Kathleen O'Meara (Labour)

That is fine.

There appears to be no obvious justification for this legislation, which, as Senator O'Rourke said, leads one to question the real agenda behind it. I find myself in agreement with the Minister's comments at the beginning of his speech this afternoon. He stated: "The policy that underlies this legislation is in keeping with the wider package of Government policies designed to strengthen national and regional competitiveness." None of us has a difficulty with that. He went on, "I want to ensure that the country's principal gateway airports are in a position to provide cost competitive services and appropriate infrastructure to meet the current and future needs of airlines and other aviation companies while operating to a commercial mandate." I agree with this, although I might go a bit further in the area of the mandate.

He continued: "Our aim is to encourage as wide a range as possible of reliable, regular and competitive commercial air services for Irish tourism, trade and industry." Nobody could have a difficulty with that. Nor could anyone have a difficulty with the policy stated in the programme for Government for the regional airports. One of my main interests is Shannon Airport and its future, particularly in the context of industrial development, tourism and the economic prosperity and well-being of the mid-west region. If it is the intention of the Government, as stated in An Agreed Programme for Government, to extend the autonomy of regional airports, what has happened in the meantime to change that? Again, I see no explanation of what has changed since the programme for Government was agreed.

From supporting autonomy for the regional airports, the Government has moved to a decision to break up Aer Rianta totally and establish a series of regional airport authorities and the infrastructure designed within the legislation. I can only conclude that there is a political agenda at work. Many people have reached the same conclusion, but it would be good to have that debate on a political level. Let us come out and state where we stand. If there is a political ideology behind this, why should anyone apologise for it? If the Government and some of its Ministers are operating on the basis of a political ideology, what is the problem with saying it? Let us have that debate. Is it something that should be hidden?

Why should we try to couch this in issues of commercialisation and so on? There is clearly an agenda based on a theory — a myth, it must be recognised at this stage — that breaking up so-called State monopolies must be done for its own sake. It is thought that a single State company like Aer Rianta must be a throwback to a past era and that it is an indication of our modernity as an economy and a country that we are seen to break up the old State monoliths. One hears the commentary about Aer Rianta in that context — it needs a new PR company because its press is not so good. However, as Senator O'Rourke and others have said, Aer Rianta is very successful compared to other State companies. Little reference has been made to Aer Rianta International or to the excellence of its management of duty free shops or airports around the world. Instead we have the notion that we must break it up, that this will be good for it and that it will measure in some way our Celtic tiger II status.

The reality is different. As has been pointed out, no business plan has been brought forward with the legislation. This leads to serious concerns that the restructuring will not be an economic success. Similarly, the manner in which the assets of Shannon Development are being transferred to the new Shannon Airport authority gives rise to serious concern in the mid-west. I raised the matter previously on the Adjournment because large commercial interests in the mid-west area raised their concerns with me that Shannon Development will no longer be able to operate as a development authority with major implications for the region's relationship with its largest employers.

It is not appropriate, nor part of its mandate, for an airport authority to be a development authority. Shannon Development has a particular mandate and has operated successfully in the region to promote industrial development, tourism and linked activities. It covers a region which extends from Kerry across to Thurles and to south Offaly and has been very successful. Those of us familiar with it are concerned that within a year of the implementation of this legislation we will see its demise because the Shannon Airport authority will not, cannot and does not have the mandate to continue the work of Shannon Development. We are also concerned that the enterprise agency which will take up the role of Shannon Development cannot carry out that function effectively as it is not based and located in the region to the same extent as Shannon Development has been.

The idea of transferring the assets to an airport authority is an artificial creation. Why is it necessary to do this? Such an artificial creation puts the new airport authority on a less than sound basis. I will not say further than that because I wish the new airport authority the best. Inevitably this legislation will pass and we will have to live with the new situation, therefore, I want the new Shannon Airport authority to be successful for the region. I want to see it develop in the best way possible, linked with development of other infrastructure such as rail and motorways. The Minister knows this House is interested in the development of railway infrastructure.

The Minister understands where I am coming from when I say that not only should we have a rail link from Shannon to Limerick, but this link should be improved to take in north Tipperary, Roscrea and Ballybrophy. It would make a huge difference to the region if we had a vibrant airport bringing new business to the region. This would have the positive economic spin off we want to see. However, we are concerned the structure proposed in this legislation will not bring about the desired effect. I genuinely hope it does, but am concerned it will not. The reasons for my concern are that no business plan has been brought forward, the loss of asset value and the lack of long-term projections. We have no figures to go on. The Minister is asking us to place our trust in his hands on the passing of this legislation.

Much reference has been made to the continued dominance of Dublin Airport under this legislation. The dominance of Dublin Airport is not surprising when one considers the extent of its growth and the short period in which that growth took place. We welcome that growth. As the Minister pointed out, the role of Dublin Airport in the economy is pivotal and we obviously want to see it operate as well as possible. However, we only have to enter its front door to see that it does not. It is something of a nightmare to negotiate but is doing as well as it can. It cannot be compared to an airport like Stansted because its set-up is different. We would like to see infrastructure such as a metro developed to the airport because it would make an enormous difference in terms of ease of travel and greater use of the airport.

The groundswell of opinion from this House, particularly from the Leader, is that the speed with which this legislation is being managed, the lack of a business plan, the lack of long-term projections, the concerns about the debt issue, to which the Minister referred in his speech but did not address sufficiently, give cause for concern. I accept what he said with regard to the drafting issue and we will examine that further tomorrow. However, the Minister's reference to the debt issue does not allay my concerns, based on what I have read today and over the weekend. The debt issue is in the public domain and is a matter of more than just spin. The Minister says a letter has been leaked and that some spinning has gone on. This is understandable in the context of what we are dealing with, but the core issue with regard to the management of the debt remains and has not been fully addressed. The Minister must deal with it in greater detail to allay our concern and I hope he accepts I am genuine on this matter.

We are in a position of having to deal with legislation in an unnecessarily rushed fashion. I will not be surprised if we have to return to a State airports amendment Bill in the future. I hope we will not have debates on the matter of airports in trouble but that we will see increased economic activity, particularly in the mid-west region. I look forward to Committee and Report Stages of the Bill.