Vol. 258 No. 3
asked the Minister for Transport and Power if he has seen the statement by Mr. Roger Sorenson of the US Embassy that President Nixon had committed American airlines to land at Shannon just as long as Irish airlines did; and if he will state whether it is the intention of Aerlínte to continue to do so.
16.
asked the Minister for Transport and Power if he is aware of the reported statement of a State Department official (details supplied) that the United States was going to stand firm on its policy with regard to airline landing rights; and if he will indicate when further talks will take place on this issue.
17.
asked the Minister for Transport and Power when the resumption of the air traffic rights negotiations with the US Government will take place; if any further communication has been received by the Government from the US authorities on this issue; and if he intends to be present himself at future negotiations.
18.
asked the Minister for Transport and Power the present position regarding the landing-rights issue; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
19.
asked the Minister for Transport and Power whether he has had an independent survey carried out into the feasibility of a Shannon turnabout for transatlantic traffic; and, if so, by whom and with what result.
With your permission, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19 together.
The Government are gravely concerned at the action taken by the Government of the United States in giving notice that the Aerlínte serrights at New York will terminate on 18th August next. If the Aerlínte services between New York and Shannon were discontinued next August, the effect would be disastrous not only for the airline but also for the Shannon region and for general tourism. Aerlínte accounts for the bulk of US/Ireland terminal traffic amounting to 60 per cent in 1970 or 72 per cent if traffic terminating at Dublin is included. The welfare of the national airline is vital to the welfare of Shannon and to tourism and there is no real conflict of interest between them. In accordance with Government policy the airline stops at Shannon and will continue to do so.
The attitude of the US authorities as set out in President Nixon's letter to the Taoiseach which was the subject of a Dáil Question on the 9th December, remains unchanged. In response to newspaper reports suggesting that the Government contemplated renunciation of US rights at Shannon the US authorities indicated through diplomatic channels that in such event they would have no option but to renounce Irish rights at Boston and Chicago in order to restore balance under the agreement and that in any subsequent negotiations they would find it difficult to consider granting more than one entry point in the US in return for Dublin and Shannon because many other countries of greater importance in aviation than Ireland had only one entry point in the US under the relevant bilateral agreements.
Aerlínte estimates of the cost of turning around at Shannon and the assumptions on which they are based have been closely scrutinised by my Department with the assistance of Dr. Martin O'Donoghue, economic adviser in the Department of the Taoiseach. Both the estimates and assumptions were found to be accurate. On the basis of these estimates Aer Lingus would have to incur additional capital expenditure of the order of £5 million to £6 million and additional continuing annual costs rising from £2.7 million. This would place Aerlínte in a serious loss position and, indeed, jeopardise the continuation of their transatlantic service unless massive subsidies could be assured.
In the light of discussions with the US to date, there is no indication that they would accept a turn-around at Shannon by Aerlínte as meeting their claims of imbalance in the operation of the bilateral agreement or would be prepared to exchange rights at New York, Boston and Chicago for rights at Shannon alone.
It is proposed to resume negotiations at an early date.
In view of the uncertainty about the future of Aer Lingus landing rights in America, does the Minister not think this is going to have a very adverse effect on the tourist industry this year; and that as we are now at the end of January there is need for urgent talks to clarify the matter?
There is need for immediate talks and there will be talks very shortly.
It is not being left very late?
There will be talks very shortly.
Is the Minister confident that the matter will be resolved?
One can never be confident of resolving anything until one engages in talks.
Would the Minister not agree that the ideal solution to this whole impasse, even at this late stage, is for the Minister and the Government to try to persuade the American Government to maintain the existing bilateral air agreement? In the light of that, could the Minister tell me whether or not since the last negotiations broke down the Minister or the Government made any representations to the American Government along those lines and, particularly, has the Taoiseach replied to or followed up in any way the letter he received from President Nixon in early December?
I do not know if Deputies appreciate how governments work, but I certainly can assure the House that at all stages in this matter our point of view in regard to landing rights for the American airlines has been made known at every level of the American administration—and that means right up to the President himself—and that there has been no lack of communication in this matter.
Is the Minister aware that all the indications from the United States point to the fact that the Government here have not pursued this matter in a determined fashion, that the Government have not used every means at their disposal to persuade the American Government to withdraw the ultimatum? Is the Minister further aware that there is an excellent chance that if the Government really got down to it they could still persuade the American Government to leave us alone?
The Deputy is living in cloud cuckoo-land. I have explained this fully to the members of the Shannon Action Committee, to the trade unions and all the other interests involved, that it is a fact of life that the American Government have decided to deny us entry into New York from August next. This is vital to our tourism. We want to recapture our position there and we have to bargain hard. Bargaining means negotiating and that means that we have to try to get the best we can out of the situation. That is precisely what we are doing.
Has the Minister done anything since last November?
I do not tell the Deputy or the House every nuance or every detail of bargaining or negotiating that is proceeding all the time. I am telling the Deputy there has been constant communication between the Government, myself, the Minister for Foreign Affairs and various people in the USA at the levels where matters of this kind really count.
Would the Minister like to say how the Government view this unprecedented action of the American Government in not alone renouncing the agreement in regard to New York but in threatening us that if we exercise our undoubted rights they will then use this power against us in regards to certain rights?
That is a separate question.
Would the Minister agree that this is extraordinary behaviour on the part of America in regard to a friendly Government?
That is a separate question. I am calling Question No. 20.
I, as a responsible Minister, am not going to make any extempore comment here that would in any way jeopardise what we hope eventually will be a fruitful solution of a very difficult problem.
Would the Minister agree that initially this was a matter that was pushed on by the American airlines but that now it has got to a stage where in fact it is a matter between Governments at highest level? In view of that and in view of the special position of this State in regard to the United States and in view of the contributions that Irish people have made to the upbuilding of the United States would the Minister not agree that the matter of negotiations should be put on the highest possible Government level, not on an economic but a political level? Would he not agree that the best outcome could be sought —I know there is risk in it but there is also possible gain—by the Minister indicating in the clearest way to the Americans the significance we place on this by undertaking the leading of the negotiations himself? This seems to me a political way in which you can indicate that we are putting it on this plane and that we expect concessions.
Every approach and aspect is under constant consideration by the Government and myself. That is the way it is. Certainly every political avenue has been, is being and will be explored side by side with the economic and administrative avenues.
The Government have had this for 12 years and have done nothing about it.
When the negotiations are resumed what level will they be resumed at?
Since the termination of the last negotiations, which were at official level, we have been pursuing various political, governmental initiatives. We hope that these will show results before the next official negotiations start. I think it is very important that whenever the next negotiations take place some concrete or positive result will eventuate.
Could the Minister say whether any steps have been taken to communicate our position to the American people? It seems to me that the only way you will shift them is if the American President is to realise that this kind of intolerable behaviour in international relations with a friendly country does not go down well with his own people. Are we trying to get across to the American people on this? This is an election year, after all.
I am well aware of that.
The Minister in one of his supplementary replies said that Deputy O'Donnell was living in cloud cuckoo-land. Would he not agree that that is a rather odd way to describe Limerick?
No.
The Minister is living in the clouds.
The Minister would hardly make a little crack about Limerick today of all days.
