Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 15 Dec 1965

Vol. 219 No. 7

Committee on Finance. - Air Companies Bill, 1965: Second Stage.

Minister for Transport and Power (Mr. Childers)

I move that the Bill be now read a Second Time.

This legislation became necessary in the first instance because under existing law the capital of Aer Rianta is limited to £13,000,000. Of this amount, a total of £12,950,047 has been taken up. This total includes £1,300,000 of the £2,000,000 Exchequer contribution towards the cost of Aer Lingus short-haul jet aircraft. The balance of £700,000 has been advanced to Aer Rianta by way of a repayable advance pending the enactment of new legislation to enable the Minister for Finance to subscribe for share capital in Aer Lingus to this amount. The Bill, therefore, provides for the conversion of the repayable advance of £700,000 made to Aer Rianta into a share capital contribution in Aer Lingus. The opportunity has been taken in the amending legislation to relieve Aer Rianta of its functions as the holding company of Aer Lingus and Aerlínte so that the State investment in these companies will now be held direct by the Minister for Finance. Another objective of the Bill is to incorporate in one consolidated Bill all the relevant legislation relating to the control and financing of the air companies at present contained in the Air Navigation and Transport Acts so that, on the enactment of the new Bill, these Acts will relate solely to the general law of air navigation and international conventions. The Bill provides for the necessary amendments to the existing legislation.

Under existing legislation, the statutory provisions in respect of repayable advances by the State, and State guarantees of borrowings in respect of moneys required by the subsidiary companies—Aer Lingus and Aerlínte —are operated through the medium of Aer Rianta in its capacity as the holding company. Now that Aer Rianta is being relieved of its function as a holding company, it is necessary to provide for the making of advances direct by the Minister for Finance to Aer Lingus and Aerlínte, for direct borrowings by these companies and for the guarantee by the State of such borrowings. Limits on advances and guaranteed borrowings have been fixed in relation to the likely requirements of Aer Lingus and Aerlínte in the next three years or so. No provision is being made for further share capital contributions from the Exchequer to these companies who have now reached a position in which they can reasonably be expected to meet their capital requirements either direct from their own resources or by borrowings serviced from those resources. No provision is made for advances or guarantee of borrowings in respect of Aer Rianta because under this legislation the functions of the company will be confined almost entirely to the management of Dublin Airport and the capital requirements of the airport are financed direct from voted moneys. The Bill also applies to the Air companies certain provisions, common to semi-State bodies generally, relating to the appointment of directors, the furnishing of accounts and approval by the Minister of new or amending superannuation schemes.

The arrangement under which Aer Rianta acts as holding company for Aer Lingus and Aerlínte derives from legislation some thirty years old and, at the time of enactment of that legislation, when the extent to which the operating companies would expand their activities over the years could not be reasonably foreseen, the system of State control through the medium of a holding company was administratively convenient. Aer Lingus and Aerlínte have now reached a stage of development where their operation as independent companies, freed from the complications inherent in their existing status as subsidiaries of Aer Rianta, is fully justified. Indeed, these companies had reached the necessary stage of development some time ago but steps to establish them as independent companies could not be conveniently taken because up to the 31st March, 1964, BEA had a shareholding in Aer Lingus. The BEA shareholding was acquired on that date by the Minister for Finance by way of a share capital subscription to Aer Rianta of the purchase price of the BEA shareholding. The arrangement under which the channelling of capital subscriptions to Aer Lingus and Aerlínte through Aer Rianta as the holding company has in fact given rise to difficulty in distinguishing the capital position of each of the three companies. Of the issued share capital of £12,950,047 shown in the Aer Rianta accounts as at 31st March 1965, £5,692,994 represents the shareholding in Aer Lingus and £6,921,477 the shareholding in Aerlínte. The balance of about £335,000 has been retained by Aer Rianta for investment in Irish and Intercontinental Hotels Limited and for its own capital purposes. The Aer Rianta shareholdings in Aer Lingus and Aerlínte are, of course, included in the issued share capital as shown in the accounts of those companies and this duplicate showing of capital has resulted in misconceptions as to the total amount of capital invested in the air companies and has, it will be recalled, resulted in unfavourable comments in the House.

The tendency is to assume that the capital invested in the air companies is double the real amount because the same quantum of money appears in the Aer Rianta accounts and again in the Aer Lingus and Aerlínte accounts. Moreover, loans, etc. required for the operating companies have to be negotiated through Aer Rianta so that the accounts of that company show liabilities which are really proper to the subsidiary operating companies. There is no reason why this situation should continue particularly now that the BEA shareholding in Aer Lingus has been acquired. The termination of Aer Rianta as a holding company will result in Aer Lingus and Aerlínte being given the necessary statutory recognition to enable the Minister for Finance to have a direct shareholding in and guarantee borrowings by the companies without the necessity for channelling the transactions through Aer Rianta. The present legislation will achieve this purpose.

The proposed change in the status of Aer Rianta will also have the effect of removing the undesirable situation under which Dublin Airport is managed by a company the vast bulk of whose capital is invested in operating companies, one of which operates extensively at the airport; two-thirds of the landings made at Dublin Airport are by Aer Lingus aircraft. It is clearly bad in principle that the airport should be managed by a company so closely identified with a particular operating company.

The Bill provides for the conversion of that part of the present shareholding of the Minister for Finance in Aer Rianta which is represented by shareholding in Aer Lingus and Aerlínte into direct shareholdings by the Minister for Finance in those companies. Furthermore, the Minister for Finance has taken up shares to the value of £295,557 in Aer Rianta to enable that company to take up shares and mortgage debenture stocks to a like amount in Irish and Intercontinental Hotels, Ltd. The Bill transfers this holding to Aerlínte as the company most closely identified with the operation of the hotels.

The House may find it useful to have a short resumé of the capital position of the air companies as a whole. With the conversion into share capital of the £700,000 referred to in section 3 of the Bill the total State investment in the three air companies will be £13.66 million, of which all but about £50,000 is represented by the investment in the operating companies, Aer Lingus and Aerlínte. The State investment in the air companies has not so far been remunerated because the companies' requirements of capital to finance their extensive operational developments over the years have absorbed any funds becoming available by way of depreciation or operating surpluses. The total amount of depreciation and net operating surpluses of Aer Lingus and Aerlínte in the period 1960-61 to 1964-65 amounted to £7.65 million. These internal resources of the companies have had to be supplemented by further State investment and by extensive borrowing from commercial sources.

The present Bill does not provide for any further subscription to share capital beyond the £700,000 already referred to and accordingly the companies will have to finance their capital projects from their own resources and from commercial borrowings as foreshadowed in the Second Programme for Economic Expansion. With this method of financing the proportion of remunerated capital, i.e. loan capital, to total capital, i.e. share and loan capital combined, will be substantially increased. The total share and loan capital of Aer Lingus and Aerlínte amounted to nearly £14 million at 31st March, 1965, of which 7 per cent was loan capital; at the end of the period of the Second Programme for Economic Expansion, it is estimated that the total of share and loan capital will be in the region of £30 million, of which over 50 per cent will be loan capital. Loan capital is remunerated at prevailing commercial rates of interest.

Section 3 of the Air Navigation and Transport Act, 1961, provides for the payment of repayable advances to Aer Rianta by the Minister for Finance up to a limit of £1 million. Instead of this provision, repayable advances of up to £1 million may now be paid in the case of each of the operating companies on such terms as to repayment as the Minister for Finance may determine.

The Bill provides for borrowing by the operating companies on such terms and up to such limits as are approved by the Minister for Finance. Under section 75 of the Air Navigation and Transport Act, 1936, as amended by section 3 of the Air Navigation and Transport (No. 2) Act, 1959, the Minister for Finance could guarantee the payment of principal moneys up to a limit of £5 million together with interest secured by debentures issued by Aer Rianta. A corresponding provision is included in the new legislation except that the limits have been revised as to £5 million in the case of Aer Lingus and £6 million in the case of Aerlínte, including the limit of £1 million on repayable advances in each case. These limits take account of borrowings which may be necessary in the next three years or so to supplement the companies' own resources for the purchase of new aircraft and other capital expenditure.

At present the method of appointment of directors of the three companies differs as between Aer Rianta, Aer Lingus and Aerlínte. The appointment of directors of Aer Rianta is regulated by paragraph 4 of the Second Schedule to the Air Navigation and Transport Act, 1936, whereas the appointment of directors of the operating companies is regulated under the Articles of Association of the companies. The Bill lays down uniform conditions for each company under which the number of directors and the terms and conditions of their appointment are determined by the Minister for Transport and Power in consultation with the Minister for Finance— conditions which are of course entirely appropriate in the circumstances that the capital of the companies has been provided by the State.

Under existing legislation, the accounts of the air companies are submitted to the Minister for Finance who presents them to the Dáil. Under this Bill responsibility for laying copies of the Report and Accounts before each House of the Oireachtas is transferred to the Minister for Transport and Power. The appointment of auditors, which heretofore required the approval of the Minister for Finance, will now be subject to my approval after consultation with the Minister for Finance. These provisions are similar to those obtaining in the case of a number of other State companies.

The remaining provisions in the Bill are generally consequential on the provisions which I have referred to and do not raise issues which require special mention.

In summary this Bill can be described as a tidying-up process which has become necessary due to the changes which have occurred over the years since the passing of the first Air Navigation and Transport Act almost 30 years ago. I should explain that the Bill does not purport to effect any change in the management of Dublin Airport and as I have already stated in the House no worsening of the conditions of any employees at the airport is contemplated. However, should a review of the system of management of the three State airports disclose that the airports would be better and more economically managed on an integrated basis, then the constitution of Aer Rianta as a purely management body would facilitate the changeover.

I recommend the Bill for the approval of the House.

Mr. Lindsay

I accept this Bill as a tidying-up measure as described by the Minister in the course of his speech, a speech which, I must say, was a simple and readily understandable presentation of what would be in ordinary circumstances a very complex situation. Consolidation in matters of this kind is or should be always welcomed not alone by the Legislature but by the layman and the lawyer alike.

While the Minister says there will be no worsening of the conditions of employees, the one worry I would have is that on the reorganisation resulting in the independence of Aerlínte and Aer Lingus, promotion would be blocked or the progress to promotion would be slower for present employees.

I should like to say something in the normal course of events on the relationship between Aer Rianta and the Intercontinental Hotels. For the moment it may be sufficient to say that the Aer Rianta people might take a greater interest in the day to day running of these hotels, particularly the running of functions and the manner in which that is done. I shall leave the matter at that because I think it is more appropriate to an Estimate debate than to a measure of this kind.

There is no doubt that our air concern has been and is a tremendous success. Not alone does it provide comfortable passenger services, but, relatively speaking, it provides the safest flying service in the world. Praise must be given to the operating staffs, indeed to the general staff, both on the ground and in the air. We cannot be sufficiently proud, in words at any rate, of our air services, from whatever aspect we view them. They are extremely good, comfortable and safe.

Reading today's newspapers and the news that Dr. Dempsey, the General Manager, is thinking of retiring—with sufficient notice indeed—I felt a certain amount of regret. It would be appropriate to say here that I do not think that in any of our State companies, or in any part of our private enterprise, is there a man to whom this country owes so much in regard to this project, started 30 years ago. He is not alone a man of great administrative ability—all done extremely unobtrusively—but it can be said of him that he has a great labour relations understanding, the result being that during the 30 years there has been very little difficulty experienced in the running of these companies. I regret to see he contemplates retiring at a very young age, having regard to his great ability and also having regard to the reluctance of many others much older in an active sense.

The people who fly the planes, whether Atlantic or European, are people to whom a tribute should be paid. Among them are the girls who work as air hostesses. I do not think the remuneration they get is adequate but probably it is as much as the company can reasonably afford. I have often wondered why, whether connected with status or otherwise, tipping is prevented. I think there should be some sort of receptacle somewhere in a plane where people could insert certain amounts to be divided among the hostesses at the end of the year, at Christmas. Very often coming home from abroad, we are in possession of a certain amount of——

Mr. Carty

Contraband.

Mr. Lindsay

I do not mean contraband, but amounts of money which are very small. If this money could be put into some sort of receptacle to be divided among the girls at Christmas, it would represent a gift from satisfied customers because saying: "Thank you very much; we have enjoyed our flight" is a very inadequate return for the services these girls give and, if I might use the old hackneyed phrase, the service with a smile they give. Passengers are sometimes not easy people with whom to deal.

The Minister has told us this is a tidying-up measure. I feel that this company—the same can be said of other State companies—having regard to the amount of money they make, to the amount needed to keep them properly supplied—the necessary acquisition of further planes and depreciation —are such a good investment that it might be reasonable at a not too distant date to put shares on the stock market so that people could invest in them. Certainly our air companies are the kind, having regard to their history, their safety record and the wonderful progress they have made, in which people could invest with security and, I think, invest very well. It is a matter about which I have felt strongly for many years—not only in relation to Aer Lingus and Aer Rianta, the parent body, but other State companies.

This is tidying-up legislation, at the same time incorporating all the international Conventions. It is not a Bill about which there can be any controversy. We can, however, avail of the Bill to pay tribute and compliments to the people who have run the services and are continuing to run them with such extreme attention and satisfaction not alone to Irish people who use the planes but to foreigners who have the good fortune to do so.

Mr. James Tully

I should like to congratulate the Minister for at least having provided us with a brief easily readable and easily understood. Perhaps he would pass on the word to his Cabinet colleagues that they should attempt to simplify some of the briefs on Bills from time to time. As Deputy Lindsay has said, this is entirely noncontroversial and is, I imagine, highly desirable. The proposals in the Bill would have to be dealt with eventually and tidying-up in this way should be welcomed. The Minister has timed this Bill well, when business is not too heavy.

The fact that the joint organisations who have been running the air services are so successful is a great tribute to everybody associated with them, from the ground staffs to the pilots and hostesses. I should hate to think that the remuneration of the hostesses is such that they would have to depend on the spare money that travellers carry back with them, not of very much use for anything. If the money were of any value, it could be exchanged on the plane for something which might be taken home. The staff should be adequately remunerated and I hope that is the case.

While there is a certain amount of glamour attached to the job of air hostess, there is also a lot of hard work. It often surprises me that girls are attracted to this type of work because apart from the danger attaching to flying — although, thank God, the operations of our services have so far been very safe—there is always the drudgery entailed by having to serve meals on a plane, very often to people who are not very good travellers, or not very good mixers or perhaps who may have mixed something a little bit too much earlier, or who perhaps find the food they are offered not exactly what they want. These girls deserve to be very well remunerated and I hope that that is so.

One disturbing comment was made by Deputy Lindsay and I should like to take him up on it. A few years ago there was a suggestion here that we should get rid of some of our State companies and at the time some of us were wondering whether we were going to try to sell the ones that were not paying or the ones that were paying. The suggestion that private enterprise should be invited to invest in a paying State company is one which we should not encourage because if we get rid of the companies that are paying and only maintain the ones that are not, we then can have people pointing to the fact that public ownership is not the right way to deal with these matters and that we should hand them back to private enterprise. Therefore I would ask the Minister not to be too anxious to take the advice of Deputy Lindsay. Perhaps if he is thinking of getting rid of some of the State companies, he might start with some of the others under his authority and see how that would work out first.

As has been stated by the previous speaker, the Bill is a tidying-up measure. One point which I would like the Minister to clarify, perhaps not now but at a later stage, is that the public are often confused about the expression "an operating profit" which is used when talking about air services. Does that mean that the operating profit is a profit made without counting the cost of replacements or the repayments of loans? Is it simply a profit on the operation of the company for the year, without taking into account any of the matters which could convert the operating profit into a very real loss? Perhaps the Minister would clarify this some time for the benefit of the general public, so that they would know whether or not the very substantial investment in the air company is, as some people claim, while showing an operating profit, at the same time showing quite a substantial loss over the years. If it is showing a loss, how does it compare with the losses of some of the other companies such as CIE? If this information were available, it would be very useful in clearing the air with regard to these matters because there seems to be a lot of doubt as to whether or not the expression used means in fact what it is normally intended to mean, or whether it covers a situation which is not quite so rosy as we are sometimes told.

However, the company is providing an excellent service and I agree with Deputy Lindsay when he says that the services provided are not alone safe but it is generally accepted that the Irish airlines are equal to the best, and in fact very much better than many other services provided, particularly on the Continent of Europe. We should be proud of that because I have yet to find, when travelling abroad, anybody who is not prepared to say that the Irish airlines are safe and comfortable and that the service given by the staff is the very best and is very courteous.

Mr. Andrews

I should like to congratulate the Minister on his brief. As one of the so-called younger members of this House, one of the greatest difficulties with which I have been confronted from time to time has been, to use a hackneyed phrase, the plethora of legislative documents which I find difficult to get the time to read and study. I do not wonder that half, or perhaps 75 per cent or 85 per cent, of the people do not know what their rights are. As has been said the Bill is a rationalisation of the finances of Aer Rianta and Aerlinte and Aer Lingus. As Deputy Lindsay has remarked, the safety record of Aer Lingus is second to none. However there is one point which I should like the Minister to clear up. How many journeys does a plane make before it is checked thoroughly and how many times is a plane used before it is finally put on the scrapheap?

As we know, Dr. Dempsey has announced his proposed resignation and I should like to pay him a tribute, apart from knowing him personally. His record as a public servant has been first-class. He has been with Aer Lingus for some 30 or 40 years and his dedication to that company has been proved by its success.

In relation to the salaries of air hostesses, as mentioned by Deputy Tully, it is only fair to say on behalf of Aer Lingus that these hostesses have certain concessions in relation to trips abroad at very reduced rates. I think that——

Mr. Carty

And a high marriage rate.

Mr. Andrews

I was about to conclude by referring to that but Deputy Carty has interjected it for me Another one of the advantages is a high marriage rate.

Mr. Molloy

I should like the Minister——

Mr. Lindsay

Another bachelor boy.

Mr. Molloy

——to clarify one point for me in relation to the hostesses and the concessions granted to them. I should like to know if any changes have been made recently in relation to the concessions which were normally granted to them since the foundation of Aer Lingus in respect of their relatives. I understand that their relatives, whether they were parents or brothers and sisters, could travel to America for ten per cent of the normal charge and they were able to do this by the system known in airline circles as "standing by", which meant that they could not travel unless there were seats empty on the plane, seats which had not been booked. I understand that this concession has been taken away from the relatives. I wonder why. It would not make any difference to the finances of Aerlínte because, as I said, these seats are provided on a stand-by basis only. I would be interested to hear what the Minister has to say on that.

I would congratulate the Minister and the Government on the decision taken recently concerning the use of Dublin Airport by American airlines. It would have been a retrograde step for the tourist industry in the west if this concession had been granted. I have been told by friends in America that when next year's schedules are drawn up, there may be some slackening off in the number of planes flying to Ireland from America. I am sure this was gone into very thoroughly in the discussion and I should like to hear the Minister speak on it. Is it a fact that one can get on an American plane at New York, book to London and, if this plane were to stop in Dublin, visit Ireland at no extra cost?

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair is troubled about the relevancy of a good deal of this.

Mr. Molloy

Well, Sir, I shall conclude on that.

Mr. T. O'Donnell

Much of what I intended to say, Sir, is not relevant, in view of your ruling just now. This Bill is welcome in that it tidies up, as the Minister said, the administration of our national airline. I should like to join with the other Deputies who have spoken in praising Aer Lingus for the service they have provided and the progress they have made. But I hope they will get down to the job of providing a proper feeder service from Shannon Airport. As I have already publicly stated, I welcome very sincerely the Government's decision to refuse the application for permission to fly into Dublin, but it is necessary that a proper feeder service be provided by Aer Lingus to and from Shannon Airport.

There is another point to which I referred previously. It is the question of the purchase of used aircraft by Aer Lingus. During the past year, they purchased a number of Viscounts from KLM. I have since investigated the matter and I am satified the aircraft acquired at that time were what might be termed a good bargain, but I feel this is something that should be discouraged. The tremendous record Aer Lingus have should not in any way be jeopardised by seeking bargains. This Bill is a step in the right direction and I sincerely hope it will lead to still further progress by Aer Lingus.

Mr. Childers

I thank Deputies for their very pleasant acceptance of this Bill. First, I shall deal with Deputy Tully's question as to what constitutes an operating surplus. He will find if he looks at the accounts of Aerlínte for the past year that the operating profit made was £1,180,000. Included in that is the whole of the calculated cost of flight operations, aircraft fuel oil used, landing fees paid out, all the maintenance and overhaul and all the depreciation of flight equipment, ground equipment, premises and furniture, depreciation as verified by the auditors and depreciation, as in the normal case of company accounts, at historic cost. Then traffic expenses, sales and publicity are charged; administration, management and general expenses are charged; and the operating profit, as I have said, was £1,180,000.

I have already indicated that Aerlínte does not remunerate its capital. Because of the fact that both of the companies were made to expand their services so rapidly, to enter upon routes with marginal profitability, it was quite impossible for the air company as a whole to earn enough appreciation or acquire sufficient reserves to invest in new aircraft on new routes at the pace at which they were required to do so by the implication of what is in the legislation or by Government direction. Therefore, if you take the capital as being a sum of £6,000,000 odd, it is not remunerated. There is no interest paid on it. It is not being repaid to the State. Theoretically, if you compare it with a private company, you will have to take from that profit what represents the remuneration of the capital, as in the case of the ESB, whose capital is repaid over a period of years.

Having got down to the operating profit, if the Deputy looks further to the profit and loss account for the year, he will find that, after adding two small credit items to that profit, amounts have been deducted or written off, preliminary expenses in connection with the introduction of jet aircraft, the operation of initial services across the Atlantic with the leased aircraft, with Constellations, before the Boeing jets were purchased. Then, having written off year by year considerable sums so as to reduce the working capital required by Aerlínte for its business, they have put aside as much as £700,000 out of that operating profit as an extra fleet replacement reserve in order to expand the fleet. They have also put aside a certain sum for fleet insurance reserve because of the possibility of insurance rates rising as a result of an undue number of accidents in the world at large. Air insurance is based partly on a company's experience within itself and partly on its contribution to whatever pool of insurance is required. The balance carried forward at the end of all that is only £204,000 out of £1,180,000. That explains the position.

The only element which could confuse the public, and which I tried to clear up by mentioning it every year, is the fact that nearly £7,000,000 of Aerlínte's capital is not remunerated. Therefore, there is no mention of interest in those accounts. If it was there, of course, the profit would be reduced.

Mr. James Tully

The Minister will agree the public can be confused by thinking there is an actual profit when, in fact, there is no repayment of capital and no interest paid on borrowing?

Mr. Childers

On the other hand, having said that, as Deputies know, the two air companies have been instructed to remunerate their capital in future, and not many years from now in respect of 50 per cent of their total capital they will have to repay in one form or another and pay dividends on it. Therefore, as the years go by, they will tend to become more and more a company such as the ESB which does remunerate its capital in one form or another. There is no use in comparing them with the ESB and suggesting they could do it in the same way but they are reaching that stage, and if all goes well and the tourist business expands between Great Britain and ourselves and the United States continue to grow in prosperity, other things being equal, it should be possible for a far greater proportion of the capital to be remunerated in one form or another in the future.

Deputy Andrews asked about checks of Aer Lingus equipment. I could acquire the information but I do not think it is necessary to give the details. If I remember rightly, I think there are 25,000 parts in a Viscount and in the case of a given number of these parts, they are automatically replaced after a certain stated length of time and stock records have to be kept of all parts. Even if certain vital parts appear to be in perfect order, they must be replaced. In regard to the rest, there are stated checks at different intervals, minor checks at lesser intervals and more detailed checks at more advanced periods. These checks are the subject of regulations, and as I said, officers of my Department are very concerned to establish and maintain the very strictest regulations in regard to the establishment of safety procedures required in connection with the national airline. In that of course they have the co-operation of the magnificent executive staff of the air companies towards preserving the splendid safety record of the airline.

Deputy T. O'Donnell spoke about a feeder service. I intend to direct Aer Lingus to provide a feeder service for passengers arriving by aircraft other than by Aerlínte aircraft at Shannon. I hope that will be in operation next year. The Deputy can be sure that the KLM Viscounts that are being purchased will be in good order, well maintained and will be aircraft which will enable Aer Lingus to maintain its present standard.

I should like to add my voice to that of the House in paying tribute to Dr. Dempsey for the splendid service he will have given to Aer Lingus when he comes to retire. His retirement is a matter of great regret. I have no jurisdiction over the airline manager's appointment; the Board of Aer Lingus appointed the manager. Dr. Dempsey insists on retiring in order to give way to a younger person. I admire him for this. I am quite sure his successor will likewise give splendid service.

I do not think there is much I need say about the position of the hostesses. Everybody knows how splendid they are. Much praise has been given to them in the House and I have frequently praised them publicly. I need say nothing about their rate of pay. There is a tradition certainly among all airlines that no tips are received by hostesses and I can see very good reasons for that because air hostesses are in a very special position and are really above the level of those who would receive gratuities.

Deputy Tully spoke of the danger of flying from the point of view of the attraction of the occupation. I can reassure him that according to American statistics, it is eight times safer to fly than to travel on the roads of America and I do not think that danger could be regarded as much of an element to discourage young women from joining the service as hostesses.

I have no information about travel privileges being changed, as suggested by Deputy Molloy. I do not think the air company would be unreasonable about it. This may have some relation to International Air Transport Association regulations but I certainly feel that the privileges are very great, and I would feel very doubtful about any suggestion of according more privileges to the staff. If anything, they are over-liberal, and when I consider that in relation to the fact that the people of the country have put up a great deal of capital for the air companies that has not been remunerated, unless the change was a stupid one which did not save money, I would have no objection to changes of a reasonable kind in regard to people who are allowed to fly at reduced fares and who are related to the staff of the airline which could effect some economy while still maintaining reasonable privileges.

Question put and agreed to.