Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 7 Jul 1993

Vol. 433 No. 6

Irish Aviation Authority Bill, 1993: Second Stage.

Minister of State at the Department of Transport, Energy and Communications (Mr. N. Treacy)

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

The principal purpose of this Bill is to provide for the establishment of a new State-owned company to be called the Irish Aviation Authority. Basically the Bill will transform the Air Navigation Services Office of our Department, ANSO as it is known, from a Civil Service agency to a commercial semi-State body.

As the House is aware, the Air Navigation Services Office discharges the Minister's responsibility for regulating Irish aviation safety standards and for controlling Irish airspace. The Bill is designed to ensure that the vital services which ANSO provides to aviation are enhanced by giving the Authority the capacity to meet the aviation industry's need for high quality, cost effective services. The new Authority, subject to the general constraints on semi-State bodies, will have the flexibility and autonomy in operational, staffing and investment matters to meet the needs of its many users.

In a wider European context, the creation of the Irish Aviation Authority is part of an evolutionary process that aviation is currently going through at both national and international levels. Like Ireland, many European administrations are now reassigning their air traffic control and airspace management organisations to more autonomous bodies as part of a broader strategy to resolve European air traffic congestion problems.

Irish aviation is going through fairly severe turbulence at present. We are not unique; the aviation industry throughout the world is going through very testing times. I hope the debate on this Bill will help to inform, broaden and enlighten the present debate on the Irish aviation industry.

Though it has had a relatively low public profile, ANSO is at the heart of the aviation industry in Ireland and plays a significant role in international aviation. I trust the House will bear with me therefore if I take the opportunity to briefly and broadly sketch the background against which this Bill has been framed.

Currently ANSO employs nearly 600 staff, located mainly at the State airports, and over half of its staff are attached to stations in the Shannon area. These are mainly air traffic controllers, electronic engineers, radio officers, flight operations and airworthiness experts, together with a small number of administrative staff.

As the House will appreciate, the day to day functions of ANSO involves highly complex and technical work. We can see the results of that work in the aircraft using our airspace. We can also see it in the safety record of the Irish aviation industry. In its day to day work ANSO has always operated without the need for the direct involvement of the Minister of the day.

For two decades or so the general trend of Government administration has been to separate policy and executive functions. Government can thereby concentrate on its role of making and shaping policy. The corollary is that the executive bodies can concentrate on their specific functions, which are of course conducted in accordance with policy as defined by Government.

ANSO is a prime example of the type of executive organisation that would benefit from the flexibility of semi-State body status. ANSO, by definition, must have the capacity to serve the needs of the aviation industry, which is noted for rapid changes in markets, technologies and operating procedures. ANSO's customers — or users, as they are usually described — are mainly the world's commercial airlines, who demand and are entitled to, quality services at competitive costs. That is what the aviation Authority, operating as a fully commercial body, is designed to give them.

Over the years ANSO has performed exeptionally well. Irish safety standards are internationally accepted as being of the highest order, as is the manner in which we manage and operate our airspace. The new aviation Authority will keep Ireland to the forefront in these vital services. Moreover, we want to give the Authority the capability to engage in associated activities, such as training and consultancy work, where there are opportunities for profit, especially in the emerging markets in Asia and eastern Europe. However, I wish to emphasise that the principal reason for setting up the new Authority is not to make profits for the Exchequer, but to improve the efficiency of services to the aviation industry in a dynamic and rapidly changing environment.

Basically ANSO has two main businesses — the regulation of aviation safety standards and the operation of air navigation services. In 1992 total ANSO turnover on a commercial basis amounted to more than £40 million, of which more than 80 per cent came from foreign airlines, many of which never touch down in Ireland.

Safety and public confidence in safety standards is the bedrock on which civil aviation is based. The Government is very conscious of public concern about safety and I would emphasise that there is no question of safety standards being in any way compromised for commercial reasons. Irish aviation safety standards are based on the highest international and European standards, as set down by the International Civil Aviation Organsation and the European Joint Aviation Authorities. Irish safety standards are applied to and cover the 500 aircraft on our national register, 2,000 licensed pilots, 3,000 certified aircraft maintenance personnel, a dozen aircraft operating companies and some 75 maintenance organisations. Of the 500 aircraft on the register, more than 110 are large public transport aircraft. Approximately half this fleet comprises GPA aircraft, most of which operate in countries spread across the globe from South America to Asia.

Because of the importance which we in Government attach to safety matters, I can assure the House that we have unique provisions in this Bill which will ensure that the highest safety standards will continue to be applied in Irish aviation. In making that commitment we are conscious of the fact that it is necessary both for our own travelling public and for those who travel in aircraft maintained or operated by Irish companies or who travel through Irish airspace.

It is clearly the responsibility of Government to ensure that aviation is properly regulated and the safety of the public protected. It is also clear that because of the international nature of aviation, safety standards must be agreed, implemented and rigorously observed internationally. Ireland has always played its part as a member of the international community in this respect and we have always subscribed to the relevant international agreements governing aviation standards. No one could question that we must continue to apply the highest standards of aviation safety so that Irish aircraft and Irish licensed crews will continue to be highly regarded and accepted anywhere in the world.

The biggest segment of business for ANSO, as indeed it will be for the new Authority, is the provision of air navigation and aeronautical communications services. In 1992, both of these accounted for turnover of nearly £37 million, that is more than 90 per cent of ANSO revenues. Broadly, these services include the control of Irish airspace and the provision of communications links between aircraft in international airspace on the north Atlantic and air traffic control in Prestwick, Scotland.

The north Atlantic communications service is provided from the aeronautical communications station at Ballygirreen, County Clare, where there are more than 100 staff employed, mainly radio officers. That station had revenues of over £7 million in 1992, from charges of £36 levied on each aircraft using our system.

Closer to home within the boundaries of Irish airspace the basic air navigation service figures are quite simple. Irish controlled airspace covers 100,000 square miles — three times the land surface area — and stretching out to a distance of some 200 miles around our coasts. Irish airspace occupies an important strategic position on the air routes between Europe and North America. Almost 80 per cent of the annual traffic between the US and Europe crosses Irish airspace.

Shannon is the principal centre in Ireland for the control of air traffic entering or existing from the north Atlantic air routes. The importance of the Shannon centre is internationally recognised in that under its control transatlantic flights make the transition from continental European airways systems to and from the north Atlantic oceanic track systems. Shannon is also responsible for handling much of the domestic traffic from Cork and the regional airports. The Dublin air traffic centre control Irish air traffic to and from Britain and the Continent.

Aircraft which use our airspace and air navigation facilities must pay for the costs we incur in providing the relevant services. Each of our air traffic control centres is fully equipped with the most modern radar and communications technology which enables us to handle both current and projected traffic levels.

The air navigation services provided by ANSO and which will be provided by the Authority after vesting day, are provided on a cost recovery basis. The charges for services are determined in accordance with principles set down by the International Civil Aviation Organisation. The principles require that charges be assessed on a cost recovery basis only. They allow for the remuneration of the necessary capital but do not permit aviation authorities to set prices to make profits.

In 1992 there were more than 300,000 aircraft movements through Irish controlled airspace and of these slightly more than 120,000 landed at, or took off from, Irish airports. The importance of Irish airspace is shown by the fact that there were approximately 200,000 aircraft movements, which were en route between the US and Europe and which neither landed nor took off in Ireland. All of these flights are charged for the use of Irish airspace facilities and in 1992 accounted for nearly £30 million of ANSO revenues, not to mention the 200 jobs which they provide in the Shannon area.

Taking these figures for Shannon with those for Ballygirreen where there are revenues of £7 million and more than 100 jobs, we have a total of over 300 jobs in the Clare-Limerick area. I need hardly emphasise that our airspace is a valuable national asset.

It is a matter of considerable pride to us that the ANSO charges on aircraft using our en route services are the third lowest in the 16 national European route charging system that is operated by Eurocontrol, the European Air Traffic Control Agency. The economic and cost effective rates being charged to its users by ANSO will, we hope, ensure that we will retain and hopefully expand our current traffic levels. Certainly this is an objective that we will be setting for the Irish Aviation Authority.

I am sure the House would like to know how ANSO and the proposed aviation authority fit into the context of the aviation industry in Ireland. Quite simply, Aer Rianta operates the State airports to operational safety standards defined by ANSO. From centres at each airport airlines, such as Aer Lingus, which operate in Irish airspace, do so under the ANSO air traffic control rules, The new Authority will take over all these functions from ANSO.

Against the background of the problems of Aer Lingus and GPA, the House might feel that this is not the most auspicious time for new ventures. I disagree. There are problems in the aviation industry and these must be tackled and resolved with considered, practical policies.

From my perspective as Minister my aim is and must be to ensure that aviation is a safe, cost competitive and commercially viable industry which will grow and develop, thus contributing to our overall goals of wealth generation and job creation. The creation of the new Irish Aviation Authority is another firm plank in the strategy of the evolutionary process in the aviation industry.

To summarise, our policy in relation to the services which are currently being provided by ANSO is to ensure the safety of aviation in the public interest and in compliance with our international obligations, to facilitate access to Ireland by air and to maximise the financial and employment benefits to our country.

Turning now to the Bill, I will outline the general approach which we have taken. Basically we have started from the standpoint that what is required is a commercial semi-State body to which can be transferred the Minister's rights, powers and authority relevant to air navigation and safety services. The latter functions are set out in the Air Navigation and Transport and Eurocontrol Acts.

I should emphasise that the Minister will continue to be responsible for overall policy in relation to safety and air navigation services. In this respect, we will always expect the new Irish Aviation Authority to adhere to the safety standards and recommended practices promulgated by the relevant international organisations. I must mention also that the responsibility for accident investigation will be retained by the Minister and will not be assigned to the Authority though, of course, the Minister will be able to call on the services of Authority staff should the need arise.

In framing this Bill, much consideration was given to the advisability of combining both a regulatory and an operational role within the same organisation. In the operational role we see mainly the air traffic control, engineering and radio service staff who are responsible for controlling and managing the airspace. There are strong arguments for keeping the regulatory and operational roles separate in an organisation which, like the Authority, is responsible for safety. However, the fact is that it would be impractical to have two separate organisations. We have, therefore, combined both the regulatory and operational functions in the same organisation. We have done so on the basis that special arrangements have been made for technical and safety audits of the company and, as I mentioned earlier, the responsibility for accident investigation is being retained by the Minister.

Turning now to the new Authority, the commercial semi-State body model which we have used is broadly on the same lines as other bodies established in recent years. Thus, the Irish Aviation Authority will be a limited company established under the Companies Acts and having a nine person board appointed by the Minister. The company will operate in accordance with approved memorandum and articles of association. At this stage, though no final decision has been taken, it is expected that 1 January next will be set as the vesting day when the new Authority will officially commence operations.

The directors and staff of the new company and its subsidiaries will be subject to general controls in relation to such matters as conflicts of interest and disclosure of confidential information. The provisions in relation to disclosure of interests are in line with the code of practice for semi-State bodies issued last year by the Minister for Finance. Under the Bill, the company will be empowered to invest in associated companies or to establish subsidiaries.

As is normal practice in semi-State bodies, the Authority will be required to furnish the Minister with copies of its annual report and accounts. The appointment of the company's auditor will be subject to the approval of the Minister with the consent of the Minister for Finance.

The airline industry — which is the Authority's main customer — is extremely cost conscious and it is important that the airlines, as well as Government, should have a clear transparent picture of the cost and financing of air navigation and safety services provided by the new Authority. In this connection, it is intended that regular and constructive consultation with the users will be a feature of the business approach to be adopted by the Irish Aviation Authority.

The new Authority will start with a clean balance sheet and will operate as a going concern from vesting day. The Authority will collect and pay sums due in respect of services provided by ANSO before vesting day and these arrangements are covered in the transitional provisions in the Bill.

The capital of the new Authority will correspond to the assets which the company takes over from ANSO and these, mainly equipment and current assets, will amount to a value of some £30 million. These assets will be funded by a mixture of debt and equity. The proportions of share capital and debt finance are matters to be determined between the Minister and the Minister for Finance and these proportions will be settled closer to vesting day. One thing which I should make clear is that the setting up of this new Authority will not require the investment of new equity by the Exchequer.

The Bill also provides that the land and buildings used by ANSO may be either transferred to, or leased to the Authority. I expect that leasing will generally be the more appropriate arrangement. There is no reason to fragment the ownership of State airports, for example, by transferring the air traffic control centres to the new Authority as the remainder of the airport will still be the property of the Minister. The new Authority will be able to fund future capital acquisitions from its charges and a borrowing capacity of £100 million for long term capital purposes is being provided, subject to the usual conditions.

In relation to the commercial character of the new Authority, the House will be pleased to note that the provisions in the Bill are in line with the decisions taken by Government on the reports of the Industrial Policy Review Group, more commonly known as the Culliton and Moriarty reports.

ANSO has already done some good work on the development of its commercial mission statement, and clear international benchmarks are given by the rates the Authority will charge for its services. These rates can be readily compared with the unit charges levied by other administrations for air navigation services. The Bill, in section 45, provides that the Minister will pay the costs where he or she directs the Authority to provide services and to exempt users, such as search and rescue aircraft, from being charged the costs of the service.

As the Authority will be a regulatory body, making orders, which have the force of law, as well as a monopoly provider of services, the Government excluded the possibility of private ownership. If, in the future, any of the core functions of the new Authority were to be carried out by the private sector the whole question would have to be brought back to the Oireachtas for debate and decision.

The Bill also provides for the transfer of ANSO staff to the new Authority. Concerns that the staff expressed in relation to security of tenure in the new employment have been taken into account in drafting and the Bill will, I believe, satisfy all sides. Some concern was expressed by ANSO staff in relation to their security of tenure. I will be confirming clarifications already given to them on that aspect on Committee Stage, as indeed I will also be doing in relation to their superannuation provisions.

Special provision has been made in relation to the Exchequer's accumulated liabilities for staff-pensions. The Bill provides, in section 41, that the Exchequer will pay to the Authority's superannuation fund over a seven year period an amount to discharge the Exchequer's liability. I should add that for many years, ANSO users have been directly funding the Exchequer's liabilities to ANSO staff.

The stage is now set, with the publication of this Bill, for the conclusion of the discussions with the trade unions and staff interests regarding the transfer of ANSO staff to the new aviation Authority.

The Authority will be specifically excluded from the provisions of the Worker Participation Acts. I would be especially concerned at the conflict of interests for staff members elected to the board, which could arise from the different roles of the Authority — which will at the same time regulate safety, operate services, and license members of its staff. I assure the House, however, that I will be strongly recommending to the new Authority that appropriate staff participative arrangements are made at subboard level.

I have given a wide but brief résumé of the general corporate structure proposals in the Bill. Before coming to some of the special provisions in the Bill, I should mention the quasi-monopoly nature of the Authority and the concurrent concern that, in the absence of competition, it might fail to adequately control its charges.

I recognise such concerns and obviously they are something the new Authority will have to pay attention to. However, it would be impractical to have more than one provider of air navigation services or aviation regulatory services. Furthermore, aviation is a very international business and it will become clear very quickly if the Authority charges are out of line and if so they must then recify the situation.

Coming now to some of the special provisions in the Bill, there are a number of unique and innovative provisions to which I should draw the attention of the House. Provision is made in section 32 of the Bill for the Authority to report to the Minister on the technical and safety standards being implemented by the Authority. Furthermore, the Minister will be empowered to appoint a suitably qualified person to carry out an examination of the company's performance in relation to technical and safety standards. These provisions will ensure that the Minister retains the necessary instruments to ensure implementation of policy in this vital area.

The new Authority will be working in highly technical and complex areas whereas safety is of paramount importance. The board will have very wide and extensive powers in relation to these matters. We must recognise that in many instances board members may not always have the expertise to adequately assess very complex technical and safety issues. I have no doubt that any responsible board will listen to and be guided by the advice of its various experts. However, public safety and public confidence in safety standards are very fragile matters. For that reason, we are including a provision in the Bill to cover the eventuality that there might be a disagreement between the board and its experts on safety issues. Where such a disagreement arises the board's decision will not be implemented until the matter has been reported to and decided on by the Minister. Moreover, provision is made for the Minister to appoint outside expertise for guidance on such important matters.

Under section 68 the Bill proposes to formalise current arrangements in relation to the control of the national airspace, taking into account the training, security, defence and other requirements of the Minister for Defence. Provision is made in the Bill whereby the Authority and the Minister for Defence can jointly provide and operate air navigation services. This provision is in line with the formal situation obtaining in many European countries where civil and military air traffic control services are jointly operated.

Other provisions to which I should refer are those at sections 62 and 63. Provision is made in these sections whereby the new Authority will, under certain conditions, represent Ireland in international fora concerned with air navigation services and safety matters. These provisions recognise the essentially international nature of the business in which the Authority will be involved and provide a framework within which the Authority can operate effectively.

I must also refer to the power that will be given to the Authority to make orders and give directions and to have these enforced by the courts should that prove necessary. The opportunity is being taken in this Bill to update and standardise the penalty provisions for offences committed in the regulatory and general air navigation services areas.

Coming to the technical provisions in the Bill, I should reiterate that civil aviation as an international business is regulated in accordance with international standards. Worldwide, aviation is governed by the Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation which was adopted first in Chicago in December 1944 and implemented here in 1946. The Chicago Convention also established the International Civil Aviation Organisation which is known as ICAO. States who are party to the Chicago Convention adopt a uniform approach to the regulation of aviation safety and as far as practicable provide services and facilities to agreed standards. The annexes to the Convention set the standards to which states are expected to conform and the recommended practices which they should apply so that aircraft can be operated safely throughout the world.

The Air Navigation and Transport Act, 1946, as amended by the Air Navigation and Transport Act, 1950, provided for the Chicago Convention and its annexes to come into operation in Ireland. Those Acts empowered the Minister to make any orders, regulations or directions necessary to give effect to them.

After the passing of this Bill, the Minister will retain responsibility for Ireland's compliance with the provisions of the Convention as a whole and for giving effect to the ICAO annexes which deal with the meteorological service for international air navigation, search and rescue, aircraft accident investigation and security. The Minister will also be responsible for the annex governing the facilitation of travellers in relation to customs and related matters.

Arising from the Bill, it will be the responsibility of the new Irish Aviation Authority to give effect to the standards and recommended practices set out in the remaining Annexes. These deal with personnel licensing, the rules of the air, aeronautical charts, the units of measurement to be used in ground and air operations; the operation of aircraft, aircraft nationality and registration marks, the airworthiness of aircraft, aeronautical telecommunications, air traffic services, aerodromes, aeronautical information services, environmental protection and the safe transport of dangerous goods by air. That, as I am sure the House will agree, is a very full and wide list of responsibilities.

As I mentioned earlier, the new Authority will be given the power, now vested in the Minister, to make orders and regulations and give directives giving effect to the ICAO annexes. Any orders and regulations which the Authority makes will be treated in the same way as Ministerial orders — they will be laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas and may be annulled by resolution of either House.

The Authority will manage the national airspace and provide air traffic control services, communications and other services for air navigation in accordance with the provisions of the Chicago Convention and the annexes thereto. It will also supply the standards for the regulation of aviation safety — for example, in licensing aviation personnel and certifying that aircraft are airworthy and in the orders and regulations governing the operation of aircraft and the safety aspect of aerodromes. All of these functions are at present carried out by ANSO.

From the point of view of the general public, the transfer of these functions to the new Authority will make no immediate difference. However I hope that for the aviation industry, the Authority, with its greater managerial autonomy, will be in a position to be more responsive to the air industry's needs, not just for services but also for accountability. The Authority, freed from the constraints of the Civil Service, will operate in a more business like and commercial manner, to the immediate benefit of the industry and ultimately to the benefit of the travelling public.

Apart from the Chicago Convention, the authority will also be responsible for giving effect to other international agreements to which Ireland is a party in so far as they relate to matters which are within its competence. The principal agreements relevant here are the requirements of the Joint Aviation Authorities of Europe and the Eurocontrol Convention.

The Joint Aviation Authorities of Europe, known as the JAA, basically is a body formed by the various European authorities responsible for the safety and regulatory aspects of aviation. The JAA has been developing for a number of years and has gradually widened its remit from being concerned purely with airworthiness matters to the area of aircraft operations. It is also currently defining specific technical standards to give effect to EC Directives in the personnel licensing and other areas. We welcome the development of a joint European approach and standards and, like ANSO, the new Irish Aviation Authority will participate fully in the work of the JAA.

The Eurocontrol Convention, which originated in 1960, is designed to assist member states to co-ordinate air traffic services and facilities and the management of the flow of air traffic so as to ensure the most effective utilisation of their airspace. There are currently 15 Eurocontrol member states, including most states in the European Community. By the end of this decade it is expected that there will be up to 20 member states in Eurocontrol, including some from Eastern Europe, like Hungary, which is already a member.

We welcome the expansion of Eurocontrol membership. It symbolises Europe's determination to deal with its air traffic problems. As the House is aware, air traffic congestion in European airspace has become an all too common and inconvenient problem in recent years. It is an extremely complex problem involving issues such as national sovereignty, equipment, operating systems and procedures.

In 1988 European Ministers of Transport took an initiative by defining a strategy to resolve European air traffic congestion problems. Eurocontrol was designated as the organisation with responsibility for implementing the strategy and has now developed a comprehensive plan to upgrade the air traffic system through the European Air Traffic Control Harmonisation and Integration Programme — a project known by the acronym "EATCHIP". The EATCHIP project is a radical plan aimed at creating a seamless air traffic control system covering European airspace through harmonising the many disparate systems and eventually integrating them.

I am pleased to say that ANSO, by investment in staff and equipment over the past five years, has ensured that Irish air traffic control systems and procedures are fully compatible with the requirements of the EATCHIP programme. As the House will be aware from my earlier remarks Irish controlled air space is a valuable national asset. It is vital that Ireland maintains its air traffic control systems and procedures at the forefront of European developments. Our airspace is a small but a vital one, being at the interface between the North Atlantic and European systems. The House should be under no illusion. Should we fail to provide the services required, or should the cost of those services be excessive, then international civil aviation will bypass us, either by re-routing or by reducing the airspace delegated to our control.

In conclusion, I would emphasise my conviction that the passing of this Bill and the establishment of the Irish Aviation Authority will facilitate access by air to Ireland and promote the safety of navigation in Irish airspace. This will benefit our aviation industry and ultimately the entire country. I commend the Bill to the House and I look forward to the various contributions on this very important and strategic Bill.

Mr. Noonan

(Limerick East): I thank the Minister for a very full account of what his Department intends to do with the Air Navigation Services Office now directly controlled by the Department and for setting out proposals to organise this service under the auspices of the semi-State organisation and to remove it from the direct control of the Department.

In recent weeks we have had quite a number of decisions which in one way or another impact on aviation policy. By way of background, I would say that it is very difficult for Opposition Deputies to see the pattern of policy which is emerging from a multiplicty of decisions. About five weeks ago there was a decision that SFADCo, which under statute is responsible for the promotion of Shannon Airport, has now, under the influence of the Tánaiste, been designated to promote Kerry County Airport at Farranfore. We have the setting up of a task force under the chairmanship of Miss Gillian Bowler to promote Shannon Airport which already has a statutory authority for promoting the airport. Now we will have an ad hoc task force with a budget of £500,000 this year and next year to promote it. There is a commitment in the Minister's speech last night to set up a similar task force for the promotion of traffic in Dublin Airport. We have the series of decisions which affect Aer Lingus, in particular the announcment last night by the Minister about major changes in the status of Shannon in the context of a reorganisation of the internal workings of Aer Lingus, which will now be in four sections, one of which will be called Aer Lingus Shannon. Today another set of decisions is being announced by the Minister. It is very difficult for Opposition Deputies to identify a pattern of policy running through the decisions.

I know that the Minister, the Minister of State and some of the senior officials have been upset when we argued that in effect the Department has no aviation policy, but it still seems that there is no aviation policy. There is no overall statement on how Aer Rianta, Aer Lingus, air traffic control services, international carriers plying our routes or the regional airports are integrated in any kind of a pattern to give the best possible service to Ireland. All decisions have to be set in the context of a national aviation policy with a set of objectives which ultimately lead to a more economically viable service and a more economically viable company. A series of piecemeal decisions operating to some secret formula in the Department does not really satisfy this House in terms of an aviation policy.

It is a sad enough occasion that we have to debate this Bill against the background of Aer Lingus on the fringe of bankruptcy. If it was a US air carrier it would be in Chapter 11 already, as many US carriers are, and if it was a private company the liquidator would have been called in already. I note that the Minister in his speech last night claimed that the policy operated by him and his predecessors in recent years has been given a payback in excess of £500 million in terms of extra activity in air transport and tourism. It is a coincidence, I suppose, that the overall debts of Aer Lingus are in excess of that at £540 million. It is not much of an air policy when the total economic benefit being claimed by the Minister is £40 million less than the total debt of the air carrier.

Again today we have another announcement, another Bill put before us. I suppose, as with all recent announcements on aviation, we will have to cope with it as a stand-alone announcement, because it certainly does not integrate into what we have heard already. Taking it at that level, what is being proposed is simple enough.

According to the Minister of State, the Air Navigation Services Office, which has served the country well under the auspices of his Department for many years, is to be abolished and a new organisation called the Irish Aviation Authority is to be set up. The justification for this is contained in the Minister of State's speech:

The Authority, freed from the constraints of the Civil Service, will operate in a more business like and commercial manner to the immediate benefit of the industry and ultimately to the benefit of the travelling public.

That is the assertion and the reason the changes are being proposed. No other justification is offered by the Minister of State, apart from this throw-away paragraph in his speech.

I had not realised that in recent years the Air Navigation Services Office was under constraints imposed by the Department. I had not noticed any diminution in safety standards or in the effectiveness of the service it provides because people were designated as civil servants rather than as public servants employed by a commercial State agency. When the Minister of State proposes to make a major change such as this he owes it to the House to argue the case at greater length rather than state in a throw-away paragraph that suddenly they have found, when they struck the rock, that civil servants are a crowd of fuddy duddies and have no commercial sense, that with one bound they will be free, that they are going to set up a semi-State organisation and everything will be grand in the future. I do not think life is as simple as that and whatever the reasons for setting up this new Authority the Minister of State has an obligation to outline them.

There will be difficulties in separating the services provided by the Department. Like ANSO, the Irish Aviation Authority will be responsible for implementing the safety regulations for the airline industry and also for air traffic control. When both functions were carried out under the auspices of a Government Department with direct responsibility to the Minister there was no conflict; the Minister was accountable to this House and as the political head of his Department he could adjudicate with the help of his senior civil servants when a conflict arose as between the two roles carried out by ANSO. The position will now be different and the Minister of State's justification is weak. A commercial semi-State organisation is being set up and it will have two primary roles: first, the formulation and implementation of safety regulations for the airline industry and, second, air traffic control.

Efficient air traffic control is one of the main elements of safety regulations. If something goes wrong it is not reasonable that the people who formulate and implement safety regulations are also responsible for air traffic control. I am aware that the Authority will carry out other safety functions such as the licensing of aircraft, the inspection of hangars and a list of other functions mentioned in section 60 and subsequent sections, but there is a conflict in having one Authority which will be responsible, on the one hand, for air traffic control and, on the other, for formulating and implementing safety guidelines for the airline industry. The Minister of State admitted as much when he pointed out that this is not the norm in Europe, that the policy in Europe has been to separate the regulatory function from the air traffic control function so that one can monitor the other. The Minister of State is so aware of this that if an accident was to occur the inquiry into the accident would be the responsibility not of the new Irish Aviation Authority but of the Minister. That is an open admission that the Minister of State is unhappy with the new arrangement and there is a difficulty which he has identified. The Minister of State has gone further — when there is a conflict between the Irish Aviation Authority in respect of a safety matter and other experts there will be an adjudication system——

Mr. N. Treacy

A conflict between the Authority and the board.

Mr. Noonan

(Limerick East): We hope that the board will have some expertise but if it is looking for expertise it will have to rely on outside experts.

Mr. N. Treacy

The Deputy should give us some marks for being innovative and taking account of these matters.

Mr. Noonan

(Limerick East): I think I am being fair. It is a peculiar admission in the text of the Bill when a mechanism is included which predicts conflict between the new Irish Aviation Authority in respect of safety matters and the board. An adjudication mechanism is proposed to make sure that this is resolved. The point I am making is that because the Minister of State is retaining the power to investigate accidents and foresees conflict in respect of the safety regulations it seems he is aware that he is going against the grain in relation to what is happening internationally. Aviation authorities do not have responsibility for air traffic control and, simultaneously, for the formulation and implementation of air safety regulations. The only justification given is that this activity is worth £40 million, that it is very small and that it would be ludicrous to set up two State authorities. The Minister of State has decided that instead of two we will have one even though there is a conflict within the one.

The matter was dealt with in an acceptable way internationally up to now. ANSO was a section within the Department and it was directly responsible to the Minister and his senior officials. It might have been fuddy duddy and subject to the constraints of the Civil Service and when we free ourselves from the shackles it may operate in a more business like and commercial manner, but the solution does not resolve the fundamental difficulty which every aviation authority in Europe and most in North America have faced, that the regulatory authority and the air traffic control authority should not be in the same organisation, that they should be separate, and that they carry out distinct compatible functions. Part of the role of the safety authority is to ensure that air traffic control is in keeping with best international practice. One of the oldest rules in law is that no one can be a judge in his own case but in this instance the Irish Aviation Authority, in respect of air traffic control, is going to be the judge in its own case as it will also be responsible for formulating safety standards.

The Minister of State said that the new organisation which will be freed from the constraints of the Civil Service and will operate in a more businesslike and commercial manner will have no interest in making a profit. It is another peculiarity in the manner in which the Bill is presented that the Authority, which will be freed from the constraints of the Civil Service and will operate in a more businesslike and commercial manner, will not be interested in making a profit. It will be a monopoly which will have the power to set its own charges and the only constraint will be international competition. I wonder to what degree the Minister of State can assure us that the service will be as efficient, effective and as safe as it has been in the past and that the new Authority will not find itself confronted with the same difficulty that confronted air traffic control services in the United States when Mr. Reagan was President and the difficulty that confronts air traffic control in Europe, particularly in France every August weekend when people have to fly around it and not over it. There is no mechanism whereby the Minister can have oversight of the charges. I know that the range of charges now being applied is low by international standards; on a league table we are not a heavy hitter in terms of charges. This has worked well under the Civil Service, and quite a large flow of revenue has come into the Exchequer.

How will the Minister control the charges and ensure that the new commercial organisation, which is not designed to make a profit, will operate in such a way that it handles the same amount of traffic? It should be remembered that as technology changes, the options for the great international carriers increase, it would not be difficult to reroute from Ireland if the service was not up to scratch — although it always has been — or if charges were too high. I do not think the international organisations which control this area would allow us to control the same amount of air space if the charges got out of line.

There are 580 people employed in ANSO at present, 300 of whom are in the Clare-Limerick area. This is a very important region in terms of air traffic control. As a result of the historic development of Shannon as the first landfall as one crossed the Atlantic, air traffic control on the north-Atlantic was switched to the European systems at Shannon. That interface is still in the area. Planes which fly from the United States to Europe cross from north Atlantic control to Irish control on behalf of the European air services at Shannon. It is important that the public and Deputies realise that we are not talking simply about flights which land in Shannon, Dublin or Cork; we are talking also about flights which pass through Irish airspace. I understand that last year the air traffic control service in Shannon handled 200,000 flights which did not land in Ireland and for which a fee will be charged.

Since the development of the jet engine there has been no necessity to land in Shannon since the early 1960s for reasons of first landfall or having no fuel to travel further. The status of Shannon was debated last night and will be debated again tonight. It was a matter of Government policy rather than technological necessity which kept the Shannon stopover in place for the past number of years. It is also a matter of economic inertia and the status of Shannon being maintained that 300 of the 580 air traffic controllers are located in the Shannon-Limerick area. Having regard to the changes in the transatlantic fleet and the decision to allow direct flights to Dublin, there is no reason the interchange between north Atlantic and European control could not take place in Dublin, Liverpool, Heathrow or Manchester — it is merely a question of arranging it. Will the Minister guarantee that the decisions announced last night, which will be so injurious to my region, do not mean that there will be a major transfer of staff from the Limerick-Shannon region when the new aviation Authority is set up?

The staff in the region are renowned for their competence — they make a major contribution to the aviation industry. The staff in Shannon and Dublin have carried out very good work over the years. We have all been proud of our national airline, but we have also been proud of the very high safety standards set and implemented by ANSO. Regardless of whether they were constrained by the Civil Service, we owe a debt of gratitude to all the staff and management of ANSO who operated so effectively over the years and have one of the best international safety records of any aviation Authority. Whatever reasons are being advocated for the change from ANSO to the Irish Aviation Authority, improvement in the safety record has nothing to do with it because the safety record of ANSO has been above and beyond what could be expected from any Authority — it must be at the top of the league of similar organisations throughout Europe.

The staff who have given this service are not being treated very well under this Bill. It is most peculiar for a Minister to say in this House that as the Bill has been published and brought before the House talks about the future of the staff can take place with the trade union movement. The talks about the future of the staff, their security of tenure, their pension schemes and where they will be located should have taken place and been finalised in a normal industrial relations context before the Bill was brought before the House. The staff is being told, in effect, that the Bill will be rammed through the Dáil during the last few days before the summer recess, it will be shoved into a committee but because all the Deputies are going on their holidays it will be finalised by Tuesday evening and the consultations will take place with them when the Bill is law; in other words, the consultations will take place when the Government has not one but two big sticks in its hand. It is a despicable way to treat people who have given good service over the years.

There is a major suspicion about the intentions of the Minister, the Minister of State and the Government on this issue. This House is not unfamiliar with the setting up of semi-State organisations to carry out activities which were previously carried out by units of the Civil Service. We know the arrangements which were made in respect of An Post, Telecom Éireann and Coillte. In all those cases, security of tenure, pensions and worker participation on the boards of the companies were included in the terms of the Act. I do not understand why people who have given good service at such a high level of technology and skill are now to be treated as a group which are not to be trusted to the degree that they will have no representation on the nine member board which will be appointed by the Minister. People in the timber industry who cut down trees or buy land to set coniferous forests have a relationship with and representation on the board of their company. The workers in Telecom and An Post also have representation on the boards of their companies.

If people who install telephones, people who deal with the payment of bills, postmen, bus conductors and bus drivers are represented on the boards of semi-State organisations, why can traffic controllers, electronic engineers and radio operators, whose skills were lauded by the Minister in his speech, not be represented on the board of their company? Does the Minister think that this representation would add to the conflict between the regulatory functions of the new Authority and the air traffic control functions? Does he think that if there was worker participation on the board it would take the issue of a person being the judge in their own case to such a ridiculous level that he could not wear it? If that is the reason, he should spell it out in this House.

The relevant section of the Bill says that everyone employed by ANSO at present shall on the day of the commencement of the Act, which the Minister envisages as 1 January next year, automatically become employees of the new Authority. This means that all civil servants in ANSO will get a free transfer to the Irish Aviation Authority from 1 January next year. However, the Bill does not say that when the staff are transferred to the new Authority they will maintain their security of tenure. They will be secure on 1 January, but how secure will they be on 2 January in this new commercial body which will be separated from the constraints of the Civil Service? What guarantee will the staff have that 100 of them will not be offered redundancy in a shake-up at Easter? It is not good enough to say that when the Bill has been passed by the Dáil and Seanad and signed by the President the discussions will take place with the trade unions and staff representatives. The staff of 580 have given good service, according to the Minister, and in my view their service has been excellent; yet they are being denied the protection afforded to staff in An Post, Telecom Éireann and forestry when those organisations were brought into the semi-State sector.

The provisions for the maintenance of pension rights are dubious. At present the staff has the full benefit of the Civil Service pension scheme, but it is proposed to make a new arrangement whereby the board, once it is set up, will be charged with the task of setting up a pension fund for its employees. The Minister will be compelled by sections of this Bill to contribute to the fund, but there is nothing in the Bill that guarantees employees with 40 years service that they will receive a pension of 40/80ths of their salary together with a lump sum payment. The sections that deal with the pension arrangements are not at all transparent. Will employees be entitled to a pension of 50 per cent of their salary? Will the pension fund be guaranteed by the State? Will employees be guaranteed a minimum benefit from the fund? These may be very mundane questions in the high flying world of international aviation but they are very important for the 580 staff who are at present employed by ANSO and who will have to explain the new arrangements to their wives and children. The husband or wife, as the case may be, will ask how the family will be fixed if anything happens. The response that the Minister is charging the board to set up the pension fund and over a period of seven years he will pay into it is not good enough. The Minister will have to give explicit guarantees to the staff.

I beseech the Minister to give the staff assurances of security of tenure, remuneration, promotional opportunities and pension rights because at present they are worried. In the heel of the hunt after the process of negotiations he will have to give the guarantees in any event. Why not do so in a forthright fashion? It is better to bring people along with you instead of wielding the big stick to them. The dedicated staff has given the State good service in the past and I have no doubt they will continue to give good service in whatever guise their jobs are organised in future.

I am glad to see that the Minister has taken the opportunity to clarify the international obligations of the new organisation, whether in terms of participation in Eurocontrol or compliance with the Chicago Convention and its annexes. The difficulty with the measures in the Bill complying with the Chicago Convention and its annexes is that they point to the Minister's own unease in having the same group regulate safety and organise air traffic control. That needs to be teased out very thoroughly on Committee Stage. The Minister is retaining in his own hands some of the powers in the Chicago Convention and its annexes while others are being transferred to the Authority. Will the Minister justify the breakdown of responsibilities? Does he have a basic belief that there should be two separate authorities but has been advised that one would be better? Because of the internal conflict between the Authority's safety and air traffic roles, does he have to be involved again to ensure there is not a conflict of interests? No doubt this will be teased out on Committee Stage and I look forward to hearing the Minister's justifications for his proposed arrangements under the Chicago Convention.

Will the Minister develop at some length how he envisages the EATCHIP arrangements, to provide a seamless air traffic control system across Europe developing and to what degree we are ready to participate in it?

Having said my piece, this is more a Committee Stage Bill and I hope we have a good and fruitful Committee Stage debate on Tuesday.

Mr. Cullen

I agree with the concluding comments of my colleague that this is more a Committee Stage rather than a Second Stage Bill. We are certainly facing turbulent times — no pun intended — in the airline industry. It is unfortunate that this Bill is being introduced at a time when there are a great many questions being asked in the airline industry. It is a bit much to put further impositions on people who have been asked already to make enormous changes. There are many good aspects to the Bill, but it strikes me that the Minister is not as surefooted as he would have liked to be — it seems to be two steps forward and one step backwards. I will develop that point later.

At present a great many changes have to be made. The obvious example is Shannon and questions are being asked about what will happen and how Dublin Airport will develop in the future. Just under 600 jobs in ANSO will be transferred to the Irish Aviation Authority; 300 of them are in the Shannon region, 200 in Shannon itself and 100 in Clare. This begs other questions. It is an important step to re-position ANSO as a more commercial operation in the semi-State sector. I welcome this. However, on the one hand the Minister wants the sector to be more commercial, but yet there is the proviso that the Authority cannot make any profits. I am at a loss to know what message the Minister is trying to convey in the first instance to the House and then to the industry. There are clear contradictions in his speech which display the absence of sure-footedness in what he is trying to achieve.

Anything that affords the Irish aviation industry more opportunities, while ensuring that standards are maintained and improved, has to be welcomed. Industry cannot stand still. New developments are occurring all the time and it is important that those involved directly in the regulation, control and planning of our industry have the ability, scope and capacity to seek out new opportunities for themselves. A developmental approach has benefits not only for our industry but for aspects of the industry worldwide. There is no reason that the Irish Aviation Authority should not be a world leader in developing technology and innovation. In my view there is nothing that restricts us in Ireland — not even size. I hate the argument that because we are a small country with a small population we do not have the capacity to compete with the big boys. That is nonsense.

Mr. N. Treacy

I never said that. That is not my philosophy.

Mr. Cullen

I did not say specifically that the Minister said it. I was making a general point. We have the capacity; but it is a question whether the operating companies particularly those in the semi-State commercial sector, have the freedom to make autonomous decisions, not having to look over their shoulders for the political nod and a wink, and to get out into the marketplace and forge ahead.

ANSO has provided services of the highest quality and its staff has been equal to the task required of them. Those involved in the general area of traffic control are recognised internationally as people of high standing with a great capacity for business and for dealing with all the situations that arise. The safety record stands as a testament to the people who have been involved in ANSO to date and speaks for itself. I hope this record will be guarded with pride and maintained and enhanced in the new organisation.

All the companies that will use the services of the Irish Aviation Authority are commercial operations, many of them private operations, and cost effectiveness, from their point of view, is the first part of any equation in terms of those with whom they do business. It is clear, therefore, that the service and the Irish Aviation Authority must be cost effective and innovative to the point that we would be able to charge less in some instances, than we would charge in other countries for the provision of services here. These are commercial operations dealing in an airline industry worldwide which is going though the most traumatic time in its history — and which is likely to continue for a number of years — because of deregulation and liberalisation worldwide which will cause more turbulence and difficulties for airlines. The services provided must be cost effective, of the highest quality, provide what is required and have the added value of an organisation clearly recognised as maintaining the highest standards in the delivery of those services. Therefore, if the service is to be cost effective it must not be to the detriment of maintaining high standards but on the basis that the high standards required are fostered, improved and maintained at all times. This is something which ANSO has achieved to date and the new Authority will have to ensure it maintains the standard in the future and that its services are innovative, of the highest quality and cost effective.

I am concerned about the position of the staff. In reading the Bill and having listened to the Minister this morning it is clear that fewer than 600 of the staff involved are moving from the secure position of having been civil servants. The Minister has not provided in the Bill or stated in his contribution this morning the precise status of the staff. Notwithstanding other arguments of companies closing down and staff being made redundant, the position of the staff after 1 January 1994 in terms of pension rights, security of tenure, wage structures and so on is not clear. It is obvious that whatever discussions the Minister or his officials have had with the existing staff they have not reached a conclusion. The attitude appears to be that we will publish the Bill first and see where we go from there. I am concerned about the attitude in the Bill regarding the staff and I hope that between the conclusion of Second Stage and Committee Stage the Minister and his Department will have all the necessary details completed or, at least, more information.

Given the advance in technology and the facilities between Dublin and Shannon — I include Clare in that — it is clear there is a distinct possibility of centralisation of all the services into one area. If no change was announced in the Shannon stopover policy one would automatically think that the importance of the Shannon Air Traffic Control Centre would be maintained but, with the change to Dublin, a further question mark is placed over a large number of jobs. By any stretch of the imagination 300 jobs is a lot. If 100 to 150 jobs were provided in a manufacturing industry Ministers would be dancing on the streets with glee. Three hundred jobs and the effect this has on families is indeed——

Mr. N. Treacy

They would not be short of companions to dance with.

Mr. Cullen

That is a matter for the Minister. Fianna Fáil and Labour are not very good dancing partners anyway so the Minister is only emphasising what they are up to.

Mr. N. Treacy

Speak for yourselves.

Mr. Noonan

(Limerick-East): They are lurching.

Mr. Cullen

I think——

Mr. Noonan

(Limerick-East): Any respectable ballroom would stop the type of dancing going on at present.

Acting Chairman

Deputy Cullen without interruption.

Mr. Cullen

The Minister will have to make his intentions clear in this whole area. It is not acceptable to me — and I am sure it is not acceptable to most Members in the House — that these changes are taking place and that their consequential effects are not being spelt out to the staff involved. Given the other changes, which I will not detail, it begs very serious questions in the context of this Bill which must be dealt with. My instinct tells me that Shannon must remain an extremely important part of Irish and international aviation. If changes are deemed necessary for reasons of efficiency or technology it would be logical that Shannon because of its worldwide renown and recognition, should be the area of concentration of these facilities and resources. I say this because this matter has not been dealt with in the Bill. It has been alluded to but the Minister has said nothing beyond that, which is regrettable.

This morning the Minister said he wanted to see commercial opportunities in the area of associated services for profit which he described as training and consultancy work taken on board by this new authority. I welcome that. Yet he said the Government is responsible for shaping much of the policy. If the Authority is to have the autonomy and be adventurous in terms of seeking commercial opportunities worldwide I hope they do not have to wait for the nod from the Department.

There is some conflict between the retention of policy decisions by the Minister and the conflict within the new Authority on the regulatory, air traffic control and policy sides. It is all very unclear. Given the shrinking because of technology and the advancement worldwide it is unlikely, because of the relationship in Europe, that we will have national air traffic control centres. It is likely that there will be slimmer and more centred organisations throughout the world. The delivery of those services need not be as widespread as is the case at present.

The new Authority should have the capacity to be recognised worldwide as a provider of such services in its own right. It should not see its role as confined to Irish aerospace. If that means it must form a separate company to deal with consultancy or delivery services, then it should do so. The Irish Aviation Authority should be able to manage air traffic control services either in one country or in a group of countries. There is enormous scope in that area for profit and a major commercial operation which would have a significant impact on job creation, not just here but for Irish people operating such services throughout the world. The Minister alluded to that in his speech but did not elaborate on it. The scope and scale of opportunity should be made clear to the members of the Authority. If Aer Rianta can develop and run duty-free airports in various parts of the world it is equally open to the Irish Aviation Authority to deliver, operate and seek payment for services because it has the expertise and the people to carry out those services. That would be more appropriate than training people in other countries for such positions. Those opportunities should be made clear in this Bill.

I am not sure the Minister has gone the whole way in moving from ANSO to a semi-State commercial organisation. He gave no reason why the Authority should not be a private commercial organisation to which certain constraints would apply in regard to its operations, although he indicated that this might happen in the not too distant future. We appear to be taking this development in stages. If that is so the commercial opportunities might be lost, because the transition period is not flexible enough and a commercial semi-State operation might not have the same flexibility and capacity to enter the marketplace as a private company.

The Minister lacked conviction in regard to the regulatory function being separate from the air traffic control function. He adopted the poacher turned gamekeeper mentality in that respect, but that will not work. He stated it would be impractical to have two separate organisations but made no arguments to support that view. Was it a case of somebody whispering to him that we do not require two bodies? There is an obvious need for two separate bodies, particularly having regard to the points I made about the commercial opportunities which exist. One must read between the lines of the Minister's speech because his intentions are unclear. If the Minister wants to take on board the commercial opportunities to which I referred — he alluded to this in his speech — he is making a fundamental error by having the two functions under the one Authority. It will not work, it is unfair to the Authority and I do not believe the Minister is convinced that it is good practice. It certainly is not taking into account what is happening in other countries and it will place a question mark over the Authority from an international perspective. The poacher turned gamekeeper mentality should not be inflicted on anybody and that is clearly the case from the way the Minister has designed the Authority. That is unacceptable in this House and it will also be unacceptable internationally.

That is not the way to do business and the Minister has made a fundamental error in his approach to setting up the Authority. There are many good aspects to setting up the Authority, but the Minister is undermining its responsibilities by not separating those two functions. Having the same people responsible for both functions will not lead to good judgment, direction and decision making. The Bill is flawed in that respect and it will restrict the good work of the Authority. The Minister will have to reconsider this aspect of the Bill. Although it would fundamentally change the direction in which the Minister wants to go, this should be altered on Committee Stage. The Minister's attitude lacks clarity. He is trying to ride too many horses at one time and he is not sure in which direction they are running or whether he wants to run on the flat or in a steeplechase. He must make decisions in regard to what he wants to achieve before finalising the Bill.

What volume of military aircraft entering our airspace is included in the figure of 200,000 or 300,000 aircraft which never land here? Do they pay a greater charge or a similar charge to that of commercial airlines? Will the Minister communicate with me in that regard?

The Minister stated that responsibility for a major air disaster remains within his remit. Where does the chain of command lie or what line will the decision making process take? We have had some serious air disasters in our coastal waters in the past where too much time was lost before decisions were made and an emergency plan put into operation. It took too long for somebody to take ultimate responsibility and make quick decisions. What role will the Authority and the Minister's Department have in the event of a major air disaster? How is it proposed that those two bodies will work together in an efficient and speedy manner in the event of an air disaster within our airspace?

A nine member board will be appointed to the Authority and it is extraordinary that no senior staff or experts in the industry will be appointed to that board. Obviously there is some reason for it but it is a mistake and should not be specifically excluded by the provisions of the Bill.

In the last few years vast sums of money, mainly from Structural Funds, have been put into the development of the regions and of the regional airports, but they are now forgotten because of the dominance of the greater questions of Aer Lingus at Shannon and Dublin. However, they are still a very important asset and an integral part of the Irish aviation industry. Therefore, I suggest that in constituting the board the Minister make some attempt to achieve a regional spread because I would hate to see the board totally weighted towards one area. That would be a mistake. I do not believe in appointing people simply for the sake of appointing them; only people with something to contribute should be appointed to the board. I certainly hope the Minister will not appoint political cronies to a board of such importance.

Mr. N. Treacy

That is not in my nature.

Mr. Cullen

I hope the appointments will be made on the basis of ability to make a substantial contribution to the organisation and running of this Authority. However, I think it is reasonable that the regions be recognised in making such appointments. That is important to their potential development.

There are 81 sections in this Bill, many of a technical nature. I would ask that the points raised here this morning receive sufficient time to be debated on Committee Stage. The fundamental questions are the conflict within the Authority between the regulatory function and the air traffic control function coupled with the potential commercial possibilities, which are far greater than the Minister seems to think. The structure of this Authority does not give it a clear mandate and I think a change in the direction of this Bill is called for.

Mr. Gilmore

I have no objection whatever to the establishment of ANSO as a semi-State company. The Minister gave us a very interesting and comprehensive address this morning dealing with the functions of ANSO. However, I am surprised that he has presented no rationale for the transfer of these functions to a semi-State body. It is still not clear why a semi-State organisation is being set up to take over the functions of ANSO. I am doubly concerned at some of the omissions from and provisions in this Bill. As Deputy Noonan says, the transfer of Civil Service functions to semi-State organisations is nothing new. Most of the legislation dealing with that kind of transfer is now standard. What concerns me is the number of significant departures from the standard legislation that deals with the establishment of semi-State companies and the transfer of functions from the Civil Service. Most of those departures have to do with the conditions of service, security of tenure and rights of the employees of the organisation. We need to know why those normally standard provisions have not been set down in this legislation.

A number of sections which deal with employment conditions need to be addressed. For example, section 40 deals with the transfer of staff to the aviation Authority and provides, as is standard in this type of legislation, for the protection of conditions of employment. What it does not deal with is the security of tenure of the employees. The question of security of tenure has been dealt with and has been specifically written into the legislation establishing other semi-State organisations. Similarly, on the question of superannuation schemes, section 41 sets out the way in which the Irish Aviation Authority may establish and run a superannuation scheme and get approval from the Minister for it. What it does not do is guarantee the employees of ANSO who will be transferring to the Irish Aviation Authority a superannuation regime which will not be less favourable than the regime they currently enjoy.

I cannot understand why standard provisions included in other legislation setting up semi-State companies have not been included in this legislation. Why is it that in those two areas standard provisions in, for example, the legislation setting up Coillte, An Post and other semi-State organisations have not been included in this legislation? I know that discussions have taken place between the trade unions representing staff in ANSO and the Minister's Department. Last week we were presented with the white copy of the Bill. The printed copy arrived only some days ago. I am surprised that once that omission had been drawn to the attention of the Minister by the unions representing the staff the opportunity was not taken to rectify it and include it in the Bill that was circulated to us. I am also surprised by the rather nebulous reference to it by the Minister. He acknowledges that concern exists among the ANSO staff. He acknowledges that discussions have taken place with his Department about it and he tells us that he will tell us something about it on Committee Stage. What he has not stated — and perhaps he will do so when replying — is that he has a firm intention to introduce an amendment or amendments on Committee Stage to provide for the security of tenure of the employees who will be transferring from ANSO and also provide that the terms of their superannuation scheme will not be less favourable than those they currently enjoy. The Minister should put that on the record when replying to this debate.

The most remarkable omission relates to sections 17 and 71. Section 17 provides that a member of the staff of the company shall not be a director of the company and section 71 bluntly states that the Worker Participation (State Enterprises) Acts, 1977-91, shall not apply to the company. I find that extraordinary. The Irish Congress of Trade Unions which is meeting in conference in Galway this week and which will no doubt be considering the prospects of entering into discussions with the Government for a new programme for economic and social progress, might well reflect on the fact that this Government has specifically excluded the employees of the proposed Irish Aviation Authority from the worker participation legislation.

The exclusion of the Worker Participation Act and the provision in the legislation that no employee of the company can be a director is a direct breach of the Programme for Economic and Social Progress negotiated with the social partners. The first section of the Programme for Economic and Social Progress deals with the key objectives of its strategy. The development of worker participation, women's and consumers' rights is stated to be among the five key objectives of the Programme for Economic and Social Progress. A whole section of that document is devoted to worker participation, stating that employee participation is of benefit to both the enterprise and the employees. It also states that the Worker Participation (State Enterprises) Act will be kept under review and that discussions will take place between the social partners and Government about its operation. One section of that document deals with extending the principle of worker participation to the private sector.

This legislation before us provides for the establishment of a new semi-State company. Yet, despite the provisions in the Programme for Government and the commitments entered into in the Programme for Economic and Social Progress, the provisions of the worker participation legislation are being denied to the employees of the Irish Aviation Authority. There is a specific statement that, even though the employees do not have a right under the Worker Participation Act to elect one of their number to the board, if some Minister in the future discovered an employee such as an air traffic controller or some other employee who might be suitable for membership of the board, the Minister would be prevented by this legislation from appointing that person to the board. It is specifically provided that an employee of the Irish Aviation Authority cannot be a member of the board of that Authority. In other words, a person directly involved in working for the Authority cannot be involved in running the Authority.

The rationale the Minister has given for that exclusion is that there might be some conflict of interest, that you could not have an employee of the IAA as a member of the board deciding on regulatory matters. If the conflict of interest is so great as to deny to the employees of the IAA the right to participate in membership of the board, then the Minister's argument that there is no conflict of interest in the Authority being the regulatory body and also responsible for the operational side of the business falls on its face. The Minister cannot have it both ways. He cannot say there is no conflict between the Authority being the regulatory body and also responsible for the operational side and also state that because it is the regulatory body there will be a conflict of interest involving the staff. That is a direct contradiction. If there is such conflict of interest as to deny the employees the right to participation on the board, the Minister should consider whether it is possible to have these activities encompassed in one body or if there should be more than one body.

I must question why significant exclusions relating to staff employment conditions and worker participation are specified in the Bill. It is important to consider what the Minister stated about the possible future privatisation of this activity. The Minister stated that, as the Authority will be the regulatory body, the Government excluded the possibility of private ownership. He also stated that if in future any of the core functions of the new Authority were to be carried out by the private sector, that matter would have to be brought back to the Oireachtas for debate and decision. It is interesting that the paragraph, which may be interpreted by the Committee of 22 as meaning there will be no privatisation, is interpreted by Deputy Cullen, who favours privatisation, as indicating there will be privatisation. Deputy Cullen interprets that section of the Minister's speech as meaning that a semi-State organisation is now being set up and that at some stage in the future that organisation should and will be privatised.

Deputy Cullen's interpretation of the Minister's intention is probably correct. I cannot see any other reason for the diminution of the rights of the employees, such as exclusion from board membership, provided in this legislation other than to facilitate at some future stage the preparation of this company for privatisation.

Our history of privatisation has been that profitable and successful State organisations are fair game for the private sector. Aviation is a profitable activity and this proposed semi-State organisation will have a viable commercial future and great potential in competing for the various activities for which it will be responsible. This legislation is providing for the transfer of aviation activity to a semi-State body to prepare it structurally for privatisation at some future stage. The Minister's reference to having to bring this matter before the Oireachtas and so on is simply taking the latch off the door.

Mr. N. Treacy

The Deputy's imagination is running wild.

Mr. Gilmore

It is not imagination. Because of arrangements entered into we may not see privatisation of this activity during the lifetime of this Government but this legislation is providing the preparatory work for such privatisation.

The Minister referred to the profitable nature of this activity, much of it generated by overflights. Deputy Cullen asked a question, which I also wish to pursue, regarding the number of military overflights. Some figures have been given as to the number of overflights and we have been told that some proportion of the activity of ANSO relates to overflights. We have not been given the breakdown of overflights as between military and civil activity. We need to know that information because a great deal of concern has been expressed about the extent to which Irish airspace is being traversed by military aircraft, particularly aircraft carrying nuclear weapons. Much concern has been expressed about that in the past and we now need to know the full extent of that activity.

This legislation is essentially concerned with air safety and safety from air disaster. We have had a very good record in that area. I agree with the complimentary remarks made in respect of ANSO and its staff, who have been involved in the control of aircraft and air safety. We are all aware that air accidents happen, and any air accident is a great tragedy. The prospect of an air accident involving aircraft carrying nuclear weapons is frightening and puts in perspective concerns which all Members have regarding the possibility of nuclear accidents at places such as Sellafield. The prospect of any aircraft carrying nuclear weapons having an accident while travelling through Irish airspace is frightening. There should be a prohibition on aircraft carrying nuclear weapons through our air space and we should take the opportunity to deal with that in the context of this legislation.

Other speakers referred to the fact that this debate is taking place at a time when there is a great deal of discussion about aviation policy generally. The Minister came in here last night to assure us that the Government has an aviation policy. I do not believe that it has. I have never seen an aviation policy document and in practice there is little evidence of an aviation policy. The Minister stated, "We have an aviation policy and I have clearly articulated what it is". He went on to tell us that, "I do not intend to repeat the full details of our plan and policies for Irish aviation. These are already on the record of the House". He sounds like the type of old fashioned politician who would stand up outside a chapel gate, say a few words in Irish and then for those who did not understand the native tongue, carry on in English. It is the oldest excuse in the book. If one does not have a policy simply say that it is so complex and so detailed there is no time to repeat it.

The only time I recall the Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications coming into this House and discussing aviation policy was in response to the Private Members' motion on Aer Limgus which I tabled just before the Easter recess. On that occasion what the Minister passed off for aviation policy was no more than a series of aspirational statements. There is no aviation policy of which I am aware and all of the ad hoc— in some cases eleventh hour — belated decisions that are being taken are not a substitute for aviation policy. If we take, for example, the question of liberalisation, it would appear from the passing references to liberalisation made by the Minister that we are in some way in favour of it because there is little we can do about it. We have never heard the Government's position in relation to liberalisation. It seeks to be unfashionable to question it. We certainly know that liberalisation has not conferred any benefits on people who have been working in the aviation industry. Whether it confers benefits on the consumer is questionable because it is debatable whether with the “hub and spoke” approach to aviation, consumers are better off having to fly to an intermediate hub airport in order to get to their destination.

We do not know the Government's position in this regard and, specifically we do not know what has been the Government's position in relation to liberalisation policy in the EC. This is not a new issue. The question of liberalisation has been on the agenda for many years now and the question of liberalisation in the EC context has been on the agenda since 1987. It was obvious that EC liberalisation of air policy would have serious implications for Aer Lingus, that it would either wipe out Aer Lingus or at best reduce it to the status of a provincial or regional small airline. That issue has never been teased out. The relationship between what Ministers for Transport have been saying and doing at EC Council of Ministers meetings on the question of liberalisation and its implications for Aer Lingus has never been spelled out and I would like to know what it is. Whatever we may say about the world aviation industry and our lack of control over it, in the context of the Council of Ministers it would seem that the Government must have had some influence or input into the development of liberalisation policy in the European Community. It seems to me there has been an absence of a policy and in its place we seem to have a kind of Irish version of it. It was reasonable, on the one hand, to allow a so-called form of competition in the domestic market while, at the same time, saddling Aer Lingus with various kinds of restrictions and regulations which have been debated in this House on a number of occasions.

It is ironic that while we have been debating, both in this House and in the country generally, whether the limited number of transatlantic flights that have their destination here should stop in Shannon or Dublin or both, we have, as was pointed out, such a degree of air traffic flying over our airspace. Clearly, much of that traffic would never land here anyway but when one considers, for example, that approximately 50 per cent of the air passengers coming to this country are now coming through UK airports, there is a very serious question about what the Government has been doing over the past number of years and its failure to develop any hub airport here.

We are told by the Minister that Irish airspace occupies a vital position between the North Atlantic and Europe, and so it does. If it occupies such a vital position why were greater efforts not made over the past number of years, particularly with all that we know about liberalisation, to develop a hub airport here which would attract some of that traffic through this country? That was not done because there has been no aviation policy of any kind. We are now left in the pathetic position where we have this ongoing provincial argument between Shannon and Dublin. It is interesting to note that the Minister mentioned Shannon ten times in the course of his contribution. I would have to acknowledge that Shannon is very much on the Minister's mind these days but it seems that what we are being prepared for, in the context of the Aviation Bill, is a grand announcement. When this Bill goes through the Houses of the Oireachtas it will be announced some months from now — another sweetener for Shannon — that the headquarters of the Irish Aviation Authority will be located in Shannon.

Mr. Noonan

(Limerick East): The Minister must speak well of the dead. That is the only reason he is mentioning Shannon.

Mr. N. Treacy

Both Deputies will be proven wrong. There is nothing wrong with mentioning such a wonderful place. There are those who have decried it since it was created.

Mr. Gilmore

The Minister mentioned it more often than the words "air traffic control". That is remarkable.

Mr. N. Treacy

The Deputy should read the Official Report of the House.

Acting Chairman

The Minister should restrain himself.

Mr. Gilmore

Shannon is very much on the Minister's mind. He did not miss an opportunity to mention Shannon. However, mentioning Shannon in a speech will be poor consolation for the people of Shannon considering the Government's recent announcement in relation to aviation policy in that area.

Mr. Noonan

(Limerick East): Guilt.

Mr. N. Treacy

That conflicts somewhat with the Deputy's external utterances.

Mr. Gilmore

Telling the people of Shannon in a couple of months time that the Government has a marvellous offer to make, namely, that it will locate the headquarters of the Irish Aviation Authority in Shannon when in fact the bulk of that activity is based in Shannon already, will be nothing more than offering a sweetener. The air traffic controllers working in Dublin Airport could probably be said to occupy a position similar to the 747s — they will be based in Shannon but located in Dublin.

Mr. N. Treacy

I do not think the Deputy will apply for a pilot's licence.

Mr. E. Ryan

At the outset I wish to congratulate the Minister for his initiative in introducing the Irish Aviation Authority Bill to the House. Given the current difficulties being experienced by the airline industry many might suggest that the establishment of a semi-State company to provide air navigation services is untimely.

However, in times of difficulty enlightened vision helps to promote recovery. The Minister in the Bill is preparing the ground for a navigation service that is more efficient and responsive to the ever-changing demands of user airlines. This is being achieved without undermining the high standard of safety currently followed by the Air Navigation Services Office.

Today Irish aviation is a large, diverse industrial sector which makes a major contribution to the Irish economy in terms of GNP activity and employment. It comprises world class companies and small niche aircraft and airfield operators. There is enormous employment potential in the aviation industry. Last year at the air show in England I witnessed the potential for the aviation industry in servicing and so on. There was a belief at that time within the industry that the number of jobs here could be doubled over a number of years if the correct approach was adopted. The Minister also referred to training. There is huge potential for training in Third World countries such as Africa and the Far East.

Fundamental to the success and continued development of Irish aviation are high safety and operating standards. Confidence in our safety and operating systems is the cornerstone on which the success of the aviation industry depends. As the industry expands, so too must our capacity to safely and efficiently manage and exploit our airspace. The purpose of this Bill is to set up an organisational structure which will continue to provide for the safe management of our airspace and exploit opportunities to improve efficiency.

The Air Navigation Services Office is well prepared to assume the responsibilities of a semi-State body providing essential services for the Irish aviation sector. In recent years it has been developing its managerial and technical skills to a point where its operation is as good as that of any of our European neighbours. On the technical side, following a five-year national £30 million reequipment programme, ANSO has state-of-the-art equipment and systems. However, this does not mean that investment can cease. Most of the deficiencies in the air traffic system in the mid-eighties were a consequence of low investment policies over previous years. This must not happen again. Removing ANSO from the restrictions of Exchequer funding will ensure that investment to maintain and expand the capacity of our ATC system can and will be made at the most appropriate time. I compliment the Minister on the fact that, despite the congestion problems being experienced in Europe, delay resulting from deficiencies in Irish airspace is now a thing of the past. Ireland has set a high standard for other states to follow.

There are many other interesting facts about ANSO which augur well for its conversion into a semi-State body. It has a turnover of £40 million, more than 80 per cent of which comes from foreign airlines. While this is significant by any standards it strikes me that the prospects for growth in this area are extremely good. Given the talent and experience of the highly specialised ANSO personnel, expansion into consultancy services presents an opportunity on which the new semi-State IAA can readily capitalise. ANSO already employs 600 people and development in consultancy activity will assist in the creation of new jobs in the IAA.

I compliment the Minister on the emphasis he is placing on safety. It is extremely important that with improved efficiency in air navigation services the safety aspect is not undermined in any way.

Section 32 obliges the new company to report to the Minister on the technical and safety standards that it applies and also provides for a technical and safety audit of the company every three years. This will ensure a safety priority in the new organisation.

The Minister in his speech rightly described our airspace as a national asset. Irish airspace covers 100,000 square miles and stretches to a distance of 200 miles around some parts of our coasts. More than 300,000 aircraft use our airspace every year. Care will have to be taken in the future to protect this asset and policies and plans should now be adopted and implemented to ensure that in the event of a rationalisation of European airspace Ireland is in a strong position to play an active role in any such reorganisation.

I am convinced that ANSO has the capacity to become the textbook example of a relevant and successful semi-State body. I consider that the time is right for such a development and I am equally convinced that this new body will be efficient, considerate to the demands and views of user airlines and will, above all, preserve the safety record of the Air Navigation Services Office.

I compliment the Minister on his commitment to safety, which is the bedrock of the aviation industry. Criticism has been made of the changes proposed in the Bill. What we are doing is setting up a commercial body which will make commercial decisions. As the aviation industry is constantly changing it is becoming much more competitive, and the new body will be able to quickly and efficiently make relevant changes which will be to the benefit of the industry.

Deputy Gilmore spoke about privatisation. I cannot understand why there is such opposition to privatisation. I agree with the Deputy in regard to the number of military aircraft using our airspace. I too would like to know how many flights of a military nature use our airspace. During the Gulf War there was great concern about the use of our airspace. With the introduction of the so-called new world order it is even more important that we know who is using our airspace. Safety is a high priority but it is also important to ensure that our airspace is not used as a means by which military strikes are made on other countries.

Ireland is strategically located to develop the aviation industry. One of the criticisms made is that we do not have an aviation policy. However, any time a Minister talks about aviation policy he is immediately criticised by the Opposition. A typical example was the debate on the Shannon stop-over.

Mr. Cullen

There is opposition to matters other than the Shannon stop-over.

Mr. E. Ryan

We are all guilty of parish pump politics. Progressive Democrats, Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil members try to get the best deal for their areas. Manchester has been developed as a hub airport and all English newspapers carry advertisements highlighting the great benefits of flying into Manchester. However, all politicians here have avoided the question of the Shannon stop-over for years and it is not a matter of which we can be proud. One of the reasons we do not have a clear aviation policy is that everybody has been afraid to deal with the Shannon issue.

As a Dublin Deputy I am glad a decision has been made in this regard. Dublin Airport shall be developed as a hub airport. That does not necessarily mean the end of Shannon. Shannon can and will develop in new ways. There is great potential there as was said on the radio this morning by a spokesperson for Shannon.

I do not know why anyone can criticise liberalisation of the airline industry. Since liberalisation there has been a huge increase in the number of people flying in and out of Ireland. Probably the only reason for the success of Aer Rianta is the huge increase in the number of people using the airport. Aer Rianta is a fantastic success story not only here but in the Soviet Union and in other places where it is engaged in consultancy work. Liberalisation is the reason the company is making so much money and I do not understand how anybody could object to that. Although Ryanair has had problems it is successful for a small airline and Aer Lingus has improved its service considerably because of the competition. The company is in trouble now but that does not necessarily have anything to do with liberalisation. It relates more to the lack of investment in the company for many years.

I welcome this Bill. We will see a commercial body making good decisions to develop our aviation industry.

Mr. R. Bruton

I propose to share my time with Deputy Carey. A number of issues have caused me concern, particularly the security of tenure of staff. I am not fully satisfied that the Bill ensures the security of tenure of staff who have worked for a long time in the public service. It has been the tradition in other Bills to provide security in semi-State companies with regard to activities that were formerly carried out in the public service. That is as it should be.

I am concerned too about the implicit decision in this Bill to combine in one agency the regulatory activities and the implementation of air traffic control. Where we have combined activities which give rise to a potential conflict of interest we have invariably got ourselves into difficulties. Under the forestry Bill we foolishly provided that grant-giving to the private sector would be conducted through the State timber company and a conflict of interest naturally arose from that. We should not make the same mistake here.

Mr. N. Treacy

Hear, hear.

Mr. R. Bruton

It is not the norm in other European countries to combine in one State authority the two functions of regulation and execution.

The proposed Cahill plan is creating enormous concern in my constituency on the north side of Dublin. The Government has accepted the plan hook line and sinker. It is very disturbing that this plan has been adopted in the absence of a national aviation plan. The Government has always emphasised the notion of partnership being at the base of its approach to resolving difficult issues. The Aer Lingus workers had a right to expect that the Government would sit down with them as equal partners and would be willing to put its cards on the table. Instead, the workers of Aer Lingus have been kept in the dark. Last Friday we saw the dismissal of hundreds of workers in TEAM within days of a joint Government Irish Congress of Trade Unions statement that there would be a commitment to preserve maximum employment, which most people read as a willingness on the part of Government to prevent compulsory redundancies. More than 300 workers were handed their P45s and have left. There was no consultation or discussion. It was a abrupt as that. That is to renege on the commitment given.

I recall the motion we debated in the House on 27 October 1992 about Aer Lingus in which Deputy Spring, the Leader of the Labour Party, now Tánaiste, gave a clear commitment and called on the Government, a Government of which he is now a member in column 888 of the Official Report to:

... prepare immediately a detailed national aviation policy to secure the future survival and development of the company as our national airline; to give an undertaking to provide the necessary equity capital to ensure that the equity base of the company is strong enough to enable Aer Lingus to compete effectively in the context of deregulation; to publish the detailed policy by November 30th; and to undertake that no decision affecting employment in the company will be taken pending the publication of such a detailed and comprehensive policy.

We have not had a national aviation plan from the Government of which the Labour Party is now a member. Only a national aviation plan can seriously address the issues. We have clearly "sold the pass" on getting EC aid for mobile assets and that is critical. Portugal, Britain, Spain and France have obtained EC aid for mobile assets and we have not even addressed the issue from a policy sense. We have just said that it cannot be done. We have not addressed the critical issue of how a short haul aviation company can survive in a deregulated market stripped of its ancillaries, which is what we will have in two or three years time. We need to know that there is some confidence underpinning the strategy in which 1,500 people are to lose their jobs. I do not have confidence in the plan. Like Deputy Noonan I have not seen any convincing evidence to show that we can suddenly beat the competition on the Atlantic as seems to be suggested. There has not been a dramatic transformation. The likely competitors we will face will be much more cost effective. They have been through deregulation and they have cut costs drastically. This is not a strategy that offers much hope.

On the European side it looks as if we are determined to adopt a cheap fare policy with which we have not succeeded in the past. What is the basis for that? If we want to preserve a national airline, and if we are committed to it, we must develop a national aviation strategy in which the national airline will have a place. Let us have that commitment. Let us see the Government's attitude to partnerships with other companies because we need the long haul link-up if our national airline is to thrive. The plan is notably silent on that. This was what we were led to believe would be at the heart of this survival strategy. We have suffered years of neglect, particularly from Fianna Fáil Ministers who held responsibility for this airline over many years. The £40 million losses did not arise today or yesterday. We have had three successive years of £40 million losses before this year's £64 million.

Mr. Carey

A Galway man was in charge.

Mr. R. Bruton

It is naive for Government Ministers to wring their hands and say these problems are greater than those in Irish Shipping and other companies put together. We saw the figures and many parties chose to close their eyes to them and to do nothing while others chose to make rash promises and to indicate in constituencies such as mine, that the number of job losses would be kept to the minimum at a time when 1,000 were under threat. Now 1,500 are under threat.

In its manifesto the Labour Party said it would put equity into Aer Lingus to strengthen its balance sheet and free its potential for producing substantial new employment through profitable investment. Those words now ring hollow given that one third of the staff of Aer Lingus are to be "set aside," to use the words which became fashionable in recent times when dealing with another policy.

The Labour Party also said in its manifesto it was determined to ensure that the job potential of the company would be fully protected, it called on the Government to prepare a detailed national aviation policy and to give an undertaking that no decision would be taken pending the publication of such a policy. These were hollow promises. The Labour Party, in expecting a new air of realism to dawn, and knowing we are competing in a deregulated market, did not refer to the way in which it deceived the people for so long. This is a sad tale of neglect and deception and many people will not forgive the Labour Party.

Acting Chairman (Mr. McGrath)

I remind the Deputy that he is sharing his time with Deputy Carey.

Mr. R. Bruton

I will conclude on that point.

Acting Chairman

I ask Deputy Carey to deal with aviation policy.

Mr. Carey

I have a particular interest in the new Authority which is now being established. The Minister of State in his lengthy speech indicated that a substantial number of the people employed in this sector work at Shannon in my constituency. Indeed, I was glad to note that he mentioned Shannon about ten times. This is one area where people are experiencing anguish at present.

In his speech the Minister of State also mentioned another location — Prestwick — which is no longer included in the Fianna Fáil dogma, which was abandoned by the British authorities in much the same way as the Fianna Fáil Party will abandon Shannon.

Mr. N. Treacy

We created it and we will sustain it.

Mr. R. Bruton

And you will destroy it.

Mr. Carey

I welcome the Minister's ringing words but his party will be judged by its deeds. I am aware that while those who work in air traffic control welcome this development they are not satisfied with the work of the Minister of State. Indeed, only a few weeks ago the trade union IMPACT passed a resolution which read:

This Union deplores the attempt by the Department of Finance and the Department of Transport, Energy and Communications to diminish the legislative guarantee to civil servants who transfer to the new Aviation Authority. Accordingly, if the forthcoming Bill does not contain the same guarantee of security of tenure as that applied to Telecom, An Post and Coillte employees we resolve to take industrial action up to and including strike action.

Recently I tabled a parliamentary question in the hope that I would receive a positive reply for the Minister. The Minister of State informed the staff that he would amend section 40 of the Bill to give them the guarantee of security of tenure that they required but he has not done this. He expressed pious platitudes about Shannon because he feels we are crying and will be forever grateful to Fianna Fáil for rescuing us.

Those who work in air traffic control have been providing a good service for a long time. In particular those who work in Shannon have suffered severely because of the embargo. Despite this, the Minister of State did not pay tribute to the people concerned for the quality of their work in trying conditions for a long number of years. Neither did he say anything about the mess created by the Department. The facility at Ballygireen could have been used. Eurocontrol is operated from Brussels by the European Community. The Government made a lame attempt to have this service located at Shannon but instead its headquarters has located in Brussels. I wonder if the Minister of State will do the right thing and establish the new headquarters of the Irish Aviation Authority at Shannon. I read his speech very quickly to see if it contained any reference to this matter. The reply to my parliamentary question stated that it would be a matter for the members of the new Authority to decide where its headquarters should be located.

The experience of Shannon in this area has been sad. The Doherty committee was established to examine air-sea rescue services. By subterfuge the Department decided to relocate the people concerned from Shannon to Dublin where its headquarters is now located because complaints had been received from people on Valentia Island and other sectors of the maritime industry that no proper facility had been provided. This was done at the stroke of a pen and was not above board. Therefore, I do not think that IMPACT will accept all the remarks of the Minister of State unless he outlines his intentions in writing in relation to the guarantee of security of tenure.

The staff are rightly concerned about their conditions of employment. As the Minister of State is aware this is a stressful occupation which can cause illness. When the staff were employed as civil servants they knew they would be looked after. However, it seems no provision has been made for a scheme. Therefore, will the Minister of State tell us which section deals with their conditions of employment? I presume that the Labour Party originally objected to the idea of privatisation but has now withdrawn any objections it may have had.

What does the Minister of State propose to do to recruit controllers? Will they be recruited abroad? Apparently, young people from the other states have been trained to do this work. Will the Minister of State insist that the new Authority should adopt a recruitment policy and place emphasis on the need to recruit highly educated Irish people? The Minister of State must be aware that in the west those trained at the regional technical college in Galway and at the radio school in Moylish are highly skilled but have to emigrate to find employment. Will the Minister of State issue instructions to his representative on the Authority to ask the management to pursue such matters?

I did not intend to be flippant about Shannon as it is a serious issue. As I said the other day, the necessary capital and human resources are available; the greater number of personnel employed by air traffic control are located at Shannon. It would be a fillip to those people if the Minister indicated either during Second Stage or on Committee Stage that he will look at this issue favourably.

Will the Minister explain how the level of charges will be decided? Will the fees currently charged by Aer Rianta be used in future to fund the activities of the new Authority? Will this lead to a further increase in landing fees over and above the 6 per cent already proposed by Aer Rianta? Has this matter been considered by the Minister's Department? This issue is of critical importance to Aer Lingus which has released extensive documents on our excessive airport charges — the landing fees for Dublin Airport are among the highest in the world. Will the setting-up of this Authority lead to a further increase in these charges?

I am still shocked at the decision taken by the Government to abandon Shannon. The setting up of this Authority and the implementation of the recommendations in the Shannon Airport rescue plan may work against Shannon in the future unless some serious answers are given. SFADCo, which has traditionally had the role of promoting Shannon Airport, has now been given the new role of promoting Farranfore Airport. It has told people in the tourism industry in that region that any new business which can be generated in Germany, France, etc., will go to Farranfore Airport and business in Shannon Airport will be maintained at its present level. That is the directive from the Department of Transport, Energy and Communications to the company. Is it intended that activity in Shannon will be maintained at its present level or is it intended to give some bit of life to that airport? Does the Minister envisage that there will be life in Shannon after the implementation of Mr. Cahill's plan?

Mr. B. O'Keeffe

The Minister gave a very clear outline of the role of ANSO. He also clearly outlined that the Government has an aviation policy and that it is committed to the continuation of public sector involvement in that industry. This is a complex Bill which will set up a clear framework within which Irish aviation safety standards will be maintained and within which Irish airspace can be controlled, properly managed and successfully operated. The new Authority will complete the public sector structure in the aviation industry. We already have Aer Lingus and we have Aer Rianta, which operates our airports and the many fine regional airports, and the new Authority which will have responsibility for safety and our airspace, will complete that public sector infrastructure. It is important that the basic essentials in any endeavour are correct. Nothing could be more important to the aviation industry than safety and airspace. The comprehensive nature of this Bill will ensure that the Authority will not only have the capacity but also the ability to discharge its functions which are essential to the long term future of the Irish aviation industry.

I very much welcome the proposed three year safety audit. This innovative proposal will ensure that the Minister and the Government can monitor the safety standards implemented by the Authority. I suggest to the Minister that it would be helpful if these reports were published. This would add to public confidence in both the Authority and the Irish aviation industry.

The Minister has correctly proposed combining the regulatory and operational functions, such as air traffic control, under the new Authority. I sympathise with the concerns expressed, but I believe the approach outlined by the Minister is the correct one. The Authority will have a very strong safety ethos and I am sure it will be able to combine both functions. With regard to the decision to combine the regulatory and operational functions, I wish to emphasise that the most important consideration is that the Authority does not investigate itself. Responsibility for the investigation of accidents will remain the responsibility of the Minister and his Department and that is as it should be. I am not impugning the Authority in any way but it is important that an organisation with such powers and responsibilities should be subject to independent investigation, especially in the event of an accident in which it might be either directly or indirectly involved.

It is equally important that safety standards are not compromised by commercial considerations. It is extremely important that the new Authority is a commercial body. The public sector principle is admirable, but as we have seen the term "public service" has been used to fudge certain issues and subsidies have had to be provided for certain organisations. I fully support the Minister's decision to allow the Authority to act on a commercial basis. The provision of services by the Authority to international airlines must be done on a fully commercial basis with competitive charges. I understand that the ANSO charges are the lowest in Europe. It is to be congratulated on this. I am confident that the Authority will continue to provide a high quality service at keenly competitive prices.

The basic building blocks of today's economy are capital, labour, technology and the state of the market, all of which are highly mobile. This is nowhere more evident than in the aviation industry. This mobility presents us with both threats and opportunities and it is up to the new Authority to focus in on the opportunities presented to it. We are fortunate to have a young, highly skilled and educated workforce. A combination of that work-force, seed capital and a commitment to top quality work with competitive pricing will enable us to lay the basis for fundamental and sound industries such as Shannon Aerospace, TEAM Aer Lingus and Shannon Turbine Technologies.

The authority will have a role to play in ensuring that it focuses on the marketplace and achieves an equitable share of the market. It is significant that more than 80 per cent of the revenue, which comes to £36 million, generated in the business comes from foreign airlines, and I understand that Aer Lingus and Ryanair account for less than 10 per cent of the overall revenue.

New markets are emerging in Asia and Eastern Europe for specialised aviation consultancy. There is no reason Ireland should not be a world leader in this potentially lucrative area of business. I have no doubt that the new authority will be able to focus on ways of increasing its existing business. We compliment the Air Navigation Service, whose dedicated team of specialist staff is committed to providing users with a high quality, cost effective service. As this ability is recognised abroad it augurs well for a major expansion of consultancy sevices in the near future.

It is important that as a Cork Deputy I draw attention to Cork airport. In the ongoing discussion about Shannon and Dublin airports, Cork airport seems to have been forgotten. Cork airport is an extremely successful and profitable enterprise. It has to raise capital to fund its own physical development. It also provides money from its own resources to market the airport and more importantly, it is run as a competitive and successful business. The Government, quite rightly, in seeking ways to encourage regional development, is examining the development of airports in Farranfore and Waterford. However, therein lies the dilemma for those working in Cork airport. If regional development means that some of the loss making traffic in and out of those airports is subvented it is quite reasonable for us to indicate that it will create major difficulties for Cork airport. It will be difficult for Cork airport to compete with a subsidised air service on its doorstep. I understand the Government indicated that Cork airport will not be eligible for subvention for regional airports. Will the Minister rethink that policy because of the difficulties it will create in Cork?

On the question of winning greater market share, Cork has been the front runner in establishing markets from Holland and in more recent years from France. Earlier I indicated the sums of money SFADCo has given to Shannon to increase passenger numbers through the airport. That is laudable but we are not all playing on a level pitch because no such subsidies are available to Cork Airport. As part of the process of increasing market share, Shannon has, in a predatory fashion, taken markets which Cork airport developed over the years with the result that tour operators who previously brought their business to Cork airport are now taking it to Shannon. When questioned, the tour operators specifically pointed out that Cork airport could no longer compete with the prices offered elsewhere. Surely it makes bad economic sense that traffic already coming into the country should be earmarked for another airport, which is subvented to the tune of £15 million. Instead of creating new markets they are taking our existing business.

While SFADCo, Bord Fáilte, Aer Lingus and others were marketing Ireland this difficulty will arise. Perhaps the time is right to focus on the establishment of one marketing authority for the aviation industry.

Our approach to industrial development may not always have been as co-ordinated as it should have been. Similarly, in selling ourselves abroad and bringing traffic into the country, I am not certain that co-ordinated structures are in place and that the available resources are processed in the most efficient manner. As we are now looking at aviation policy and putting in place a new structure for Aer Lingus it is time to go the whole hog and look at this sector.

This excellent Bill is very welcome. It shows a great deal of foresight and completes the process we are trying to bring about in aviation. I wish the new authority every success in what it is trying to achieve.

Debate adjourned.

Sitting suspended at 1.28 p.m. and resumed at 2.30 p.m.