The last capital injection in the air companies was made in 1969 under the Air Companies (Amendment) Act, 1969 when an injection of £15 million was made then to assist the financing of their capital programme at that time. Since then the capital structure of the air companies has been considerably altered. Capital expenditure on new aircraft and other assets has continued year by year while over the same period severe losses on revenue accounts have been incurred. These losses in the period from 1970 to 1977 amounted to £7.7 million or £14.4 million when provision is made for foreign currency losses and extraordinary items. The result is that at 31 March last the shareholders' equity in the companies amounted to £20 million and loan capital stood at £46 million. The equity injection of £15 million now proposed will restore the gearing between equity and borrowing to a more normal ratio and bring it into line with competitor airlines.
The years ahead will require a vast expenditure on new equipment. Because of the age of many of the aircraft in the present fleet and international noise requirements, it will be necessary to replace much of the fleet, while it will also be necessary to expand it to meet growing traffic. The companies estimate their capital requirements over the next decade at £250 million at present prices. It is necessary to put the companies on a sufficiently sound basis now to enable them to improve the present profitable trend and build up the necessary reserves to meet this expenditure.
This equity injection and the increased profitability and confidence it will generate are very necessary to enable the companies to plan for future developments and expansion to meet the needs of our growing economy. These plans indicate the generation of a very substantial increase in the number of visitors to Ireland with a consequent creation of a substantial number of jobs in the tourist industry and upwards of 1,000 new jobs in the airline itself. A reasonable capital structure is vital for the proper development of the airline to meet these future challenges.
In the context of this Bill it is appropriate that I should speak about the performance and prospects of the airline. Senators are fully aware of how difficult a period the seventies were for all airlines, especially on the north Atlantic routes. The main reasons for this adversity were the worldwide recession which caused a downturn in tourism and in travel generally, the sharp increase in oil prices, the steep rate of inflation, the disruptive effect of currency fluctuations, severe competition from charters, and the general over-capacity on the north Atlantic which led to an unremunerative fare structure.
Additionally, in our case, the violence in the North had an adverse effect on our trouist traffic. As I have indicated, the losses of the air companies totalled £14.4 million in the period from 1970 to 1977 including foreign currency losses. The turn around came in 1976-77 when a modest profit of £117,000 was made and the position improved significantly in 1977-78 when a net profit of £4.6 million was earned. This is a very welcome development but this level of profit is quite modest when viewed in proper perspective. On the gross turnover of the air companies of £160 million this profit represents a margin of only 3 per cent. In other words if there should be a downturn of as little as 3 per cent in the present bouyant level of the companies' activities the profit would disappear. I have already indicated that capital requirements over the next decade will be of the order of £250 million. For these reasons a greatly increased level of profits is required in the years ahead.
A further point I should stress is that the profits earned by the companies last year largely came from ancillary activities especially those closely related to aviation. The ancillary activities proved very successful and profitable but continued heavy losses, though reduced, were incurred on north Atlantic operations while the short haul European network, inluding cross-Channel, was marginally profitable. The ancillary activities are proving their worth in underpinning the air transport operations; they are providing a high level of skilled employment and earning substantial foreign exchange for the benefit of the national economy. Indeed, without these activities it would be difficult for the air companies to generate sufficient earnings from their air transport operation alone to promote an adequate reserve for the heavy investment which will be needed for fleet additions and replacements in the future.
It is proper in this context that I should mention the question of the level of air fares. A scheduled airline must provide a regular all-the-year round service taking the rough with the smooth to meet the on-demand needs of the business community and regular travellers. It must maintain a widespread sales network and, especially in our case, incur heavy expenditure on promotion of tourist traffic. A schedule airline cannot just cater for the peak traffic when full loads are guaranteed and cost their operations and fix their fare levels accordingly. This would be creaming the top of the market and while there are carriers who seek to engage in this activity it would be entirely inappropriate for a publicly owned national airline with obligations to the community as a whole. In this respect the north Atlantic is a source of continuing worry.
The airline is still suffering heavy, though reduced, losses on the Atlantic due to the very uneconomic fares now obtaining in that theatre. It is difficult to see an early improvement in the economics of transatlantic services because of the strong and rapid trends towards the dismantling of the regulatory framework and towards uncontrolled competition. Fair competition can, of course, help to stimulate the market and promote efficiency but the airline industry, because of its capital intensity, seasonal and cyclical nature and its public service obligations, cannot operate economically in conditions of uncontrolled and excessive competition.
Because of the present intention on the part of the US authorities to deregulate air transport, and the fragmentation of policy among western European states, I can at present see only a continuing price war on the north Atlantic. It is to be hoped that there will be a return to a more rational regulatory framework before too long within which the airlines can compete fairly, provide an adequate and reasonably priced service for the travelling public and earn moderate returns. This can be done only by international action. There is little that a small state such as ours can do on its own. We will, nevertheless, continue to do our utmost to secure a return to a more sensible regulation of the market.
Encouraged no doubt by what has happened on the north Atlantic a demand is at present being widely made for a reduction of fares on the European network, particularly cross-Channel. I know that Aer Lingus are conscious of the need to keep fares at the lowest possible level consistent with providing an efficient and viable service. It must be borne in mind, however, that the Aer Lingus short-haul operations are only marginally profitable. All applications for fares adjustments are examined in detail by me and I am concerned in considering proposed increases to ensure that the essential balance is kept between the natural demands of the travelling public and the need to meet continually rising airline costs.
Aer Lingus must operate commercially and must generate profits if it is to face future expansion plans with confidence. The company also has an obligation to provide a fare structure which will help to stimulate tourism; this it does by offering a range of special fares including excursion and advance booking fares as well as reduced fares for families, all designed to cater for the price-conscious traveller. As Minister responsible for both aviation and tourism I am particularly anxious that services, including fares, offered by Aer Lingus do not act as a disincentive to tourism growth. I am satisfied that at present this is not the case but I will continue to keep fare levels under review so that the air traveller may have the benefit of the lowest possible fares consistent with the economics of the airline and the development of tourism.
Perhaps I have dwelt at too great a length on the problems which arise in the aviation industry. By and large it must be seen as a young but very vigorous industry and one in which, notwithstanding temporary fluctuations, continued growth is assured. Its importance to a small island community, such as ours, cannot be overstressed. It plays an important role in the servicing of our industry, trade and tourism and, indeed, has provided important developments in our economy. Our national airline plays an important role in our national development. It provides an important part of the national infrastructure vital to the development of our trade and industry in general and tourism in particular. Its primary task of providing a wide network of air services is done efficiently and safely.
Its work on behalf of other airlines, which earned revenue of about £23 million last year, is proof in itself of the airline's efficiency and good international standing. Other measures of the airline's contribution to the economy include an expenditure of £7 million on tourist promotion, the provision of high grade employment for 6,000 people and a contribution of £60 million in foreign exchange earned abroad. Our national airline has truly served us well in the past and the additional equity capital now proposed will provide a reasonable capital structure for it to continue to do so in the future.
I commend this Bill to the House.