Shane Ross (Independent)

We should not be having this debate because the Government should have sold its 25% stake in Aer Lingus at the time of privatisation. Had that happened there would be no good reason for it to be a political football now. The Government is reaping the whirlwind of its fudge this time last year when it decided in its wisdom and its desire to cosy up to the unions in Aer Lingus and others that it would hold on to 25%. The impression was given - it was not contradicted by the Government at the time - that as long as it held 25% and the unions 15%, everything would be all right and the privatisation would not really be a privatisation, but that the airline would remain under State control. The Government deliberately gave that impression to keep vested interests happy. Now when it is being called on to deliver on that unstated but deliberate impression it cannot do so.

I have little sympathy for the Government in this situation. I support fully the sale of State assets. The Government has no business being involved in airlines, airports or banking. If we fudge it this is exactly what will happen. Now it is hoist on its own petard, and does not know whether it has control or influence, which it does not have.

The appointment of directors does not give one control over the day-to-day management of Aer Lingus. While the Government has no business in respect of this decision, it appointed the directors. Members should not forget the other directors are also political appointees. Every one of them was appointed prior to the privatisation by the Government. No one should take great comfort from the forthcoming appointment of two more directors. The Government implies the directors to be appointed will be two of the greatest political patsies ever to have been appointed by it, which will be some record to beat.