Return to Writ: Dublin Central. - Air Navigation (Eurocontrol) Bill, 1983: Second Stage (Resumed). – Dáil Éireann (24th Dáil) – Tuesday, 29 Nov 1983

Return to Writ: Dublin Central. - Air Navigation (Eurocontrol) Bill, 1983: Second Stage (Resumed).

Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Mr. Manning

The few remarks I wish to make at this stage will be brief. On the previous day I congratulated the Minister on the way in which this important and complex legislation had been presented to the House and especially the clarity with which he managed to convey to us some of the more arcane and difficult sections of the Bill.

I urged him then, and I wish to do so again today, that as a matter of priority his Department should develop a full, future policy with regard to aviation in the overall sense and especially and immediately in regard to airports. We are at a stage where the use of regional airports and the feeder service provided from these airports is becoming an important feature of our transport system. In the past few years there has been a dramatic increase in the use of this kind of service and I have no doubt that the potential market for regional airports is only beginning to be tapped. For that reason it is vital that there be an overall policy of providing modest, functional regional airports and economically viable services and that the question of providing these services be approached in a thought-out way so that never again will we have the kind of one-off decisions as happened at Knock——

Mr. Wilson

The Deputy said that the last day he spoke.

Mr. Manning

Yes. On that occasion we were coming to the end of a long day and I had confused some of the things the Deputy said. This is simply to recap and to set the record straight. Only through the provision of an overall, structured, thought-out policy will we avoid the kind of one-off decision that left us with the kind of albatross that Knock represents.

I share with Deputy Wilson a certain degree of bewilderment regarding the reason for section 2. This is a strengthening of section 3 of the 1963 Act. Like Deputy Wilson, I wonder why under subsection (8) the director-general of the agency should need such immunity. It is rather difficult to get the meaning of the subsection. It states:

The Director-General of the Agency shall enjoy immunity from jurisdiction in respect of acts, other than acts which would constitute a road traffic offence or acts whereby damage is caused by a motor vehicle belonging to, or driven by him, but including words spoken or written.

I do not know why it is necessary to include this in the Bill. I realise we live in a time of international espionage and subterfuge but I wonder why such safeguards are needed in legislation of this kind. There may be good reasons and I should like to hear about them from the Minister.

One of the main functions of the Bill is to regulate the charges for services provided. I take this opportunity to apologise to Deputy Wilson for accusing him of a sexist remark on the previous occasion. I checked the record, the Deputy did not make the remark and I am sure he will accept my apology. Like the Deputy, I am puzzled by the anomalies in the amounts charged on different routes in the same zones. The Deputy outlined some examples on the previous occasion. There may be good reasons for what is being provided for in the Bill but the loss in revenue for Shannon appears to be substantial. I should like some comments from the Minister on this matter.

I should like to congratulate the Minister and his officials — I am sure this includes the previous administration also — on the deal they have worked out with regard to the purchasing back of Mount Gabriel. I know there has been a great deal of misinformed and at times mischievous writing and speculation about the role of Mount Gabriel in air traffic control. Now that this installation will be fully under the control of the Irish Government this type of speculation, which in the past was at least in part responsible for the wanton damage caused, can be put to rest. The bargain negotiated by the Minister represents a worth-while saving to the Exchequer. The Minister and his officials have shown themselves to be hard-nosed and tough in their bargaining and even if it is only a few million pounds it is worthwhile and it represents a real gain. Like Deputy Wilson, I should also like to know the up-to-date position of Mount Gabriel with regard to repair of the damage caused some time ago.

I would be very interested in knowing if the Minister has any views of his own on the third of the ten principles he enunciated with regard to the legislation, namely, the way in which within the framework of Eurocontrol there can be closer co-ordination of air traffic control policies and greater emphasis on joint planning and the cost effectiveness of air traffic control systems. The Minister stresses, and I agree with him, that to this end the new convention must make provision for the new procedures. I should like to know if the Minister has any specific suggestions to make or if there is any particular Irish attitude as to what can be done.

I should also like to know if the Minister has any points to make on the question of the new requirements calling for greater care in the area of air safety navigation and the extent to which Eurocontrol might contribute to this. This is specifically relevant in a week in which there have been two major airline disasters, one in strange circumstances in the area under the control of Eurocontrol. At a time when there have been such disasters has the Minister any ideas from his own officials as to how greater air safety could be achieved?

Principles five and six bring us back to a point I made earlier, namely, the matter of costs. Deputy Wilson has pointed out certain anomalies and I have also drawn attention to them. It is essential that there be as much simplification as possible of the financial machinery of Eurocontrol. Steps must be taken to see that the already high degree of efficiency is brought to an even higher level in the interests of costs and air safety.

The general aim of the Bill is straightforward and the provisions in it must receive general welcome in the House. They are designed to provide a greater level of air safety, even on the high level that exists at the moment. They are designed to do so in a more efficient way, with a higher level of national control but within a co-ordinated, co-operating international framework. The proposals in the Bill should help to meet these objectives which all of us share. I wish the Minister success with the Bill.

Mr. G. Brady

Like other speakers, I welcome this most important legislation. I realise its technical input. In the context of the Bill I should like to draw attention to a very important matter, that is the recent growth in the number of small aircraft that use our cluttered air space, and to inform the House of what in many cases is the inadequate training some pilots undergo to obtain a PPA or private pilot licence. There are now approximately 500 pilots operating close on 250 aircraft below 6,000 lbs. It is important in obtaining such a licence that particular attention should be paid to training. As things stand, all that is necessary is the achievement of a certain number of flying hours. I think the number is 15 hours training plus a medical examination, plus a written examination in air law and theory, plus 40 hours solo flight time, and then a test. All this relates to visual flight. It is flying by sight. There is no comprehensive training in instrument flying and many accidents have occurred as a result of small aircraft wandering into the air space of commercial airlines.

These pilots have, as I said, no training in flying by instrumentation. This is something that should be examined very carefully by the Minister. Some tragic accidents have been due to pilots wandering into low cloud banks, banks as low as 500 ft. At that point it is absolutely vital for a pilot to have a competent knowledge of instrument flying. As the law stands, that is not obligatory and so these pilots are not trained in that aspect. Irrespective of how competent they may be otherwise, it is absolutely essential that they should be obliged to take a very comprehensive course in air navigation and instrumentation. I make a very strong plea to the Minister now in the context of this Bill to induce the flying clubs to introduce beacon installation and rudimentary navigation aids.

We are living in an age in which we must have computerised flying and a knowledge of instrumentation is of vital importance. There are something like 250 movements per day at Dublin Airport. It is a busy airport with 30 different airlines flying in and out. The figure is 34 at Shannon and 15 in Cork. The sky is crowded and, unless there is an updating of the rules and regulations appertaining to private flying, it is on the cards that we shall have more accidents. An aircraft can be a lethal weapon in the hands of a private pilot. Solo flying usually begins after 12 to 15 hours instruction. That is not a great deal of time in which to give a pilot authority to take an aeroplane up on his own without any knowledge or appreciation of instrument flying.

At this point, I should like to pay tribute to the pilots we have on our commercial airlines. We have the best trained pilots in Europe. Their record stands on its own. Our airlines have proved very safe and this Bill is intended to maintain that record. We have the best instrumentation in the navigational towers at Dublin, Shannon and Cork. There has been trouble about manning levels and difficulties in operational techniques. The air traffic controllers complained that the instrumentation was not up to standard at Dublin Airport. Possibly a great deal of that criticism may be unfounded but the Minister should give an assurance that the instrumentation of Dublin, Shannon and Cork is not wanting in any way. This is his opportunity to do that. Such an assurance would allay anxiety. It is not just a question of manning levels. It is also a question of whether the instrumentation could be updated. At all times the most sophisticated and best equipment must be used. One does not look for a bargain when one is buying a parachute and it is most important that the instrumentation is of the highest standard. I visited Dublin Airport and saw the instrumentation there. The technical data is certainly away above my head but I would recommend the Minister to visit our three major airports to find out for himself if the air traffic controllers are happy with the instrumentation. My feeling is that there is a certain amount of discontent. They are, of course, quite right in their demands for the best instrumentation available. We have a very excellent record in flying. One has only to think of Captain Saul and Colonel Fitzmaurice. Lindberg referred to Ireland as one of the four corners of the air navigation world because of the huge ocean mass between Ireland and the United States. Many planes travelling the southern course towards Portugal and traffic travelling towards Iceland on the north-western route have their last land contact with Ireland. We are recognised as a most important navigational point.

Would the Minister consider making instrumentation an obligatory part of the training of private pilots? In 1972, 173 licences were issued to private pilots. I have not got the 1983 figure but in 1982 the figure at the end of that ten year span had increased to 465. The indications are that more small aircraft will be used as the enormous cost in jet travel increases. Equally, the increase in the number of small aircraft — those below instrument rating — has gone from 98 in 1972 to 241 in 1982 and the figure for 1983 will probably go way beyond that. Therefore this is a very important factor.

One is tempted to refer to particular crashes and to speak about the recent crash in the Welsh Mountains, but it would not be fair to those who have suffered. Therefore, I am loath to do that. A great deal of anxiety on the part of those operating control towers at airports could be eliminated if people made contact through instrumentation with airports. The Minister will agree that putting a person in to fly an aircraft is the same as giving a little knowledge which turns out to be a very dangerous thing. In my view the problem has accelerated to the point where we must address ourselves to it and take cognisance of the fact that many more terrible accidents have taken place over our airspace because many aircraft have flown into the navigational airspace of commercial flights. As Ireland increases its network of small airports the problem will magnify. With cluttered roads, communications will be by air. We will have many smaller aircraft, such as the girocraft, which are operating in the United States. More knowledge of air navigation is necessary.

We must look at the cost of air navigation to this country. I realise there is a standard charge through the European agreement, but for a peripheral nation such as ours the Minister can make a case for some type of differential charge because there is a greater workload when the craft are going beyond the airspace of the nation itself. Like previous speakers I welcome this legislation and I hope the Minister will take cognisance of what I said, that there should be an instrument course for private pilots and perhaps he could give the House an assurance that the instrumentation being used at our airports will not be found wanting by international standards.

Mr. R. Bruton

This is a very important Bill for many reasons, not least the fact that Ireland has an important position geographically in air traffic control. We are an island on the approaches to Europe and carry a very high burden of the cost of controlling air traffic that is not directly related to our needs.

The importance for Ireland of the Eurocontrol organisation was that they recognised that trying to finance air traffic control presented special problems for a country like Ireland, that there must be some way a small country would be compensated and that there would be joint financing and joint collection of the equipment needed. Ireland has done well out of its subscription to this convention. We have had the benefit of money communally subscribed and this has helped us to handle the difficulties of air traffic control. It is very important that the collection of the route charges be centrally handled because it is virtually impossible to think that a small country like Ireland could enforce the collection of route charges if air companies decided not to pay them. Trying to collect these charges would face Ireland with enormous costs. Obviously the convention which arranged for central collection, central enforcement and ensured that none of the airlines operating from other countries would be found wanting when it came to paying up, benefits Ireland. In my view it is important that we continue to support the suggestions in the new amended agreement.

The importance of co-ordinating this sort of work should not be overlooked because not alone is it important for the safety of passengers but I can see a real danger where a small country like Ireland has to bear the cost of controlling routes which are not directly relevant to its needs and there is a very real danger that that country would tend to skimp on the amount of effort put into air traffic control. It is essential that there be some sort of communal backing to prevent this happening. It is like the farmer and the beekeeper. The farmer had apple trees which were obviously of great benefit to the beekeeper but the farmer could blithely ignore the development of those apple trees, or even cut them down, without paying attention to the beekeeper. Clearly, this sort of co-operation prevents such a thing happening. This is a welcome measure but this convention goes even further. It gives priority to placing responsibility for analysing the future needs of air traffic control on the community of countries involved. There is a danger that if this type of measure is not done communally it will not be done if it is left to individual countries. That underlines the importance of this measure. This convention also gives priority for training staff. This is something which, if left to themselves, countries might tend to neglect. Overall, this amended convention is very welcome.

This convention has accepted what has ben in practice here over the last 20 years, namely to have air traffic controlled locally. I understand it was proposed in the original convention that that should be done by a joint executive, in other words, that a supra-national authority would be responsible for our air traffic control. That would have serious implications for a country such as ours which is not only proud of its neutrality but must also consider the possibility of emergencies, just as any other country must consider emergencies. It would be unthinkable if our air traffic control system were to be operated by foreigners in the event of an emergency. The new convention gives clear testimony that our thinking on this issue was always correct. I will give one example of how things could go wrong if a supra-national body were controlling the system. A few years ago the UK air traffic controllers who were responsible for controlling our air space over 25,000 feet went on strike. We found ourselves in the position that our own aircraft could not fly in from the United States because we were dependent on foreign air traffic controllers. That was the danger which lay along the path originally taken by the convention and I welcome the fact that they have reversed the situation and are now supporting our view.

While broadly welcoming this convention we must raise some questions about its performance over the past couple of years. It has been in existence for 20 years and Ireland, as a country subscribing to it, must consider whether it has adequately served its needs. It is regrettable that there are still very different standards being operated by different countries in their systems of air traffic control. Ireland has been a victim of these differences. An example is that some countries operate a separation standard which would permit eight aircraft per hour to fly in for a particular airline, while an adjoining country might permit only four aircraft. Obviously that poses enormous difficulties in trying to schedule eight planes to take a certain flight path, crossing a country which is not willing to allow them to cross at the required rate. The result has been serious delays and it is unfortunate that Ireland has suffered in a way that other European countries have not, particularly when flying to Spain.

The problem appears to be in overflying France. During the past year or so our flights to Spain have been experiencing delays of up to 40 minutes while aircraft from other European countries do not experience delays of that kind. The Minister should consider whether we are getting through Eurocontrol the kind of results we need. It seems we are being left behind to some degree. It is important that we should press forward on this point this year when our Minister holds the chairmanship. It would be disappointing if a body such as this which was set up to do the job of co-ordinating, should fall down through lack of effective measures.

Although I recognise the virtue of unanimity which has already been praised by Deputy Wilson and also the fact that countries can derogate from decisions in cases of national importance, I still think this body may not have the teeth it needs to put through the important co-ordinating functions. I would ask the Minister to bear that point in mind this year when he has the chairmanship of the authority.

Another point relates to route charges. I read in the multi-lateral agreement on charges to which we subscribe that charges are established according to a common formula which takes account of the costs incurred by the contracting States in respect of en route air navigation facilities and services and of the operation of the system, as well as the costs incurred by Eurocontrol in operating the system. Clearly that indicates that charges will be set in such a way that a country such as Ireland that will probably be bearing disporportionately high costs of air traffic control will be collecting higher route charges, thereby getting greater returns. I have not the exact figures but I am given the impression that Ireland's route charges are somewhat lower than those in operation in most other countries. I am at a loss to know why this is. Our handling and landing charges are very high and it is not in our interests to have low route charges for aircraft which are overflying and not touching down, and high landing and handling charges for planes which touch down. We would like to encourage traffic to land in Ireland. I would ask the Minister to see whether we are operating route charges that are favourable to our position and if possible to alleviate to some degree our high handling and landing costs by raising more revenue from route charges.

The Minister has given a figure in the region of £10 million for the revenue we collect and I am not sure that this fully covers our costs. I know we do not face the cost of collection but it is important to discover whether the returns from route charges justify our expenditure. The importance of this point will probably become greater in the future. Under the convention it has been agreed to give up the principle of Community financing for air traffic control facilities. There is no doubt that the Minister has succeeded in getting a good bargain concerning the financial contribution by Ireland to take over facilities which were jointly financed.

The Minister must be praised for getting a good deal. In future we will carry a great deal more of the financial burden in providing these facilities. That makes it all the more urgent for us to look at the system of route charges. In future we will be depending on them to a far greater extent and we could find ourselves seriously out of pocket if we do not make sure at this early stage that our interests are adequately protected.

I take the opportunity of welcoming the Bill and the amended convention. As I have said, it is good to see that an effort will be made to achieve greater co-ordination. It is important to seek international co-operation because it cannot be done individually. I ask the Minister to take advantage of this year in which he is in the chair to make sure that the opportunity is not lost to give greater effectiveness to this job, and to make sure that the type of deficiencies which I have indicated do not persist, and that Ireland's interests are protected in the important financial job we will be taking on ourselves in future years.

Minister of State at the Department of Posts and Telegraphs (Mr. Donnellan)

I should like to thank Deputy Wilson, Deputy Brady, Deputy Manning and Deputy Bruton for their contributions to the Second Stage of this Bill.

Both the amending Protocol to the Convention dated 13 December 1960 and the Multilateral Agreement on Route Charges were signed in Brussels on 12 February 1981 by representatives of the seven member and four contracting states.

The introduction of the Bill in this session is in phase with progress by other states in their ratification procedures. To date three states, France, Luxembourg and Portugal have ratified both the Protocol and the Multilateral Agreement, while Switzerland has ratified the Multi-lateral Agreement. The UK, Belgium, Austria and Switzerland expect to complete their ratification procedures by early 1984. While the Netherlands, Germany and Spain have not given firm estimates of the time necessary to complete their ratification procedures, I am hopeful that the ratification procedures in all 11 states will be completed during 1984.

The purpose of the Bill is to give legislative effect to the provisions of both the Protocol and the Multilateral Agreement. These provisions, when enacted, will enable Ireland to ratify the amended Convention and the Multilateral Agreement. I should point out that there is not a new Convention as such, but the term "new Convention" has tended to be used to describe the consolidation into one text of the 1960 Convention and the amendments arising from the Protocol.

The provisions of the Bill relating to the recognition and enforcement of judgments are similar to provisions being proposed to enable Ireland to ratify the 1968 EEC Judgments Convention. These provisions are not as heavy handed as they might seem. Their intent is to simplify and speed-up the collection of route charges in the event of airlines not eventually paying their debts.

I should explain the situation in relation to unpaid charges. In general, defaulting payers account for less than 3 per cent of the overall route charges payable and about 1 per cent in the case of moneys owed to Ireland. While the Eurocontrol Route Charges Office may initiate legal proceedings against an airline who have continued to default in their payments, in many cases a payment plan is arranged with the defaulting payer so as to assist an airline in every way possible to discharge their debt.

The desirability of reducing the number of international organisations dealing with aviation matters was considered while drafting of the Amending Protocol was in progress. The possibilities included some form of amalgamation with the EEC, with the European Conference of Ministers of Transport or with the European Conference of Civil Aviation.

Difficulties foreseen at that time were the differing memberships of these organisations and that Eurocontrol was executive rather than policy oriented. There were undoubted advantages in continuing with the existing legal "persona".

Eurocontrol is required in the first instance to offer all vacant posts to nationals of the member states. The Department of Transport have been pressing for and will continue to press for more posts for Irish nationals in the organisation. We succeeded in getting three new posts in Brussels for Irish nationals during 1983. The Minister will continue to ensure that as many posts as possible, including those at the highest level, are open to Irish applicants as they fall vacant.

In establishing the route charges system the Eurocontrol member states endeavoured to devise a system which would be as equitable as possible and that could be applied to both upper and lower airspaces. The system is a harmonised regional system in which a single overall charge is invoiced for the area, irrespective of the number of states overflown. However, a separate charge is in fact calculated in respect of each state overflown, the overall charge for a given flight being obtained by adding together the separate charges.

The system is designated a "harmonised" regional system because, although the charge is calculated for each separate State, the calculation formula is identical for all the States participating in the Eurocontrol Route Charges System. Furthermore, the methods used by states in calculating the expenditure incurred by them in the provision of the air navigation facilities is also identical.

This charge is based on the cost, both current and capital, to each state of providing navigational facilities and includes the costs of the staff concerned. These costs, which vary from state to state, are then divided by the estimated level of traffic to give a flat rate. This rate in turn is adjusted to take account of the weight of a particular aircraft as well as the distance flown. The charging system is therefore based on the distance flown in a particular aircraft in a given airspace.

The charges referred to by Deputy Wilson and contained in the Schedule annexed to the Air Navigation (Route Charges) (Amendment) Regulations, 1983 (S.I. No. 82 of 1983) relate to tariffs levied on aircraft flying trans-Atlantic routes only. They do not relate to charges levied at particular aerodromes but rather to route charges incurred when flying to or from these aerodromes from points within specified zones over the Atlantic and along particular routes.

The Route Charges System works as follows:

—States participating in the system notify the Eurocontrol Central Route Charges Office in Brussels of all flights departing under Instrument Flight Rules from their aerodromes, all data regarding departures from Irish aerodromes being forwarded to Brussels through Ballygirreen Aeradio Station, County Clare;

—the Central Route Charges Office then calculates the charge due, based on the aircraft's weight and distance flown;

—this charge is billed to the airline concerned; and

—on receipt of payment, the Central Route Charges Office reimburses the State concerned.

In essence therefore, the Eurocontrol Central Route Charges Office acts as the collection agent of route charges for the States. Reimbursement of moneys to states is made in US dollars which are then converted into national currencies. The total receipts accruing to Ireland in 1982 amounted to £9.3 million and receipts to date in 1983 exceed £11 million. Under the new Multilateral Agreement, Eurocontrol will continue to collect route charges on behalf of the member and contracting states.

Mount Gabriel Radar Station near Schull, County Cork, monitored civil aircraft in the upper airspace within a radius of 240 miles. The facility consisted of two radar heads — one duty and one standby. The station was damaged by an explosion on 20 September 1982. As a priority, Eurocontrol decided to restore one head to operational service. Installation of the replacement equipment is now almost completed and an operational evaluation of the facility is scheduled to commence early in January.

A preliminary estimate of the cost of restoring Mount Gabriel to its pre-1982 status is approximately £2.5 million. Malicious injuries claims have been lodged with Cork County Council both by Eurocontrol and by the Department of Transport. Both claims are now likely to be heard in the Circuit Court in Skibbereen in January 1984.

The development of air traffic control centres involves extensive research relying heavily on data processing. For this reason, Eurocontrol set up an experimental centre at Bretigny, south of Paris. Experimental and simulation work is carried on there as a prelude to the development of automated control centres. Simulation is a technique whereby a real air traffic situation is represented in a computer and conclusions which can be applied to the original system can be deduced from the study of the model.

At Bretigny, real-time air traffic control simulation is carried out in a realistic environment, and includes work positions for controllers, communications networks, radar coverage and automated back-up systems. Officers from the Department of Transport have attended simulation courses and exercises at Bretigny concerned with the development of the Shannon upper airspace control centre. Simulated exercises such as those conducted at Bretigny cannot interfere with live aircraft.

The estimate of £9 million which I gave in my speech as the value of Eurocontrol facilities in Ireland is made up of £3.6 million for the Shannon upper airspace control centre and its extension, £3.4 million for Woodcock Hill radar station and the replacement radars recently installed and £2 million for Mount Gabriel radar station. These figures were agreed with Eurocontrol and, with the exception of estimates for the extension to the Shannon centre and the replacement radar at Woodcock Hill which are not yet fully costed, are the actual costs.

Electronic air navigation aids and communications equipments are provided by my Department for the control of aircraft en route in Irish lower airspace and landing at or departing from the State airports and for communicating with aircraft flying over the eastern part of the North Atlantic. The House can be assured that all aids and equipments necessary for the safety and regularity of aircraft movements have been and will continue to be provided.

Expenditures for the past three years were: 1980, £0.5 million, 1981, £1.3 million and 1982, £3.5 million. Expenditure for 1983 will exceed £2 million. Equipment installed since 1980 includes a primary radar and communication equipment at Dublin, a very high frequency radio beacon and communications equipment at Shannon and a computer and high frequency transmitters at Ballygirreen Aeradio Station, County Clare.

The Irish Government took an early initiative with regard to the tragic incident to Korean Airline Flight 007 on 1 September. The Secretary of the Department of Transport who in his capacity as current President of the European Conference of Civil Aviation was scheduled to attend the 24th Session of the Assembly of the International Civil Aviation Organisation in Montreal later that month, was directed by the Government to work for a common position among ECAC's 22 member states with a view to their adopting a joint approach to prevent the recurrence of such a tragedy. This joint approach resulted in a resolution presented by Ireland which will ensure that this incident is thoroughly investigated and that new binding and effective measures will be taken by the International Civil Aviation Organisation to guarantee the safety of aircraft engaged in civil air transport, including their crews and passengers.

Deputy Manning spoke on the immunity envisaged. This concerns the Director General and the top officials. It is similar to the case of diplomats and is normal procedure.

Deputy Brady indicated that I should visit Dublin Airport, which I have certainly done. I have not, however, visited the installation to which he referred. Some knowledge might be gained from this and I might look into it in the future. The Deputy also referred to instrumentation which, as I have already said, is undoubtedly the best available.

Deputy Bruton raised some points in relation to delays in flights to Spain over France. The delays experienced by our aircraft are comparable with aircraft from other European countries, having regard to the number of flights involved. The Minister for Transport will be President of this organisation in 1984 and I shall remind him of the problem mentioned by the Deputy. Deputy Bruton also mentioned costs. We are not responsible for costs but we recover all costs involved in en route passage of aircraft through our airspace, both current operating and capital costs for the provision of facilities.

Most of the points raised by Deputy Wilson have been dealt with already. Deputy Brady mentioned licensing requirements for Irish pilots. The criteria for Irish licences are as safety orientated as for any other country. The requirements are internationally agreed and enforced. We always strive after greater safety and I can assure the Deputy that I am always conscious of the need to promote increased safety.

I wish to thank all those who took part in this debate.

Mr. Wilson

I raised the point of military planes being involved. I know that these are not, so to speak, programmed for Mount Gabriel, as some question arose when I was in the Department. I do, however, think that the word "military" is used somewhere, either in the convention or the protocol. Is Shannon or the other Clare installation of Mount Gabriel involved with military aircraft at any time when they are flying through our air space? The inviolability aspect has been covered, but I cannot see how a commissioner of the EEC is not given this inviolability while an official of Eurocontrol is.

With regard to the £2.5 million malicious damages claim, could the Minister tell the House whether there is any fund or insurance available to Eurocontrol to cover such eventualities? I mentioned two airlines in particular which failed, the Laker and the Braniff air companies. Could the Minister say if they owed any money to Eurocontrol and, if so, can this money be recovered in any way?

Mr. Donnellan

In relation to the first point mentioned by the Deputy about military aircraft, I presume their own nationals might have this information, but as far as we are concerned we have no military involvement to pass on any information. We have no insurance fund.

Mr. Wilson

Have Eurocontrol any insurance fund?

Mr. Donnellan

No. In relation to the air companies mentioned by the Deputy, our only hope of recovery is through the normal court proceedings.

Mr. Wilson

The Minister said that Eurocontrol is executive rather than policy orientated. It was stated in his speech that one of the sectors of Eurocontrol was involved in policy, while the other was involved as an executive agency. Is there some inconsistency there?

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 29 Nov 1983