Yesterday the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment laughed at the prospect of meeting Mr. Michael O'Leary. No one in north Dublin is laughing today.
Leaders’ Questions.
A special notice question relating to this matter is due to be taken later.
These are Leaders' Questions and I am engaging in preparatory work for the oral questions to be taken later.
Yesterday the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment laughed at the prospect of meeting Mr. Michael O'Leary. No one in north Dublin — real families and real workers with real jobs — is laughing today. The Government has not taken opportunities to secure jobs. The record of the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment in respect of this matter has been abysmal. Under her stewardship, unemployment has risen to 437,000 and up to 50,000 people have emigrated. The budgetary figures project a further 70,000 job losses this year.
Following much pressure, a meeting is due to take place this evening. That meeting relates to securing 300 high-tech jobs at Dublin Airport. In view of the abysmal record and gross incompetence of the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment in delivering and securing jobs for this country, is the Taoiseach prepared to take charge of this matter and ensure that the necessary action will be taken in order to secure these jobs for the workers of north Dublin, particularly those who were previously employed by SR Technics? Is he also prepared to demonstrate a willingness and sincerity in the context of doing what is necessary, on behalf of the Government, to secure 300 high-tech jobs at Dublin Airport?
Deputies
Hear, hear.
I reject the personalised attack by the Leader of the Opposition on the Tánaiste.
When SR Technics announced the closure 12 months ago of its operations in Dublin Airport the Tánaiste appointed the IDA and Enterprise Ireland as contact points for any company that wanted to maintain part of its operation there or had ideas for starting a similar business at the airport. As a result, many expressions of interest were received and two were considered worth pursuing. One involved Dublin Aerospace proceeding with a project that provides 250 jobs in that area——
Only 30 to date.
——and has that prospect in mind. The other involved Ryanair, which is not prepared to negotiate with the DAA but we were prepared to use the IDA as an intermediary. This was a proposal to establish a maintenance operation for its own fleet which would initially employ 200, perhaps rising to 500 over a number of years. Certain conditions were attached to this proposal, one being insistence on the use of the largest hangar at the airport, hangar 6, to be secured for the project. This is problematic as the hangar in question was being used to provide line maintenance for the Aer Lingus fleet at the airport, which was carried out by SR Technics and is now done by Aer Lingus itself. It was the position of Aer Lingus, having a licence on the property, that it required the hangar for the maintenance of its own fleet and would give substantial employment in that respect. We also understand it is the only hangar in Dublin Airport suitable for wide-bodied aircraft used by Aer Lingus.
Nonetheless, the Tánaiste determined that every effort should be made to secure the project and much engagement and discussion took place between Ryanair, the IDA and the DAA and correspondence progressed between them also. The process culminated in a letter from the CEO of the IDA, Barry O'Leary, to Michael O'Leary, the CEO of Ryanair, clearly setting out the position on the options available to progress the project. To date Michael O'Leary has continued to insist that hangar 6 be secured for the project, although he is aware that Aer Lingus has licence of the property and requires it for its maintenance purposes.
It is the Government's view that viable options exist for progressing the project on its own merits, including building a new hangar for the operation at the airport, and to do whatever is necessary to secure it as we believe it is in the interests of Ryanair and the airport, with the prospect of increasing employment at the airport. We strongly believe in re-engagement in discussions on the project, which the Tánaiste will facilitate later this evening with Mr. Michael O'Leary. This is part of the effort to find a viable way forward. If we can do so of course the Government will support it in every respect.
I am concerned about securing 300 high-tech jobs and not about political egos. It is not true to say that the Tánaiste determined that every effort should be made to secure these jobs because she laughed at the prospect of meeting Michael O'Leary. Do not fob this off to Barry O'Leary of the IDA. The stock response of the Government is to hand matters over to somebody else and for Ministers accept no responsibility for their duties.
Yesterday, Michael O'Leary gave me two commitments. The first was that he would be prepared to demonstrate and prove that by the end of summer he would have 300 high-tech engineers working on heavy maintenance in the hangar if it is leased to him. Aer Lingus does not do heavy maintenance at Dublin Airport, as the Taoiseach is aware. The second commitment was that he is prepared to sign a contract which states that whatever circumstances arise, if heavy maintenance of Ryanair aircraft was not being carried out in hangar 6 he would hand it back to the DAA or the IDA. I remind the Taoiseach that in the leasing agreements conducted by the DAA it is clear that it can take back space or building where it is required for aircraft operation or airport development.
Read the next paragraph.
With 12 months notice.
I have a copy of a lease from July 2009.
Deputy Kenny without interruption.
The lease states it shall require to be taken back and other accommodation provided.
If the Tánaiste is serious about determining the security of these jobs, under the lease it is legally possible to take back hangar 6 because it is now required for aircraft development and maintenance. What can be more important in north Dublin than high-tech jobs in aircraft maintenance? If the Taoiseach is really serious about this, in view of the abysmal incompetence of the Tánaiste in dealing with Cadbury and Dell and now this offer from Ryanair, is he prepared to cancel what is in his diary, as he rightly did a couple of weeks ago on a matter of importance, take charge of this situation and do whatever is necessary to secure these 300 high-tech maintenance jobs for north Dublin?
At a meeting this morning, Deputies from north Dublin were shown pictures of hangar 6. The hangar was empty and the 95 jobs situated there could be accommodated in many other locations at Dublin Airport. This is the challenge for the Taoiseach. Is he prepared to take charge of this tonight because I do not believe in the competence of the Tánaiste to do anything to secure these high-tech jobs? Will the Taoiseach cancel what is in his diary, take charge of the situation, act as Taoiseach and secure these jobs for north Dublin?
Deputies
Hear, hear.
If life was as simple as Deputy Kenny thought it was he would probably be Taoiseach himself. The situation is different from that. On 17 September 2009 it was communicated by Ryanair that the condition of hangar 6 being part of the proposal was to be withdrawn on 24 September at Ryanair's AGM. In the aftermath of the Prestwick announcement it was stated by the CEO that the prospect of providing jobs in Dublin remains. I welcome that and we are anxious to discuss it with him. Deputy Kenny will accept not only the comments of the Tánaiste but also the comments of the CEO of the IDA, the DAA, others in the business of dealing with these matters on a daily and weekly basis and all users of the airport. Arrangements have also been made for the use of hangars 1 and 2 by Ryanair.
Hangar is right.
Rather than people getting involved in a personality assassination effort here, which I do not accept and I do not believe is relevant, the issue is a business one as to whether a viable option can be obtained consistent with the legal issues that arise and the licences and leases in the ownership of other companies on the property which Ryanair seeks to obtain. At the end of the day, we have to sit down in a sensible, rational and calm way to see in what way——
Stand up and be counted.
——we can find a viable project for this to go forward. I believe with common sense that would be possible. If conditions precedent exist similar to those which were in place prior to September when it could not be accommodated it is important that we examine the issues afresh to see in what way we can move forward. I do not question the bona fides of anybody in this matter but we must find a way forward that is consistent with what the situation is at present and how we might be able to provide a facility for this work to be brought to Dublin Airport.
It is about jobs and not personalities.
The Taoiseach is a repeat offender on this issue. Last spring, when SR Technics announced it would close down, the staff of SR Technics made a proposal whereby a package was put together which would continue aircraft maintenance and servicing.
On 1 April 2009, I put it to the Taoiseach in this House that 900 of the jobs at SR Technics could be saved if the Government supported that proposal and I argued that it should do so. In his response, the Taoiseach stated: "the Government will make every effort consistent with obtaining a viable proposal with the purpose of having an aircraft maintenance facility in Ireland." What did he do, however? The Dublin Airport Authority took hangar 6 back from SR Technics, thereby undermining the possibility of saving the jobs at that stage. This is the second time that hangar featured in the story.
We now know that Ryanair also made a proposal. We have heard all about this problem with hangar 6, that problem with the DAA and correspondence between the IDA and the DAA, all of which culminated in the Tánaiste announcing as recently as yesterday that she was not prepared to meet Ryanair or even pick up the telephone to ring its chief executive until she was embarrassed into doing so as a result of the publicity that arose in the course of the day.
This is the second time the Taoiseach, the Tánaiste and the Government have made a mess of the SR Technics situation and sacrificed jobs. These are no ordinary jobs. They involve people who can read an aircraft maintenance manual, something I doubt anybody in this House could make much sense of if it was put in front of us. When we speak grandiosely about the knowledge economy and new jobs, we are referring to these highly skilled people who can maintain an aircraft and get it back into the air. These jobs do not appear every day of the week. We had assembled a group of people at Dublin Airport who were capable of doing that work. SR Technics moved its operation to Switzerland and the jobs were lost as a result but the people were still available to carry out the work. All the Government had to do was show a bit of leadership by knocking heads together to ensure these jobs were not lost.
This story reveals what is at the heart of the problem with this Government and why it has become an obstacle to people keeping their jobs or returning to employment. The fact of the matter is that the Taoiseach, the Tánaiste and the Government did little or nothing to save those jobs in the first place. When a businessman came along with a viable proposal, all kinds of obstacles were put in his way and they did not come around to addressing the issue until the Tánaiste was embarrassed into doing so. My question to the Taoiseach is simple. I ask him whether he stands over the handling of the issue by the Tánaiste.
Of course I stand over the handling of the issue by the Tánaiste.
Lovely.
The contention by Deputy Gilmore that other viable projects were available at the time of the closure of SR Technics is not correct.
What was the deal between the DAA and SR Technics?
Deputy McEntee, please, one speaker at a time.
There were expressions of interest and sincere efforts were made by the workers themselves——
Disclose the deal.
——which involved having to provide some of the capital for the project by forgoing redundancy payments. Unfortunately, that did not provide the financial mix which would allow it to proceed, despite everyone's best efforts. I acknowledge those efforts but it is not just a question of knocking heads together and finding that a project is viable. A viable commercial project was proposed by people in that operation and Dublin Aerospace and it was supported by the Tánaiste, the IDA and all the agencies to the point where we have got it up and running. It will develop in due course and, I hope, increase its trade and capacity in the coming months and years. There was an outcome, therefore, albeit not one which involves the same number of jobs.
The other proposal considered by the Tánaiste and support agencies at the time was the Ryanair project, which came with conditions regarding hangar 6. Deputy Gilmore referred to the fact that ownership of the hangar reverted to the DAA from SR Technics. As he will be aware, it was previously a TEAM Aer Lingus building. There was a retention of interest by Aer Lingus in the building and, as part of the arrangement to deal with legal issues and problems that had arisen in respect of ownership so as to provide a facility in due course and get over the post-SR Technics problem, a 20-year licence was issued to Aer Lingus in consideration of its continuing interest in the building. Aer Lingus states that its commercial requirements include the hangar for the purpose of line maintenance, in which regard former employees of SR Technics are involved in some of the ongoing aircraft maintenance in addition to what Shannon Aerospace is doing.
The questions also arise of how we can deal with the Ryanair project and whether we can find another viable way to proceed. It seems to me that the idea that it can only proceed on the basis of hangar 6 needs to be further explored given that Ryanair has dealt with the DAA regarding other activities in hangars 1 and 2. We need to calmly and rationally discuss how a further 300 or 400 jobs can be created from the Ryanair project in due course by locating it at Dublin Airport, while recognising the issues that arise in regard to Aer Lingus's interest in and plans for the property.
That is all gobbledygook.
It is not gobbledygook. Be honest.
It is gobbledygook.
It is gobbledygook. People lost their jobs because the Government did not understand the issues.
Deputy Gilmore is hunting with the hounds while running with the hare.
TEAM Aer Lingus separated from Aer Lingus a long time ago and was subsequently sold to SR Technics. It is nonsense to suggest now that some kind of property legacy remains through which Aer Lingus has a hold on hangar 6.
It is not.
The bottom line is that almost 1,200 people lost their jobs in a business that was viable. I acknowledge that certain issues had to be addressed and overcome and there was a necessity for modernisation. Everybody accepted that at the time. The maintenance and servicing of aircraft is a viable business but we have lost it. The Government lost it last April and it had ten months to conclude all the calm and rational discussion in which it is now offering to engage. That has not happened and 1,200 people have lost their jobs.
The Government failed to support and advance the proposal put forward by staff last year. The withdrawal by the DAA of hangar was a key factor in undermining that proposal but the Government did not step in to prevent it from happening. On top of that, we now have a new proposal from Ryanair in respect of which 200 jobs have already been allowed to slip through the Government's fingers to Glasgow. It appears that until yesterday the Government was content to allow the remaining 300 jobs to slip through its fingers. It has made an unholy mess of this matter. These jobs should not have gone down the spout because they represent the kind of work which can be retained here.
It would be preferable had the Taoiseach acknowledged that the Government, the Tánaiste and Ministers made an absolute mess and then moved on rather than pretend that all kinds of complicated property arrangements are preventing them from acting. During an unemployment crisis, they should be moving mountains to ensure that two separate business proposals to provide and save perfectly viable jobs had Government support rather than the kind of hamfisted and negligent treatment they have received thus far. People are losing their jobs and businesses are suffering because of the ensuing drop in income for north and west Dublin in particular.
I reject that innuendo and political charge. It does not stand up to scrutiny. We are prepared to move. We are prepared to sit down with Ryanair and discuss the provision of alternative hangar space in a way that is consistent with its requirements. We can sort this out if that is what people want. The idea that there is only one viable proposition is not correct.
It is nonsense.
There are ways we can make this viable, such as to ensure there is vacant possession of the hangar space that is required to take on 300 people, and more, with further work taking place at Dublin Airport. That option is on the table if people are prepared to work through that issue commercially. The way one would get around the question of a particular hangar being required for whatever reason, even though there is not vacant possession of that hangar and others have an interest there, is to provide an alternative hangar space. We will deal with the issue in a way that is consistent with the commerciality of the project.
There is not one big enough.
That is what we are prepared to do and that is what we want to do. We have been prepared to do that from the time the proposal came forward——
The Government did not even know SRT was leaving until months after the decision was made.
——as we have been able to pursue the Dublin Aerospace project to a successful conclusion, and in the same way that a line maintenance facility has been provided by Aer Lingus as well. Let us do the very same with this company, which would be in its interests and in the interests of the Dublin Airport Authority——
The Government gave away the hangar.
——and come forward with a viable alternative, rather than having a row about something that cannot be simply resolved overnight.