Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I appreciate the opportunity of discussing the implications of this regulation. A Council regulation is binding, while a directive may require domestic legislation. Regulation 95/93 has been amended some 40 times and the consolidated version is that of 2002. It lays down the fundamental principles of the management of slots in airports and aviation policy.

It opens by stating that the objective of the regulation is to give a proper answer to the "growing imbalance between the expansion of the air transport system in Europe and the availability of adequate airport infrastructure to meet that demand". While the directive and its amendments deal with co-ordinated airports Shannon is not a co-ordinated airport and Dublin briefly was. The regulation lays down fundamental principles upon which aviation policy in the EU was to be based: "The use of flexibility is limited, it cannot be used for slots related to routes considered vital for economic development of the region where the airport is located, nor disturb airport operations, when another carrier with less frequencies has not been able to obtain landing and departure slots within two hours before or after." Therefore it accepted that where a particular slot was vital "for the economic development of the region where the airport is located" that had to be borne in mind.

This brings me to the nub of the matter — compliance with the regulation was a Government responsibility. The original allocation of slots was a matter that had been discussed intergovernmentally. Therefore, on that fundamental principle, BMI could not, for example, move its slots to Shannon without reference to a co-ordinator or the co-ordinating committee.

On the other hand, the Irish Government, while under an obligation of compliance, decided to leave it to the board to comply even though the Government had not appointed members to the board. In turn, the board delegated a decision of this magnitude to what was regarded as an operational decision by the executive. This is absurd.

One of the reasons I raise this was to seek to resolve this issue. It could be resolved but we are not helped in Galway, the west or the mid-west by the bilious comments of the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, Deputy Ó Cuív. In his lecture in Bunratty yesterday he stated:

While you must recognise the challenges and deficiencies in your region, never sell your region short. By always highlighting the difficulties and never the advantages, a great disservice is done to a region.

How dare he say this. Those of us asking for fair treatment of Shannon are asking only for equality. He goes on to give his Joyce country céilí band speech: "In my experience, in the Joyce country where I live, the vital turning point came when the people's attitude towards their area changed from one of despair and negativity to one of positive thinking and pride." I have no problem if he regards himself as John the Baptist in the mountains but I object to his distortion of a genuine campaign. I condemn his ignorance of regional planning. No integrated regional planning has come about as a residue of open market thinking. It has required equality of infrastructure.

The Minister, like me, represents Galway West. He is happy that not one cent from the national development plan, under Transport 21, will be spent on an integrated transport service at Ceannt Station. More than ten acres of a 14.5 acre site will be sold to raise money for minor adjustments in Galway city. Instead of co-operating with us to see how we can make progress he gives these "up the airy mountain, down the rushy glen" speeches around the country. He claims we are talking ourselves down. We seek equality of treatment and when we speak of connectivity, it is not to highlight difficulty in the region but to refer to the capacity of the region. I have no objection to how he wishes to describe himself but he is being grossly unfair to the alliance and the workers.

My reason for this debate was to see how the Government is complying with a Council regulation, by which it is legally bound.

Brendan Smith (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Deputy Michael D. Higgins for raising this issue. The Minister for Transport, Deputy Noel Dempsey, is unavoidably absent. The EU regulation to which the Deputy refers is of no relevance to the decision of Aer Lingus to discontinue its Shannon to Heathrow service. The regulation in question is Council Regulation (EEC) No. 95/93, as amended, on common rules for the allocation of slots at community airports. I propose to set out the background to the regulation and how it is applied.

The regulation lays down common EU rules for the allocation of slots to air carriers at airports in the community. Essentially the regulation took responsibility for the slot allocation process out of the hands of airport authorities at congested airports and made it the responsibility of slot co-ordinators who are designated by the member states. The Commission for Aviation Regulation has been designated as the competent authority for the regulation in Ireland.

Under the regulation, airports in the community are either co-ordinated or schedules facilitated, as referred to by Deputy Higgins. Generally, congested airports will be designated as co-ordinated airports by the relevant authority in the member state concerned which means that a carrier cannot operate a landing or a take-off at such an airport without being allocated a slot. A more flexible regime can be operated at schedules facilitated airports where capacity is not so constrained.

The application of Regulation 95/93 in Ireland is concerned only with the allocation of slots at Irish airports and Dublin airport is the only airport in the State that has been designated as a co-ordinated airport by the Commission for Aviation Regulation. The slot allocation process at London Heathrow is entirely a matter for the UK authorities.

With regard to the wider issue of the withdrawal by Aer Lingus of the Shannon to Heathrow service, the Deputy will be aware that the Government is extremely disappointed with the decision taken by Aer Lingus and has clearly conveyed that disappointment to the management of the company, both publicly and privately.

Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

And late.

Brendan Smith (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister for Transport, Deputy Dempsey, made it clear to the company that the decision ran counter to public policy in several respects, including the national spatial strategy, regional development and aviation policy——

Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is exactly what the Council regulation is about.

Brendan Smith (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

While it was recognised that Aer Lingus was not an instrument of Government policy, there was an expectation that it would take these wider policy issues into account in making commercial decisions. The Minister also made the point that Aer Lingus should have engaged more with its customers and wider stakeholders before announcing its decision. The Aer Lingus Chairman informed the Minister that the decision was taken to establish a new base at Belfast International Airport following extensive evaluation of growth opportunities throughout Europe. He said the decision was commercially robust and the company would not reconsider it.

The company has reiterated that position consistently and it was evident from early on that Aer Lingus would not deviate from this position. Given that fact, the Government began to look at the possibility of restoring connectivity on the route. A number of options were explored in that regard. The Minister investigated the possibility of the State acquiring Heathrow slots to replace the service. The Minister was informed that this was not legally possible. It is not open to the State to acquire slots as the applicable rules allow only for slots to be assigned to airlines. The option of providing funding to assist in acquiring such slots was also examined, but again this or any other form of direct subvention of a London Heathrow slot is constrained by the state aid rules.

Arising from this it was clear that the focus of attention had to move to securing a replacement service for the Shannon Heathrow route. It was indicated clearly to the Shannon Airport Authority that the Government would assist it in any way that it possibly could. The Shannon Airport Authority, which has direct responsibility for securing such services, has been actively pursuing all options in this regard since then. The authority has specifically identified airline services to the key European hub airports of London-Heathrow, Paris, Amsterdam and Frankfurt as being of key strategic importance to its ongoing development. The airport recently published a European hub airport incentive scheme for services to come into operation in 2008, which provides for significant discounts in airport charges and for the possibility of marketing support to be provided by Shannon Airport for new services.

Regarding connectivity for the mid-west region, it is accepted by the Government that this decision by Aer Lingus will have an adverse effect on the region——

Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy Smith should tell that to Deputy Ó Cuív.

Brendan Smith (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

——particularly in relation to business travellers to the Middle-East, Asia and Australia. The Minister is very committed to ensuring that the mid-west region will continue to have the widest possible range of connectivity options available for the benefit of business and tourism throughout the region.

Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We can all go to Athenry and get the train.