Fergal Browne (Fine Gael)

Ba mhaith liom fáilte a chur roimh an Aire Stáit. Fine Gael welcomes this Bill and I thank the Minister of State for his comprehensive speech which certainly cleared up some questions in my mind. This Bill was referred to the Sub-Committee on European Scrutiny on 21 November last and then referred to the Joint Committee on European Affairs for further detailed scrutiny. The members of that committee had little difficulty with it and felt it took a sensible approach.

We welcome a harmonised approach to insurance for airline carriers. The world is now a small place.

Huge volumes of traffic pass through airports every day and it is vital that airline passengers have maximum rights. I was amazed to learn that in any given 24-hour period, in the region of 1,000 aircraft use Irish airspace. This works out at nearly 7,000 aircraft per week at peak times, although the distinction between peak and off-peak has blurred in recent times.

The previous obligation on aircraft operators from non-EU countries simply to have insurance has proved unsatisfactory. The fact that an amount of insurance is specified is a welcome step. As Aer Lingus and Ryanair already meet the proposed insurance requirements there should not be any fare increases for passengers using their services.

Widespread public consultation was undertaken in regard to this proposal. Advertisements were placed in newspapers last March. The lack of response is an indication that the public is quite happy with the proposal.

The Bill deals with the insurance requirements for air carriers and aircraft operators. It aims to ensure a harmonised approach to the level of insurance held by aircraft carriers in response to the increased fears of terrorist attacks arising from the events of 11 September 2001 in the United States. We continue to be at risk from such attacks. In the terrorist attack in Bali but for the grace of God some Irish people would have been killed. Even a terrorist attack thousands of miles away in Bali can have a direct impact on Ireland.

The Bill will allow us to ratify the Montreal Convention, thus giving it the force of law here. The Montreal Convention updated and replaced the Warsaw Convention and the Minister of State clearly outlined the benefits attached to this.

On a point of clarification, will the Minister inform the House of the implications of the Rome Convention, which I came across in researching this area? I am not sure what it is, although I am aware we have not yet signed it. What is it, do we plan to sign it and, if not, why not? Will it have an implication for the Bill before us?

Currently European Union countries have high levels of insurance cover, in excess of €1 billion, but many carriers from non-EU countries have considerably less than this. Given this state of affairs the European Commission correctly brought forward a proposal to ensure a harmonised approach to insurance that will enhance the rights of passengers.

The regulation will apply to all EU and non-EU carriers and operators that fly into EU airports or use EU airspace. All such carriers will be required to have specific minimum levels of insurance for passengers, baggage, mail, cargo and third parties.

Current regulations require aircraft operators simply to have insurance, without specifying actual amounts. The existing recommended amounts are relatively low compared to that held by most carriers in EU member states. The level of insurance will depend on the maximum take-off weight of the aircraft and the insurance must include cover for acts of war or terrorism.

The Minister of State's point on ratification before 1 May is valid. Accordingly, I wish the Bill a speedy passage through the Houses. By passing the legislation before 1 May, it will also apply to the ten accession countries, which is good news for all concerned.

Non-EU aviation carriers operating in Ireland are currently regulated by the Department of Transport, but the implementation of the regulation is not expected to have significant implications for it. The Irish Aviation Authority will be responsible for enforcement in the area of individual aircraft licences. Does the Minister of State foresee any extra workload for the Department or the authority in this area?

The legislation will ensure that sufficient funds will be available to meet compensation costs in the case of an accident in Ireland between EU and non-EU carriers from any of the states which are party to the convention.

The provision on the French language is unusual. The Minister of State expanded on this point in his speech. Surely it would make more sense to have English as the main language of Europe. While it may not be the first language of most European countries, it is one which is widely spoken and may help prevent further confusion. Is this provision set in stone or can it be changed?

Where do we stand in regard to making amendments to the Bill? If we make amendments, will they have an impact on other countries? Does the legislation go back to the European Parliament, for example, for further ratification?

I welcome the Bill, which is a good one. It is hard to say anything bad about it. Members of the Joint Committee on European Affairs queried the matter of state aircraft not coming under the remit of the legislation. This is due to the Chicago Convention which dictated that, in the event of a crash involving state aircraft, the Government in question would honour any liabilities. This may be the subject of discussion in Brussels today. It is certainly on the agenda for discussion at European Union level. Will the Minister of State clarify the issue of liability in the case of the involvement of military or State aircraft in an accident? As far as I know, it is outside the remit of the legislation.