Dáil Éireann debate -
Friday, 4 Dec 1987

Vol. 376 No. 4

State Guarantees Act, 1954 (Amendment of Schedule) Order, 1987: Motion.

Minister of State at the Department of Tourism and Transport (Mr. Lyons)

I move:

That Dáil Éireann approves the following Order in draft:

State Guarantees Act, 1954 (Amendment of Schedule) Order, 1987

a copy of which Order in draft has been laid before the Dáil on 29th October, 1987."

Is é cuspóir an ordaithe seo atá i ndréacht — an t-Ordú um an Acht Rathaíocht Stáit, 1954 (Leasú ar an Sceideal) 1987 — ná cumhacht a thabhairt don Rialtas dul i mbannaí i gcóir iasachtaí Aer Rianta cpt. mar is gá. Is féidir é seo a chur i gcrích trí leasú a dhéanamh ar an Acht Rathaíocht Stáit, 1954, trí Aer Rianta cpt. a chur isteach i Sceideal an Achta chomh maith leis an suim airgid atá i gceist. Ghlac an Seanad leis an Rún cheana féin ar an 20 Deireadh Fómhair, 1986.

This motion arises from the Government's approval of the construction of a new runway and associated works at Dublin Airport. The motion, if approved, will facilitate the provision of a State guarantee for up to £25 million of borrowing by Aer Rianta. It is unlikely that Aer Rianta's borrowings for this particular project will amount to £25 million but the draft order provides for a maximum of that amount to ensure that the amendment will be adequate to meet the cost of any unforeseeable developments.

The provision of a State guarantee facility in respect of borrowings by Aer Rianta requires an amendment to the Schedule to the State Guarantees Act, 1954. It is in this context that the motion arises. The order in draft has already been approved by the Seanad and Dáil approval is also required before the Government can make the order.

Dublin Airport's runway system dates from the mid-1940s. The runways were designed to cope with the types of aircraft operating at that time as well as aircraft and technological developments then anticipated. Since they were constructed the runways have been extended, overlaid and continuously maintained.

Conscious of the age of the Dublin Airport runway system, the developments in size and weight of aircraft in recent years and the need to provide for the long-term traffic needs of the airport, a group of experts, representative of Aer Rianta, the then Department of Transport and Aer Lingus was established to carry out a detailed examination of the airport's future runway requirements. The group, which completed its work in 1981, concluded that further maintenance of the existing main runway would not be a viable option and recommended that a new east-west runway should be constructed on the southern side of the airport terminal area.

On the basis of the group's report, and following a further technical analysis of the condition of the runways and an assessment of a number of alternative options, the Government gave approval in December, 1985 for the provision of a new 8,650 feet runway, together with associated facilities, at Dublin Airport, at an estimated cost of £31.26 million at 1985 prices.

The new runway will intersect the Ballymun/Naul Road. Local residents and other users of the Ballymun/Naul Road were very concerned about the proposal to close the road and to replace it by two new roads running parallel to and located on each side of the runway, linking the Ballymun/Naul Road with St. Margaret's Road. An action group made strong representations to the Minister for Tourism and Transport objecting to the proposed road closure and sought instead the provision of a tunnel to carry a road under the runway and parallel taxiway.

I can assure the House that all representations regarding the Ballymum/Naul Road proposal were carefully considered and while the Government were disposed to providing a tunnel, they had no option but to take cognisance of the advice of the Garda authorities on the security implications of a tunnel.

Their advice was that for security reasons the tunnel should not be built. In view of the concerns of the local residents, however, the Government decided in July 1987 to provide additional roads and to have further improvements undertaken to existing roads at an additional cost of £3.06 million.

Arising from the construction of the new runway, it will also be necessary to close a section of Collinstown Lane. A replacement road will be provided to connect the lane with the Old County Road at Commons Townland and this will meet the requirements of the local community.

The investment on the overall project will be the largest single investment ever undertaken at a State airport. As well as the runway itself, the project will include the provision of a parallel taxiway system, advanced navigational aids, a new air traffic control tower/technical building and the roadworks I have already mentioned.

The project will provide about 200 jobs at peak during the construction of the runway and the associated work and indeed will be one of the largest in the northern part of County Dublin over the next few years.

The new runway will have an east-west designation and as a result there will be a significant reduction in aircraft noise levels for densely populated areas of Dublin city and county, whose residents have from time to time complained about aircraft noise. Noise levels, in particular, will be significantly reduced in areas such as Ballymun, Finglas, Swords and Castleknock, a factor which I am sure will be welcomed by residents of those areas.

The actual development work on the project commenced in August 1986 with the provision of water and sewerage services to the proposed new air traffic control tower and technical building. A new high tension electricity supply for the project has been provided and relevant drainage works have been undertaken. Work on the actual construction of the runway commenced in mid-July 1987 and the runway should be completed in about 20 months.

I am quite pleased with the progress so far and I am hopeful that the new runway will be operational by early summer 1989.

As Deputies are aware, the three State airports are managed by Aer Rianta on an agency basis on behalf of the Minister for Tourism and Transport. Under these arrangements capital expenditure at the airports has traditionally been funded totally by the Exchequer, while the surpluses earned by Aer Rianta have been surrendered directly to the Exchequer. Recently the company have been given responsibility for the funding of certain commercial projects from their own resources.

In view of the heavy demands on the Exchequer, the scale of expenditure involved in the Dublin runway project, the expected commercial rate of return on the project and the strong financial performance of Aer Rianta in recent years, the Government have decided that the bulk of the funds for the runway project should be provided by the company from their own resources. It is envisaged that the company will provide 75 per cent of the funds required, with 25 per cent coming directly from their own resources and another 50 per cent from borrowings. The remaining 25 per cent of the cost of the project will be provided by the Exchequer in the form of capital grants over the next three years.

Aer Rianta have had discussions with a number of financial institutions including the European investment Bank, on their terms for borrowing. A final decision on the source of borrowing will not be taken until immediately prior to the time of borrowing because of the anticipated fall in interest rates.

In 1986, Exchequer funds amounting to almost £1 million were expended on the runway project. This year total expenditure on the project will be about £6.5 million, of which £2.6 million will be provided by the Exchequer. As some borrowing will arise, it is essential that the appropriate facility for State guaranteed borrowings by Aer Rianta be in place as soon as possible.

Passenger throughput at the three State airports is confidently expected to exceed five million by the end of 1987 compared with 4.42 million in 1986. Dublin naturally, and this is widely accepted, is the busiest of the three airports and accounts for about 66 per cent of the total passenger traffic.

In the ten months to the end of October 1987 passenger traffic at Dublin amounted to 3.1 million, an increase of 22 per cent over the corresponding period in 1986. There is no doubt that the growth in passenger traffic is due to the stimulatory effects of the low air fares policy being pursued by the Government. It is expected that passenger throughput at Dublin Airport for the full year will reach a record 3.5 million, which is over two-thirds of the total expected traffic for the three State airports. To eliminate congestion arising from these increased passenger numbers, improvements were made in the passenger terminal at Dublin Airport earlier this year at a cost of almost £1 million.

On the financial side Dublin's performance is equally impressive. It recorded a surplus of over £10 million in 1986. The provision of the new runway will not only enhance the future prospects of the airport and meet its traffic needs well into the next century, but it is confidently expected that it will generate a further increase in profits at the airport.

I should like to say a few words about our two other State airports, Shannon and Cork, which are managed by Aer Rianta. Major improvements are underway in the terminal building at Shannon and the apron is being extended on a phased basis. The cost of these improvements will be about £2 million and are necessary to enable the airport to cater for the increases in traffic which it is experiencing. Passenger throughput to the end of October this year at 1.1 million was up by about 8.5 per cent on the corresponding period in 1986.

Another welcome development at Shannon has been the construction recently of a new aviation fuel depot which enables Aer Rianta to sell, at very competitive prices, fuel to airlines using the airport. This project was, I am glad to say, financed directly by Aer Rianta from their own resources.

At Cork Airport major improvements are being undertaken which will also involve substantial investment. The main runway is to be extended by 1,000 feet and improved navigational aids will be provided. Improvements are also being undertaken to the terminal building. The overall expenditure involved is in excess of £4 million. The passenger throughput up to end of October this year at 383,369 has shown a 24 per cent increase over the same period last year. I am quite satisfied that the improvements now being undertaken will further enhance Cork's excellent performance of recent times as the airport will be able to accommodate without penalty larger aircraft for longer routes.

I recommend the motion to the House. Mar sin molaim go rithfear an Rún seo.

Mr. Deasy

We fully support this motion as it is basically the brain-child of the previous Government whose approval for the project was granted in December 1985 and the work on which commenced in August 1986. It is obviously a very necessary development at Dublin Airport and while the State is providing handsome grants to Aer Rianta for the work in question I am glad that the company are providing 75 per cent of the money either through their own resources or through borrowings, which is an indication of the healthy state of Aer Rianta whose performance in recent years was very laudable. A few points in the Minister's statement would not be readily understood by a layman. For instance, the Minister said that the new runway will lead to a lessening of noise levels in the densely populated areas of Dublin city and county. Why should longer runways, bigger planes and more traffic reduce the notice levels?

Mr. Lyons

It will reduce the noise levels in certain areas.

Mr. Deasy

The fact that the new runway will be built in an east-west designation seems totally logical in view of the traditional wind directions in this country. I would have though that runways not built to an east-west designation would not be properly constructed. What was the reasoning behind the designation of the previous runways?

I am almost — but not quite — amused by the assertion that the growth in passenger traffic is due to the stimulatory effects of the low air fares policy pursued by the Government. That is less than honest because the Minister should have said that policy was instigated by the last Government. Remember that the low air fares policy was introduced as far back as December 1985 with the granting of a licence to Ryanair to operate commercial services in and out of this country. That, together with the deregulation of air fares, brough about primarily by the Commissioner, Mr. Sutherland, led to this tremendous reduction in air fares in and out of the country. The fact that it is continuing is due to the stimulus it received at that time. To hear senior or junior Ministers claiming credit for something that has been in operation for 12 months is a little sinister. Let us face the fact that the initiative was taken in the lifetime of the previous Government under the then Minister, Deputy Jim Mitchell. The improvement has been apparent ever since. For instance, the Minister said that the number of passengers going through the three State airports in 1987 will exceed 5 million compared with 4.42 million in 1986. For Dublin alone the number to the end of October 1987 is 3.1 million which is an increase of 22 per cent over the corresponding period in 1986. Let us be perfectly clear about the fact that that is not due to any policy introduced by the Government, nor can it be attributed to any policy instigated by the national airline, Aer Lingus, who probably have the best public relations operation in the country. If their fares are lower it is because of competition created by the introduction of licences for private operators. Let us get that out in the open and say very clearly that we were ripped off for many years in relation to air fares. Aer Lingus had a monopoly and anybody in the State airline or associated with it who claims that they were the pioneers of lower air fares should be ashamed of themselves. We all owe the lower air fares structure to the enlightened approach of the previous Minister for Transport and his colleagues who granted licences despite opposition from the national airline. Those people who created and maintained higher air fares over the years should have the decency to apologise to the travelling public for overcharging prior to the advent of the independent airlines and the lower air fares structures. Why were people charged more five, six and seven years ago to travel to and from London then they are charged today? We are entitled to an explanation.

It was one of the greatest rip-offs of the century that we had an overmanned and inefficient national airline but, of course, if one speaks out about a national body one is accused of being anti-national and not having the best interests of the country at heart. Any airline which has an Irish base, employing Irish staff, doing the job properly and giving a better service than heretofore are entitled to credit and praise but let nobody claim that they brought about something which they opposed. That is hyprocisy.

It would be illuminating if we had a publication of the air fares structures that existed here in the ten years prior to the introduction of deregulation or licences for independent airlines. Remember, that the initiation of this was during the last Government's term of office and it started in December 1985 and not on 10 March 1987 as some people here have tried to insinuate. It has worked like a dream. It increased traffic by 20 per cent this year and 20 per cent last year. No doubt that trend will continue. It is working wonders for the tourist industry. It is providing jobs not just in tourism but in the transport industry. More people are travelling to Ireland. That indicates that the policy has been a tremendous success. It is a pity that it was not done years previously.

The Minister in his statement referred to the two other State airports, Shannon and Cork and pointed out that considerable improvement works had been undertaken in both those airports. There are improvements to the terminal building at Shannon, the construction of a new aviation fuel depot and, in Cork, the main runway is being extended — another initiative brought about——

Mr. Lyons

You cannot claim that.

Mr. Deasy

——by the previous Government.

We should have a comprehensive State policy for all airports. Although we only have three state owned airports under the control of Aer Rianta, because of deregulation and the licensing of independent operators, we have had a huge increase in the volume of traffic going through airports which are now classified as regional airports, so we need a national policy for an airport system. It is not easy to classify regional airports because they are independently owned. A report I read recently showed that there are something like 76 airports or air strips in this country. Is it not time we had a grading system and a policy for the development of not just major airports but of those regional airports capable of taking very large aircraft? Knock Airport is classified as a regional airport as is Waterford Airport and many others. These airports are capable of accommodating large aircraft. If Waterford Airport had a larger runway it could accommodate larger aircraft. I am asking the Minister to look at the overall situation with regard to airports presently providing a scheduled air service or a number of scheduled air services. Ryanair are operating daily services from Knock to a number of destinations in Britain. Waterford Airport is operating a daily schedule to Luton. I am not aware of other airports doing likewise but we should have a debate in this House which would highlight airports capable of carrying on a scheduled service. Although I am not in a position to confirm it I have been told that an airport in a small town in County Donegal, Castlefin, is operating a scheduled service to certain locations in Britain, perhaps to Glasgow or Edinburgh. It would be interesting to know how many airports are capable of developing services like that, services which would be a tremendous boon not just to the tourist industry but to industrialists who want to go to areas in the remoter parts of Ireland. If we had scheduled services rather than chartered planes they could get to their destination at a reasonable cost in an hour or two from anywhere in mainland Britain. It is time we have a grading system for airports especially when we have had this explosion in passenger numbers which is making this business viable. It is viable nowadays to operate from airports which we would never have considered viable two or three years ago. It is now clear that Knock Airport can become financially viable. I have said publicly before that that is a great achievement. A number of other airports can likewise be viable and provide a wonderful service to the public.

We have no problem in moving this motion which basically was ours and I recommend it to the House as did the Minister.

Mr. P. O'Malley

I do not object to this measure which is to provide a State guarantee of £25 million to rebuild the main runway at Dublin Airport. As the Minister said, the existing runway is now 40 years old. I assume that over that time it has suffered a lot of structural damage and it is presumably cheaper to replace it now than to carry out some type of maintenance programme on it. In arriving at the decision to reconstruct the runway there must have been detailed surveys into the condition of the existing runway, it being found in the long run that it was cheaper to build a new runway to cater for the future needs of Dublin airport. Obviously the new runway, which will be considerably longer than the existing runway, will greatly benefit the future operations of the airport. The fact that it is being replaced in its entirety and being increased in length is welcome for the reasons I have mentioned because it will enhance operational prospects at Dublin Airport.

Because a new runway is being built its orientation is being changed; it will run in an east-west direction. There are two beneficial factors arising therefrom. The immediate one that concerns me is that quite a lot of noise problems had been associated with the old runway, particularly in areas in North County Dublin such as Ballymun and Swords. In my constituency there were adverse consequences resulting from aircraft noise in places like Blanchardstown and Castleknock. Therefore, the reorientation of the runway, which will give rise to different flight paths in and out of Dublin Airport, will be beneficial. I assume that, so far as is possible, those flight paths will be located over less populated areas than is the case now. That is to be welcomed.

The other point to bear in mind is that the runway is being increased in length by approximately 1,100 feet. This should improve the capacity of the airport to handle larger and fully laden aircraft. I understand there has been continuous difficulty experienced with regard to some charter flights in and out of Dublin Airport, flights to various sun spots. It appears that if they are fully laden they cannot fly safely in and out of Dublin Airport. Therefore, this extended runway will allow such fully laden flights to operate more safely. That will augment usage at the airport which is also highly desirable.

I assume also that this extended runway will have the capacity to handle transatlantic traffic. That being the case, I wonder what will be the implications for Shannon Airport where there is at present a requirement on all transatlantic flights entering and leaving the country to touch down there? Given that Dublin Airport will now have the capacity to handle such flights, perhaps the Minister would advise us whether the commitment on transatlantic flights to land at Shannon will be maintained. Now that Dublin will have that capacity I imagine it is possible that that commitment to Shannon Airport may be withdrawn at some point in the future, which would have very severe consequences for Shannon Airport and the people of that region.

I understand the overall cost of the new runway will be £34 million, which includes not merely the cost of construction of the runway but other ancillary works, including much necessary roadworks which have to be undertaken on roads which will be affected by the coming into operation of the new runway and by the flight paths arising therefrom.

I welcome this order because its implementation will be beneficial to the air transport industry generally. Certainly it increases the capacity of Dublin Airport to handle a wider range of air traffic more efficiently. I also welcome the fact that this project will give rise to a considerable number of construction jobs. I believe the Minister said that approximately 200 jobs would be created at the peak period. Of course the construction industry have suffered very severely in recent years. Therefore, public works programmes of this nature are very desirable from the point of view of their employment content, another reason for my being happy to see this project go ahead.

I should like to know the timescale within which the borrowings must be repaid. I do not notice anything in the Minister's remarks to indicate whether Aer Rianta have worked out a timescale within which they expect to be able to repay the borrowings on the strength of this guarantee. The Minister might let me have that information when replying.

Various Members who have contributed to this debate so far have claimed credit for all of the growth that has taken place in air transport in recent years. They have claimed credit for deregulation of the licensing of independent operators and the generally improved position that has evolved in recent years. I think I can appropriately leave it to my party leader, Deputy Desmond O'Malley, to answer that aspect more fully. While I was not a Member of the House at the time it is my clear recollection it was he who first set down the markers in all of this area. I have no doubt he will deal with that aspect in his contribution.

Mr. Kavanagh

I am afraid Deputy Desmond O'Malley will have to wait a little longer to benefit from that accolade. I do not claim any credit for the deregulation of air fares to and from this country. I have had nothing to do with them. Naturally I welcome fair and honest competition in all areas and I must compliment Aer Lingus on the job they have undertaken over a very long period. Times have changed, they must now be competitive; they are, and are proving to be successful in changed circumstances.

With regard to the motion before the House I, too, welcome what is taking place at Dublin Airport, specifically in regard to the extension of the new runway. I shall not claim credit for the fact that it was begun when I was a member of the previous Government. That is history and is on the record. Bearing in mind all of the cuts the present Government have been proposing since they assumed office I am indeed glad this is one project they feel should continue. This has come about in no small measure because Aer Rianta themselves can pay for the great bulk of the work involved, which, in itself, is a blessing. We have a roads network largely dependent on State aid. We know the slow-down that has taken place since I produced a roads programme countrywide just a few short years ago and which seems now to have come almost to a complete halt.

Of course problems were encountered in the locality of this new extended runway. The people living there, using roads on the perimeter of the airport, had to be catered for in drawing up the changes proposed. Their proposal that a tunnel be constructed under the new runway was not a sound one given the unfortunate security problems we now encounter. The construction of such a tunnel probably would require now the presence of security personnel at all times to ensure that none of the madmen who inhabit both parts of this island would have access to a vital link with the outside world, who could cause great distress were anything unfortunate to happen in that locality. I welcome the changes being effected in the roads system in that area and the money being allocated to ensure that the people who live in there, who have to use the roads in the locality, will have a proper road network, rendering commuting time somewhat easier for them on the perimeter of the airport. That is very important and I am glad money is being spent in this way to look after the needs of those people.

The flight path of the new runway has been mentioned. I am sure that new orientations have been considered for the flight path but I am inclined to think that there must have been some scientific design in the orientation of the old flight paths. Wind directions, etc. would have been taken into account. In those days such work would not have been carried out in a haphazard way. Large aircraft can, to a large extent, ignore wind direction and can, with all the modern techniques, land safely. Wind direction is not constant. For long periods the wind may blow from the south-west and the flight path is east-west orientated but that is only a very minute point considering modern techniques and the development of aircraft.

More significant is the fact that there is a runway much longer at Dublin Airport, and therefore it should be able to facilitate all types of modern aircraft that are now being flown throughout the world. The aircraft that requires the greatest amount of space is probably the Concorde. It is not my favourite aircraft and I have travelled in quite a few of them in the last eight or ten years. Nevertheless, it is a modern and much used aircraft but one that I understand could not be regularly accommodated at Dublin Airport. A modern realignment of that airport would ensure that whatever aircraft are available for regular service could be catered for.

This new runway will give rise to very delicate political arguments. Pressure has been put on previous Ministers for Transport to allow the American carriers to fly into Dublin, either after a stop at Shannon or to use Dublin as a backtrack for some of their scheduled flights from Europe and Britain. There were merits in those demands for the east coast area. Many people want to fly to the capital city and regard it as a slight nuisance to have to stop elsewhere and change planes for a very short flight onwards to Dublin. When the proponents of deregulation and cheaper air flights make their arguments for the convenience of passengers they should also take that point into consideration. The decision to ensure that the west benefited from carriers stopping at Shannon was a wise one. It has been of great benefit to Shannon and to the west. It would be a serious blow to the tourist industry there should the number of people who at present embark of disembark at Shannon have the opportunity to fly direct to or from Dublin. I wonder how long that policy can continue in the face of the great pressures that are being brought to bear from the huge conglomerates that run the American aircraft system to fly into Dublin.

Deregulation in America has meant that fewer aircraft companies have survived. Increasingly, there are take-over bids for the smaller national airlines in that country. Companies such as North West Orient, Delta and so on will I am sure be bringing great pressure on the Irish Government to allow them fly into Dublin Airport. The provision of a longer airstrip in Dublin will ensure that the facility to do so will be available to them. That is a very delicate political argument and one that the Government of the day will have to face and have faced in the past. It will be interesting to see what will happen when that pressure is brought to bear on the Minister and the Government.

At present three and a half million people use Dublin Airport. It is not just necessary to lengthen the runway but also to consider upgrading some of the other facilities at the airport. One is well aware of the confusion that reigns in the car parking area at the airport. There are several car parks at the airport, one of which was originally built at a very high cost, that is a covered car park but it does not seem to be available to all the people who use the airport. In the past if one paid a premium one could use it but for security reasons it was believed to be dangerous to allow normal car parking in that area. In any event it would be far too small now for the number of people who would wish to use it. At present it seems to be used solely by employees of the airport. A high rise car park nearer to the terminal is needed to facilitate passengers with their luggage. Long periods of time can elapse when one is looking for a car parking space, particularly during the summer and at Christmas when the airport is used much more frequently than at any other time. The car parking facilities at Dublin Airport are chaotic. Something should be done to modernise them. That would be money well spent as the cost of parking a car there is relatively high. It would be welcomed by most people who use the airport regularly. They would be happy to pay a little extra to have car parking facilities nearer to the airport terminal.

It would also be more secure to have a car park under cover. At present with the open car park people often return from flights abroad to find that the doors of their cars have been opened or that their cars have been scratched. One is not covered by insurance for that kind of damage to a car. If we are really going to modernise Dublin Airport, a spur from the DART system to Dublin Airport would facilitate people using the airport. It would be costly, but other national airports such as the one in Brussels and the main London airport have had to accept this and introduce such a facility. It is a great facility for those who arrive in the country without readily available transport, generating even more traffic to and from the airport. It would go some way towards solving the problem of car parking at the airport.

The likely cost of this new facility is about £25 million. The Minister has not told us what kind of claim is being made to the EC to claw back some of this money. I am sure grants could be got from the regional fund's infrastructural sector to help with this. We should know if that is the case and what benefit we are getting from the EC towards the provision of this new facility.

My final point is not one to do with what is happening in this airport, but I hope the Chair will allow me to make it. It is simply to point out that we seem to be aircraft-orientated to the detriment of other types of carrier. We spend huge sums of money on our airports and in buying aircraft and the like. When one lives in a seaport town and sees the lack of money being made available for ports one wonders if we have gone too far in favour of airports and aircraft to the detriment of seaports and our shipping carriers who are the basic carriers for so many people in the country. Very little money has been spent on many of the small ports around the country and they are, in most cases, in a state of decay. We seem to be going to extremes spending money on airport facilities. I suggest to the Minister of State and the Minister for Transport that we have 27 or so ports which come under the aegis of the Department of the Marine now. Nevertheless, very little money is spent on the upkeep, repair, maintenance and extension of seaports compared to the amounts spent on our airports.

Mr. D. O'Malley

I am glad to have the opportunity to say a few words on this motion and comment on some of the things said here this morning by the Minister of State. It is the first time I have spoken in the House on airports and air transport policy since the difficult days of 1984-85. Like Deputy Deasy I have to pick out, at the outset, the extraordinary sentence uttered by the Minister of State this morning, "The growth in passenger traffic is due to the stimulatory effects of the low airfares policy being pursued by the Government". I would ask people who are interested in that point to read the debates on the Second and Committee Stages of the Air Transport Bill, 1984, and to look at what happened there from 26 January 1984 onwards into the autumn and winter of 1985 when there were a succession of divisions challenged in this House on this very point of low airfares, on whether we should have competition in airlines. The result of each division was the same, one for, 165 against.

Not alone was there opposition to the whole idea that we should have lower airfares, competition between airlines and a break up of the disgraceful cartel that operated in this country for so long, but there was derision at the very idea. I was described by people on both sides of the House as anti-national. That is a phrase that was used in respect of me on other occasions; but I was anti-national, no less, and the derision was equal from both sides. I remember Deputy Jim Mitchell who was then Minister standing up over there and pointing at me across here and saying "Here he rides again, the lone ranger. He cannot get anyone to agree with him".

I really am amused at the statements that are being made at the moment. Only last week in the European Parliament Deputy Paddy Lalor, that man who has devoted so many years to thinking about the ins and outs of air transport, went on at great length lauding the policies being pursued by the Irish Government in this respect and what they had achieved. I will come back to that in a moment.

Let me deal first with Aer Rianta itself which is the subject of this motion. There have been a succession of measures in this House over the past couple of months looking for more money to be injected into various State companies and looking for permission from the Minister for Finance to guarantee more borrowings by most of these State companies. In relation to another £100 million that will go down the drain with CIE, Deputy Martin Cullen said on our behalf that it was time for this sort of nonsense to stop, that we would have to draw the line at pouring more and more funds into the bottomless pit that many of these State companies are.

I absolutely agree with what Deputy Cullen had to say but an exception can be made in the case of Aer Rianta. I have admired it for many years; it is properly run, it is commercially run, it has a proper attitude on how to run its affairs, which is in stark contrast with many of the companies with which it has to deal and other companies in the semi-State sector who are anything but commercial or realistic in their outlook. I am delighted to see that two-thirds of this money is being provided by Aer Rianta out of its own resources. I hope that very soon we will be in a position where all moneys of this kind that it has to raise will be raised from its own resources. Knowing Aer Rianta and the competent way in which they are managed I would be very confident that this guarantee, which we formally have to authorise today, will never be called on. There is no question of the Minister for Finance or the Exchequer at any time having to honour the guarantee that is given now.

The one reservation I have about the proposal for which this guarantee is needed is that it is proposed to build a new runway of 8,650 feet at Dublin Airport. That does not seem to me to be an inordinate lenght. I am relieved in fact to find that it is only that length because the proposals of some years ago were that a runway of between 10,000 and 11,000 feet would be built at Dublin Airport.

The proposal some years ago was that a runway of between 10,000 and 11,000 feet would be built at Dublin Airport. At that time — and this goes back over a period of ten years — I expressed some very serious reservations about any such proposal because I realised that if that happened Aer Lingus, whose commitment to Shannon Airport and that region is and always has been negligible, indeed their attitude is almost hostile, would immediately avail of the opportunity to cut out Shannon Airport altogether and have all of their trans-Atlantic flights landing only in Dublin. I am not sufficiently expert in this to know if it is possible for them to do this with a runway of 8,650 feet, but would rather think it unlikely. Certainly, I should think it would be dangerous for fully laden 747 aircraft with full fuel on board to try to take off from a runway of that length. It may be physically possible to do it, but I do not know if it is within the limits of safety. I should like an assurance from the Minister of State that this is not the intention. I want that assurance, not as something that is passed on from Aer Lingus, whose word I would not accept on a matter like this, but as Aer Rianta's decision and the Department's decision that even if it were physically possible for a fully laden 747 or similar type plane to take off on a trans-Atlantic flight, that it would not be allowed to do so.

In any event, one would have thought that if normal commercial considerations dominated in a matter of this kind there would be no question of their wanting to do that from Dublin, anyway, because it has been Aer Lingus's experience over all the years and the experience of other airlines which use both Dublin and Shannon in relation to the trans-Atlantic routes that, year in year out, two-thirds of the passengers on the North Atlantic route embark and disembark at Shannon. Even when it is open to them to come to Dublin, by a majority of two to one they choose not to do so. I have no reason to believe that that pattern would change in the future, but I want to ensure that they are given the opportunity of embarking and disembarking at Shannon. In that regard, it is something of a disappointment to find that there is only a passing reference here to Shannon and to some very minor work being done there. There is in Shannon, in spite of its size, busyness and so forth, only one real runway. The other runways are no longer suitable for modern planes. They can be used only for light planes, or perhaps in an emergency. There is a very definite and clear need for the planning and building of a cross runway at Shannon to enable it to be used in all weather conditions by all planes using that airport.

I notice that the growth in traffic in Shannon has not been as great as in the two other airports. Unfortunately, as we face into 1988 the growth will be limited by the serious problems, which are created due to the weakness of the dollar, for our North American tourist trade in the year to come. That is why I heartily welcome Aer Rianta's efforts to spread the attractions of Shannon as an airport to more than just people flying the North Atlantic route into Ireland as tourists. The advent of the Russian and Cuban airlines to Shannon has been terrifically beneficial and I hope that Aer Rianta's efforts to extend it to other eastern European airlines will be successful. I hope that proposals they have in train at the moment with the Russians and with other Communist countries will come to fruition, because Shannon could have been facing a bleak time with the present dollar situation were it not for these arrangements that Aer Rianta have so successfully made.

The Minister tells us that up to the end of October there has been a 22 per cent increase in passenger traffic in Dublin over 1986. That is marvellous news and we know why that happened. The 1986 figure was, in turn, a huge increase over 1985 and in his reply I should like the Minister to tell us what the increase in 1987 is over the corresponding period in 1985. That would be an even more significant figure.

I notice that the forecasts I made here in 1984 about the increase in traffic that we could generate and which were derided at the time as being crazy and impossible to achieve have, in fact, been exceeded. In concrete and practical terms, we have had in each of the last two years about 200,000 additional people coming into this country who would not have come here if the old, traditional Government view to uphold the Aer Lingus cartel had been maintained. Think of the difference it would have made to this country if we had lost those 200,000 people in the last two years. How much greater the degree of depression would be if those people had not been enabled to visit us. Deputy Deasy's expression of indignation here this morning at what Aer Lingus were allowed to get away with for so long, even though it was angry was perfectly justified.

Mr. Deasy

The best part of their operations are public relations operations.

Mr. D. O'Malley

Unfortunately, that is often true of companies of that type. It is true of others, also. I raised the matter here about two years ago that we had an admission, finally, from Aer Lingus that they paid £500,000 of Irish money to KLM, Royal Dutch Airlines, not to fly into Ireland. I do not know if the real significance and impact of that ever got across here. KLM, which is one of the major airlines of the world could have brought in over the years probably hundreds of thousands of people into this country if they had been allowed to do so, but the Aer Lingus attitude to them was that they were not to do so, that Aer Lingus would give them a substantial profit not to come in here at all. When I recall what was described as anti-national — my attitude in trying to bring in competition — and compare that with what Aer Lingus did at that time it gives me cause for thought.

The advent of competition, by Ryanair particularly, on the Ireland-UK routes has opened up the market completely and has changed the whole scene. The minimum normal fare between Britain and Ireland in 1984, when I was arguing here in this House, was £208. It was almost impossible to pay less unless you entered into all kinds of restrictive arrangements. The normal fare, today, in December 1987, is £95.

Mr. Deasy

And as low as £50.

Mr. D. O'Malley

Of course, you can get substantially lower. However, I am comparing like with like. The normal fare was £208 in 1984 and today it is £95. When I said three years ago that it could have been that, I was derided. We have a high degree of competition also now on the North Atlantic route because there are four or five carriers operating scheduled services into Shannon and the American authorities will not countenance any cartel arrangements, or price maintenance, or price fixing, or anything of that kind. Therefore, fare-wise the North Atlantic routes are okay but the routes which are anything but okay at present are those between Ireland and the Continent. In that third and remaining sector the old cartel system between the state-owned airlines is maintained, and the fares between Ireland and for example Germany, Denmark, France, Spain, on scheduled services, and Italy, are disgracefully high. The normal fare between Ireland and some German cities is £450. You can fly the Atlantic over and back, which is three times the distance, for half the price.

Mr. Deasy

But you get a black pudding for your breakfast.

Mr. D. O'Malley

Maybe if you go executive class you will get two sausages instead of one and that is supposed to justify paying an extra £200 for that kind of nonsense. I suggest that the House should not tolerate that situation any longer and that Aer Lingus should be forced to break up the remaining cartels they are in with the State-owned continental airlines and in the process encourage the influx of the hundreds of thousands of German, French and other people who would come to this country if they could have access to it at a reasonable price. Clearly it would be to our benefit if they did.

The way in which this objective will be achieved is by allowing competition and if Ryanair are given routes to Frankfurt, Dusseldorf, Copenhagen and Paris out of Dublin, Shannon and Cork, if they want them, we will find that the normal £450 fare will fall to about £200. I say that with all the certainty with which I said in 1984 that the £208 fare between Dublin and London would be halved, and in fact it has been more than halved. The Minister should now intervene, since a new light has descended on those people who battled so valiantly against me in 1984 and 1985. They should see the principle through and if there is truth in the statement or allegation made by the Minister of State this morning that a new low airfares policy is being pursued by the Government let them pursue it everywhere. They are not entitled to pursue it only on the Ireland-UK routes; it should be pursued everywhere.

At that time, I told Aer Lingus, who mounted a strong, personal and political campaign against me for what I said in this House, that they would be the chief beneficiaries of an opening up of competition and a large increase in passenger numbers into and out of this country. I told them that they should get rid of their inferiority complex and they were unable to compete and that they could survive only if they remained in cartels with other State airlines. My words have been proven to be true. When Aer Lingus did get into the marketplace and had got out from under the coat-tails of the cartels they were in for so many decades beforehand, they proved that they were able to compete. Let them prove it now on the continental routes also. If they can, not alone will the country benefit but, as I repeatedly told them in 1984, Aer Lingus will benefit as well.

A help in arriving at the much happier position we find ourselves in today was the views expressed on behalf of Aer Rianta at the time by Mr. Martin Dully, their chief executive. The manner in which he described the Aer Lingus attitude in 1984 was strong, to say the least of it; in fact it was so strong that I felt there were one or two words in it I would not be allowed to repeat in this House, but I think the man was absolutely justified as everyone else knows perfectly well. I am glad he had the courage to say in public what everyone involved in this industry knew but which they were afraid to say. It is a pity that at that time Bord Fáilte were not prepared to say the same in public although they were saying it freely in private.

Another major factor in helping to bring about the change in climate was the important part played by the Commissioner for Competition in Europe, Mr. Sutherland. It was he who achieved the final breakthrough when Aer Lingus were putting up the last vestiges of resistance and when he threatened them with legal proceedings if they maintained the illegal and improper cartels they were so committed to. We would not have achieved the changes we did and as rapidly as we did were it not for the efforts of Mr. Sutherland. What he did helped all of Europe but it particularly helped Ireland and he has served this country extremely well.

I express the hope now that the AngloSpanish dispute in regard to Gibraltar airport has been resolved in the last day or two, which is something I rejoice in, that Mr. Sutherland and the Commission will now be able to press ahead with their further proposals which are very exciting and which will be terrifically beneficial to this country, to all Irish airlines, both public and private, if they want to avail of them, and in particular for the tourist industry because access will suddenly be allowed on a reasonable fare level from many parts of Europe. I commend Mr. Sutherland for what he has done and I ask him to continue with equal determination on the path on which he has set out on. I hope that in the next couple of years he will have the same degree of success as he has had in the past two.

In conclusion, I ask the Minister of State to be good enough to respond to the number of queries I raised in the course of my remarks. I am supportive of what is being proposed. I am particularly supportive of Aer Rianta and I congratulate them on their achievements to date. They are a model which might usefully be copied by many other semi-State companies whose record is frequently so absymal.

Mr. Lyons

Ní mór dom mo bhuíochas a ghabháil leis na Teachtaí a chuidigh leis an rún atá os comhair an Tí. I thank the Deputies for their contributions and I acknowledge their support for this motion. I will endeavour to answer the queries which were raised by each Deputy. I acknowledge, in reply to Deputy Deasy, that some steps were taken in regard to access fares into this country by the previous Administration. Not alone have we continued that initiative but a distinct policy drive on access fares is and will continue to be very evident in the Government's policy. The Government's policy in that regard is acknowledged by everyone we meet, particularly in the tourist industry. Also acknowledged by all concerned is the fact that we are pursuing at every opportunity the further determination of that policy.

Mr. Deasy

We agree with that but let the Minister of State not pretend he started this.

Mr. Lyons

I am sure Deputy Deasy will accept what I said at the beginning and I accept that an initiative was taken. I did not say we took an initiative, I indicated we continued, improved on and emphasised it. The drive is still going on and it will continue.

Like Deputy Deasy I do not wish to be parochial, but he talked about the airstrip at Waterford and I would like to make one small reference, if I am permitted to be parochial. Deputy Deasy mentioned Cork Airport and the extension work going on there. I do not know whether I should have to remind him but I will put on record that the greatest disappointment to the employees at Cork Airport and everybody associated with the travel trade who attended the jubilee celebrations in Jury's Hotel this year was that there was not from a Government Minister attending that dinner a proposal to develop Cork Airport which had been untouched for the previous 25 years. Now it is going ahead. We took the initiative and are proceeding with the work.

Deputy Deasy and others mentioned grading of the aerodromes and airstrips. There is a self-determined grading for these from grass to tarmac to concrete. Most of the airstrips are privately owned but since 1980 the Exchequer has made available financial assistance of up to approximately £14 million for these regional airports. Let me give two examples. Connaught Regional Airport received approximately £10 million and Waterford almost £1 million.

Deputy Pat O'Malley welcomed the cost effectiveness of the proposal. He welcomed also the reorientation of the runway. He asked whether with the new runway the trans-Atlantic position relative to Shannon would be affected. My information is that the position with regard to Shannon would remain unchanged. He asked about the length of time for the borrowing repayment. I indicated in my speech that the negotiations for the borrowing are not yet complete because the projected fall of interest rates would be taken into account in finalising the borrowing repayments. In short, the repayment will be long term.

Deputy Kavanagh stressed the importance of the roadworks and a number of Deputies raised a point about noise levels. I will take the question of noise in association with the orientation I have just mentioned. As I have said, the new runway is east-west oriented and it will reduce the impact of aircraft noise over less populated areas. Deputy Pat O'Malley acknowledged that Blanchardstown and Castleknock will experience a reduction in noise levels. Procedures are being developed to minimise noise disturbance to people in populated areas east of the new runway. Old aircraft, which are far noiser than modern aircraft, are being phased out and this will improve the environment from the point of view of aircraft noise.

Deputy Kavanagh asked about car parking. Anybody who uses or attempts to use the car park at Dublin Airport will agree with him and so do Aer Rianta. While the car park facilities there have been improved, they are restricted by availability of space. Aer Rianta regard this as an ongoing priority. The Deputy asked about the possibility of a DART spur to the airport but such a development would cost an enormous amount of money. I suggest that the feeder bus service already existing there is satisfactory.

Deputy Kavanagh mentioned ERDF grants. This project will not qualify for ERDF grants because it is regarded as replacement investment and not new regional development. Deputy Des O'Malley wanted an assurance regarding fully laden 747s leaving Dublin Airport. I am assured that fully laden 747s will be able to take off safely without difficulty at Dublin Airport for North America.

Mr. D. O'Malley

It is very disturbing to hear that. A few minutes ago the Minister gave an assurance that the situation vis-à-vis Shannon would not be changed.

Mr. Lyons

The Deputy asked if aircraft would be able to take off. Of course they will. That is different from the earlier question. Deputy Pat O'Malley asked about the trans-Atlantic position at Shannon and I said it would remain unchanged. They are two separate matters even though there is a parallel between them.

Deputy Des O'Malley asked about the percentage increase in 1987 over the 1985 figures. I am informed that increase was 35 per cent. The same Deputy mentioned low fares. Low access fares to Ireland is and will continue to be Government determined policy and I have elaborated on that. The effectiveness of that determination is reflected in the increased numbers. Like other Deputies I am pleased the dispute between the UK and Spain over the airport at Gibraltar which held up the liberalisation of fares during the year and engaged much of the attention of my Cabinet colleague, Deputy John Wilson, at meetings in Europe has been sorted out. That must be seen as a positive step in relation to Government policy.

Deputy O'Malley said we are concentrating too much on one particular location. It is well established that the drive by the Government for low access fares is not confined to the UK but to Europe and to any area of the world from which aircraft come into Ireland. The encouragement for the people to come here must be low access fares which have been, as pointed out by Deputies already, inordinately high down through the years. I welcome the general consensus that access fares and the reduction of fares to Ireland is a very positive and helpful step. All of us will continue to support the reduction in access fares. I would like to thank the Members for their contributions and queries.

Mr. D. O'Malley

Will the Minister convey to Aer Lingus the view that even if an 8,650 foot runway at Dublin is sufficient to enable a trans-Atlantic service to be operated to and from Dublin, the Government will not tolerate that and that the present situation where there is compulsory landing in Shannon will continue into the next century?

Mr. Lyons

I will certainly convey the view expressed by Deputy O'Malley because at the end of the day it is the Government and not Aer Lingus who must make these decisions.

Mr. D. O'Malley

With respect, I asked the Minister to convey my views to Aer Lingus. I am sure they can read them, if they wish, in the Official Report. Anyway they are aware of my views. I am asking that a formal guarantee will be given in this House that there will be no change in the situation. If the Minister fails to give that guarantee, it will cause considerable agitation in the Shannon region, given that Aer Lingus are known to be and have always been hostile to the idea of landing at Shannon.

Mr. Lyons

I could not possibly give such a guarantee. I am sure the Deputy knows well from his experience in this House and in Government that I could not give such a guarantee. What I said is that I will take his suggestion and convey it to the Government. I also said that it is the Government and not Aer Lingus who decide on these matters. That is as far as I can go.

Question put and agreed to.