Dáil debates

Tuesday, 14 June 2016

Ceisteanna - Questions (resumed) - Priority Questions

State Airports

4:35 pm

Photo of Brendan  RyanBrendan Ryan (Dublin Fingal, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

58. To ask the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport the efforts he will make to address the concerns of Fingal residents living in the vicinity of the proposed north runway at Dublin Airport, specifically regarding increased noise pollution; if he discussed this with the Dublin Airport Authority directly; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15833/16]

Photo of Brendan  RyanBrendan Ryan (Dublin Fingal, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My question relates to the proposed north runway at Dublin Airport, which will now proceed after a long period on the shelf. The benefit of this runway to the local, regional and national economy is beyond argument and it is to be welcomed. There are valid concerns from residents in communities such as Portmarnock, Kinsealy, Balgriffin, south Swords, St. Margaret's, the Ward and Kilreece regarding the impact the new runway will have on noise pollution. Is the Minister aware of these concerns and does he have a plan to address them?

4:45 pm

Photo of Shane RossShane Ross (Dublin Rathdown, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On a point of order, I thought Deputy Troy's question was next.

Photo of Declan BreathnachDeclan Breathnach (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes. I omitted to take his question. We will take it after Deputy Ryan's question.

Photo of Shane RossShane Ross (Dublin Rathdown, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Okay. That is fine.

Photo of Declan BreathnachDeclan Breathnach (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I apologise. I am as confused as the Minister regarding the rules. In fairness, I will come back to Deputy Troy after Deputy Ryan's question.

Photo of Shane RossShane Ross (Dublin Rathdown, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is fine. We will take them in this order.

Photo of John BrassilJohn Brassil (Kerry, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Chair is doing a great job.

Photo of Shane RossShane Ross (Dublin Rathdown, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I would like to thank Deputy Ryan for his question. As he will be aware, the Dublin Airport Authority, DAA, has a statutory responsibility to manage, operate and develop Dublin Airport, including by providing the infrastructure necessary to meet existing and future demand. The north runway project falls into this category.  The DAA was granted planning permission for this project in 2007 and announced its intention to proceed with it in April 2016.  While I have not yet had an opportunity to meet representatives of the DAA to discuss the project, I understand that a meeting has been arranged. I can reassure Deputy Ryan by saying that a meeting has probably been arranged for next week or the week after. It is coming up very shortly. I assure the Deputy that when I meet the representatives of the DAA, I will address this important issue with them immediately. This project will be one of the first things I discuss with them. I have been briefed on the meetings that officials from the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport have had with the DAA. I hope to meet representatives of the DAA shortly to discuss a range of issues, including the north runway project. I welcome the stated commitment of the DAA to work closely with all stakeholders, including local residents and community groups, on the north runway project. I understand the DAA has already met local residents to discuss the project and further engagement is planned.

New EU legislation regarding the issue of noise enters into force this month. Specifically, EU Regulation 598/14 on the introduction of noise-related operating restrictions at EU airports entered into force yesterday, 13 June 2016. This regulation sets out the process to be followed when decisions are being made on noise-related operating restrictions and involves consideration of all potential aircraft noise mitigation measures.  The regulation provides for consultation with interested parties, including local residents living in the vicinity of the airport. The new noise regulation presents an opportunity to establish a modern, cohesive and measured approach to the management of noise at Irish airports. It is capable of delivering the best outcome for all stakeholders.  The Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport, the Office of the Attorney General and the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government are engaged in discussions on the technical details of the appropriate implementation of this regulation.

Photo of Brendan  RyanBrendan Ryan (Dublin Fingal, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I know the DAA is making efforts to meet residents' groups. I have met and spoken with Mr. Kevin Toland. I appreciate the work that is ongoing in this area. I would like it to be continued and expanded. I ask the Minister, as the democratically elected person who is representing the public in this brief, to represent the residents to the best of his ability. We must ensure an appropriate balance is struck between delivering this project and meeting the concerns of the Fingal residents. I believe the residents' concerns can be met. I ask the Minister to keep a close watch on this aspect of the project as it progresses. I thank him for indicating that it will be a priority for him when he meets the DAA.

Photo of Shane RossShane Ross (Dublin Rathdown, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputy. I assure him that I will not allow a State monopoly to bully any group of residents, regardless of how small that group is. The Deputy can take that message back to them. It seems to me that State bodies of this sort are always in a position of great advantage over small groups of people. Although I agree that the necessity for the second runway is compelling, it is imperative that those who have lived in the affected area for a long time or indeed for a short time should not have their safe and reasonably quiet residences ruined, and certainly not without adequate compensation. They should be able to reach an amicable agreement with the DAA. When a big body like this is seeking to get its way over a small group of residents, it is an uneven contest. I will be asking the DAA certain questions about the second runway. Permission for it was granted in 2007 and it is now 2016. One would have to look at the appropriateness of that permission now. As the permission was granted until 2017, everything they are doing is perfectly legal. However, it is only fair that the concerns being expressed by the residents nine years on should be considered with a certain amount of generosity.