Denis Naughten
Question:79 Mr. Naughten asked the Minister for Transport the commitment the Government has to the retention of the Shannon stopover; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16675/03]
Other Questions. - Air Services.
Jan O'Sullivan
Question:98 Ms O'Sullivan asked the Minister for Transport the way in which he proposes to ensure that transatlantic business, which represents 38% of Shannon Airport's revenue, is maintained and developed in the context of discussions on the proposed air transport agreement between the EU and the US; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16862/03]
Jan O'Sullivan
Question:129 Ms O'Sullivan asked the Minister for Transport if his attention has been drawn to an assurance given to a number of MEPs and representatives of workers in Shannon Airport that maintaining the dual gate equality of services on transatlantic routes from Dublin and Shannon will not break competition rules and will not be an obstacle to developing an open skies agreement between the EU and the US; his views on these matters; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16861/03]
Tom Hayes
Question:133 Mr. Hayes asked the Minister for Transport the Government's position regarding the Shannon stopover; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16682/03]
Joe Sherlock
Question:151 Mr. Sherlock asked the Minister for Transport the implications for Irish aviation, and particularly for Shannon Airport, of the decision of the EU Transport Council on 5 June 2003; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16883/03]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 79, 98, 129, 133 and 151 together.
As I stated in a reply to a parliamentary question on 10 June 2003, the question of giving a mandate to the European Commission to negotiate an air transport agreement with the USA was agreed at the Transport Council on 5 June 2003. When deciding what position I should adopt at that Council on behalf of Ireland, the main issues that I took into account were the ruling of the European Court of Justice last November, the impact on Shannon Airport and its hinterland, the impact on tourism of increased access to Ireland, the opportunities for Aer Lingus to increase its business on transatlantic routes, the possibilities for other Irish airports which currently do not have scheduled services to destinations in the US, as well as Ireland's wider relationship with Europe.
A major factor regarding Shannon is that an EU-US liberalised market is the inevitable outcome of this whole process in Europe. It became very clear before the Council meeting that there was a consensus among other member states that an EU-US agreement was the way forward. In view of that reality, I took the view that to seek to insist on a non-open skies policy would damage not only Irish tourism, business and aviation as a whole, but also the potential for Shannon Airport to carve out new routes into the US in this new and liberalised market, and to develop itself as a hub for passengers and cargo.
At the Transport Council, I stated that I would not oppose the wish of all the other member states to grant this mandate to the Commission to negotiate an EU-US agreement. However, I also reiterated my concerns about the impact an agreement might have on Shannon Airport, and I pointed out strongly that I will carefully assess the draft agreement, which ultimately emerges from those negotiations.
We must take a proactive approach to these new realities and opportunities. My objective is to seek to ensure that in any new scenario Shannon has an equal or greater volume of aviation business available to it. I will engage with all the necessary interests to bring that about.
The Department seems to be giving different answers to various issues here. On 4 March, the Minister told me that no contacts had been made between Ireland and the US on the bilateral agreement. On 10 June, in a response to my colleague, Deputy Killeen, the Minister said that contact had been made on 28 May and a range of issues was discussed. He believed he would ask his officials to contact the US authorities with a view to bilateral discussions. However, on the Adjournment debate on 11 June, the Minister said: "I should make it clear that my Department—"
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle:
It is not appropriate to quote during Question Time.
It made it clear that the Department had not engaged in any discussions with the US authorities on the current bilateral agreement. Based on discussions that took place and are about to take place, there is a view that the Minister is fast-tracking a change in the current bilateral agreement to facilitate Aer Lingus to open new winter routes in September and October to San Francisco and Orlando from Dublin only. Is that the reason the Minister is about to open discussions with the US authorities?
I would like to clear up the question of discussions. There were discussions at the request of the US embassy before the Council meeting in Luxembourg to talk about the upcoming Council meetings and the situation at the time. There have also been discussions since. There are no negotiations on the bilateral agreement at present. It would be silly not to keep in touch and have discussions not only with the US authorities, but also with the European Commission to establish the position in regard to open skies over the next two years or so. It is estimated that the US-EU discussions will take about two years to complete. We must take a proactive approach to building up Shannon Airport, particularly over the next two years, to seek to attract new routes and any new business we can get. We are having discussions on those matters at the moment.
Is the Minister aware that senior EU officials told the Shannon workers' representative group and some MEPs that the current dual gateway of Shannon and Dublin would not interfere with either the competition rules of the EU or the discussions on open skies? Will the Minister give us an undertaking that he will not try to sell off Shannon in a separate negotiation with the US, rather that he will operate through the EU? In his initial reply, the Minister talked about the "inevitable outcome". Is the Minister aware that abolishing the dual gateway is not an inevitable outcome? That seems to be the clear opinion of EU officials.
Is the Minister aware that evidence suggests that in small EU countries where there is no regulation for incoming flights those flights come to only one destination, usually the capital? Is the Minister aware of the serious outcome for Shannon Airport and its hinterland if, of his own accord as opposed to what the EU might want to do, he argues for the abolition of the dual gateway status of Shannon and Dublin that exists at the moment?
I am in favour of increasing the volume of business that comes into Shannon and into Ireland. My only objective is to increase the volume of aviation business coming to Shannon Airport. We should not sit back and wait for some taxi type deregulation decision from a court.
That is not what I am talking about.
We should not wait for a decision to come down like the last decision that came down from the European Court of Justice. We should use the time we have to be proactive in having discussions to see what is available and what new businesses we can build up and take it from there. To simply sit and do nothing until the EU takes a decision is not the way I want to go. I want to build up the business and make sure we get extra business. Some 40% of people coming from the US last year got off at Shannon Airport because they wanted to travel to the mid-west and the west. When the stopover rule changed from 100% to 50%, the number of people using Shannon Airport increased.
I have to be realistic and I urge the Deputy to do likewise. Open skies in the European Union meant just that – there are completely open skies in the European Union. Planes may fly where they wish and Governments do not tell them where to fly. We are now trying to do that between the United States and the EU. It would be dishonest of me to mislead the people of the mid-west by suggesting that somehow we can have open skies and closed skies at the same time. We cannot have both.
Does the Minister accept the finding of various studies that daily year-round non-stop services to and from Shannon to the US are of crucial importance to existing industries in the region and in the west, and to future industries which might set up? Will the Minister ensure that when his negotiations are finished, this level of year-round, non-stop daily service to Shannon will continue by regulation or otherwise?
I would certainly love to arrive at that situation. The Deputy is correct. It is not so much that the stop-over is the model particularly wanted by anyone. What is wanted is direct services to Shannon Airport. Given the number of people who disembark at Shannon, and the growing market, I am confident the numbers of people who will want to travel from the United States to the mid-west will be maintained, if not increased, because of the extra destinations which we will be able to bring on stream.
What if the airlines will not bring them any longer?
If one is sitting in a boardroom in the United States, and one wishes to provide a service to Ireland, two services are necessary, which is not the case in any other country. If there is an item on the agenda in the boardroom in New York or Washington regarding a choice between flying to Ireland and France, it will be noted that one can land in one destination in France while two stops are required in Ireland. That is a harsh reality which we must continue to consider. What answer will one get to that sort of question? The solution for Shannon is along the lines that Deputy Killeen has been advocating. I agree 100% with him. We need daily non-stop services to Shannon, because people want to go to Shannon. The stop-over solution is not the answer.
Deputies have been talking about the stop-over today. There is no such thing as a stop-over. There is the Shannon gateway and the Dublin gateway. We have direct services from Dublin to the US. We have them from Shannon. With the exception of the route to Baltimore, all others go through Shannon. I ask the Minister again if Aer Lingus has contacted him with a view to changing the current bilateral agreement to facilitate a new Orlando-San Francisco service direct from Dublin. That is what we have heard and it is very important.
The straightforward answer is "yes". The contact with Aer Lingus was not unusual. We have had regular correspondence with Aer Lingus on these matters, going back to my predecessor in the Department and my predecessor's predecessors. The view of Aer Lingus has been consistent for many years. It wants to open new gateways. We currently have five gateways in the United States. Aer Lingus wants to open another five or six. The ones they want to open are fairly well known too. The company feels they cannot move on these matters given the present arrangements.
That is just one thing to be taken into consideration. All this is not just about Aer Lingus. The important single issue is that it is incumbent on all of us, particularly me, to try to ensure that we have a very strong Shannon Airport maintaining a strong trans-Atlantic business with daily non-stop flights, as Deputy Killeen has suggested. I know the Deputies will support this view.
What one has, one keeps until one gets something to replace it. Up until now, the current bilateral agreement has worked well for Shannon and Ireland. Some 80% of the Aer Lingus profits come from the trans-Atlantic business, most of it through Shannon. Any change in the current bilateral agreement would be detrimental to Shannon and to the west. If the Minister changes the agreement, he will be remembered for the damage done to the west. He should remember he is from the west, and prove himself so.
Can the Minister confirm that it is possible to maintain the dual gateway policy within the context of an open skies regime? Is it not the case that he is not coming under pressure to abandon the dual gateway policy?
The Minister referred to meetings or discussions with representatives of the US Embassy prior to the EU meeting. Can he tell us the main thrust of those discussions?
If the Minister wants Shannon Airport to stand on its own two feet, when does he think it might get a railway connection to help it become an attractive destination for these flights?
On the open skies policy in Europe, the Minister said how beneficial it was. It has not benefited Shannon Airport, which does not have direct services to Europe. How will the Minister get direct services to the United States when he cannot get them from Shannon to Europe?
Shannon has an entitlement to flights to Europe. Europe is open. It is a matter of getting airlines to put on the service.
Will Aer Lingus stand over that?
That is the difficulty.
One of the ways forward for Shannon is to avail of the open skies policy within the European Union and attract airlines to put on additional services into the European Union, particularly cross-Channel. The other way forward is to develop traffic from the east, and use Shannon as a hub. There will always be a very strong trans-Atlantic business in Shannon, because 40% of people who came to Ireland last year disembarked in Shannon. That number will grow in the years ahead.
They will not be able to get off the planes.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle:
Please allow the Minister to conclude.
Deputy Shortall asked about meetings with representatives of the US Embassy. I did not take part in any discussions. Officials in my Department at the request of the US Embassy, seeking clarification on what position Ireland might take at the Council in Luxembourg—
What position were you asked to take?
These were routine discussions at the request of the Embassy. Such discussions have taken place many times over the years. This was an exploratory discussion mainly involving clarification as to what the Irish position might be. I regard that as a routine inquiry. I certainly did not feel any pressure there.
Regarding railways, I am certainly interested in providing railways to our airports, as I am in Dublin with the metro system. We must, however, be able to make the numbers work. Deputy Shortall asked me if a dual gateway was consistent with the open skies policy. Ultimately I do not believe so.
Who says it is not? Is the Minister coming under any pressure?
In the European Court of Justice ruling in regard to the bilaterals, the clear implication is that one cannot have open skies and a multiplicity of legally required gateways within it. We can accept that reality and start working, or we can pretend it does not exist and wake up some fine morning with a taxi type of regulation facing us.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle:
That concludes questions for today.
Written answers follow Adjournment Debate.