff of Aer Lingus made considerable sacrifices to contribute to the company? Does he agree that they deserve support and credit, and that it was not just one person who turned the company around? Third, does the Minister accept that Members of the House and elected public representatives, particularly in north Dublin city and county, as well as nationally, have major problems with privatisation? They are concerned that others want privatisation for its own sake rather than dealing with the real world.

With regard to aviation policy, who is the Minister talking about when he refers to the stakeholders?

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I put on record the answer to a number of the Deputy's questions when answering Deputy Shortall. I accept that Aer Lingus has made a significant contribution to Ireland, nationally and internationally. As the Taoiseach, the Government and I have stated on many occasions, the unions, the board, the former chief executive and others have achieved the turnaround of that airline. It was the result of much hard work and is an ongoing process.

My job is to make sure we progress Aer Lingus into the future. All of the stakeholders — the social partners, trade unions, the management, the board and the Government — are ad idem in accepting that Aer Lingus needs substantial investment quickly to take advantage of the huge opportunities that exist. There is no disagreement on any side with regard to this fundamental point.

The issue is not just about investing and then walking away. Aer Lingus needs to compete on a level playing field with other airlines, which it is not in a position to do at present. I want to correct this. Aer Lingus has an opportunity to become a far more substantial airline, achieving far more for this country, if we make crucial and correct decisions now about placing it in the right shape for the future. I have been having discussions on this with the stakeholders for the past five months. I am glad these have been positive, open discussions.

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Does the Minister consider the Airbus A330, which is used on transatlantic routes, a suitable replacement for existing aircraft given that many carriers are choosing smaller aircraft for those routes? For example, Continental Airlines uses a Boeing 757 with much less capacity.

The Minister stated there were opportunities for Aer Lingus to open new routes to 20 different destinations in the US. Are these year-round routes or seasonal? Given that Aer Lingus is a relatively small airline compared to US carriers, Lufthansa and British Airways, of which the former Aer Lingus chief executive is now chief executive, will it be able to compete against such mega-carriers on transatlantic routes?

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The question on the operational matter of the type of aircraft is outside the scope of this question.

Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister might get through it.

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

He might want to answer.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is an operational matter on which I have no view. I trust those charged with that responsibility will make the best decision in the interests of the airline and passengers in terms of volume, scope and potential growth.

With regard to the final question, I am not presenting Aer Lingus as some kind of mega-global player trying to compete all over the world. I have identified specific markets where there are excellent opportunities for an Irish airline. I want that airline to be Aer Lingus, operating out of Ireland. I am determined that these opportunities be taken up by Aer Lingus and not any other airline. On that basis, it can compete on transatlantic and other routes. However, completion of all of the business planning, within the company and other companies, is crucial to that success.

Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister stated in his initial reply that when Cabinet takes the decision he will bring all the information to the House on the basis for the decision and the arguments for and against. However, the arguments for and against should be provided at this point. The Minister speaks of being involved in negotiations with the stakeholders. All the Members present, as public representatives, are stakeholders; we represent the public interest and the taxpayer who currently owns this successful company.

The Minister has a responsibility to make the arguments in the House for and against any proposed change in the ownership structure of Aer Lingus. The main purpose of my Priority Question was to draw out the Minister on this point and get him to make the arguments. Let us have a discussion to try to establish the company's needs into the future, the best ways of meeting those needs, the most appropriate structure for this and how the strategic interests of the country can be safeguarded. That discussion should be in public. There is a range of views on this issue and much merit in the different proposals.

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

A question, please.

Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister should consider allowing time for this matter prior to any final decision being taken by Cabinet because we all have a legitimate interest, as representatives of taxpayers, in discussing this in an open and objective manner.

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy should confine herself to the question.

Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Will the Minister provide an opportunity for us to do this?

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy might accept that I have gone a long way to putting as much of the information on the record as I can.

Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister has not put any of it on the record.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What I cannot do is undermine the opportunities for Aer Lingus by airing them all over the place.

Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister should stop hiding behind that excuse.

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy Shortall should allow the Minister to answer without interruption.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There are serious commercial opportunities and financial mechanisms sensitive to Aer Lingus, including the value of the company. We all accept that Aer Lingus should maximise these issues.

Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister is hiding. Let us have a public debate.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

With all due respect, it is of no benefit to the workers and management to have Members speculating on speculative figures that may be completely meaningless until we get to the crunch point of getting the company into the market. I must listen to staff, management, other experts and the market. There is much evidence on this issue. The Deputy is experienced and well read in these matters, and she knows the opportunities that exist. I want to make sure we create opportunities for the company to seize. The chairman of Aer Lingus, the trade unions directly involved and the social partners all accept there are huge opportunities for the company and that it needs substantial capital to begin this process immediately.

Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There are different views on this.

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There are.

Eamon Ryan (Dublin South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Joint Committee on Transport heard the basic argument for a private sector investment on the basis that long-haul aeroplanes had to be replaced. There was no business secrecy; it was a simple fact. It would cost about €1 billion and we questioned from where the money would come.

I support Deputy Shortall's point. The Minister said he had talked to the stakeholders — the unions and social partners in the partnership process. We live in a democracy. The Members of this House represent the people. We are the representative stakeholders. If the Minister can talk to the unions and social partners, and if there is a basic question about funding for replacement of the long-haul fleet, regardless of any commercial sensitivities--——

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

A question, please.

Eamon Ryan (Dublin South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy Shortall is correct. In those circumstances, why should we not debate the basic principle, as stated by Deputy Finian McGrath?

Perhaps my maths is poor but it was reported we would get perhaps €300 million for selling the company, a figure that could be wrong by perhaps €50 million either way. We know that roughly €1 billion is required for the replacement argued for at committee by the chairman of the company. This leaves a gap of €700 million. Would private sector investors borrow to pay for the long haul aircraft? If so, where is the benefit? Are we doing all this for €300 million? Could we not borrow the full €1 billion ourselves? The Minister says the airline is threatened with becoming uncompetitive due to operational problems. It is one of the most profitable and successful airlines in the world. Why are we selling a stake for €300 million when the company needs €1 billion? Will the gap be bridged by private lending and why do we not borrow the money ourselves?

Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

If Aer Lingus ends up only investing that much, it will have failed in its opportunities. That goes nowhere near what the potential opportunities for the company are.

I will correct one item which may be misunderstood. There are 21 airport destinations in North America interested in having Aer Lingus flying in to them. I have not said that Aer Lingus wants to fly to all 21 destinations. There are subtle differences involved which I will not go into because clearly there are commercially valuable routes which I will not flag to other airlines which are equally interested in them.

The following is very important. Before we give opportunities to other companies which are competitors to Aer Lingus, I want Aer Lingus to have those opportunities first. That is what we should all be striving to achieve. This is not about playing with figures. It is about positioning one of the most important companies in this country for significant growth in jobs and in the Irish economy.

Eamon Ryan (Dublin South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It will need more than the €50 million——

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy, there were 12 minutes allowed for this question and we went to 14 minutes.