Skip to main content
Normal View

Select Committee on Enterprise and Economic Strategy debate -
Tuesday, 13 Jul 1993

SECTION 7.

Amendments Nos. 9, 38, 39 and 40 are related. Is it agreed to discuss them together? Agreed.

I move amendment No. 9:

In page 12, subsection (1), between lines 36 and 37, to insert the following:

"(b) requiring the company—

(i) to give a direction—

(I) under paragraph (h) of section 60 (1) in relation to a specified area,

(II) under subparagraph (I) of paragraph (i) of section 60 (1) in relation to specified restrictions on the flight of aircraft in a specified area of air space, or

(III) under subparagraph II of the said paragraph (i) in relation to a specified area of airspace,

or

(ii) to revoke or amend a direction given by the company under section 60 (1) pursuant to a direction of the Minister under this subsection.".

Section 7 deals with the Minister's powers to give directions to the company. The purpose of the proposed amendment is to provide that the Minister may direct the company to make a direction declaring an area of air space to be a prohibited, restricted or danger area. The company may on its account make orders declaring prohibited, restricted or danger areas to ensure aviation safety. It might find it appropriate to prohibit or restrict the flight of aircraft in a particular area because the safety of aircraft there could not be assured, for instance, because of the difficulty of radio communication with that area or because of activities such as artillery practice. Similarly, the Minister or the Government may wish to prohibit or restrict aircraft activities in certain areas for reasons other than aviation safety. An obvious example would be the case of helicopters flying over prisons, any aircraft flying low over military installations or for other security reasons.

This amendment will ensure that the Minister, whether on his own account or at the request of the Government or other Ministers, may direct the company to prohibit or restrict such flights. If an aircraft flies into a prohibited or restricted area in contravention of an order the Defence Forces may intercept it and oblige it to land.

In regard to amendments Nos. 38 to 40, this subsection relates to the company's powers to establish restricted or danger areas. The purpose of these amendments is to clarify that it is air space to which the restriction or the danger applies.

I do not have much problem with the section but it contains a couple of curiosities. First, the Minister is empowered to give directions in writing to the new company under certain circumstances. In effect, that is what the section does. As I understand it, all the expertise on those matters is within ANSO which works directly to the Minister. On vestng day the 589 staff of ANSO will become the staff of the Irish Aviation Authority. From where will the Minister get his expert advice in the Department if all the experts are transferred the new company?

Subsection (2) states:

If the company considers that compliance by it with a direction under subsection (1) would adversely affect the safety of aircraft, it shall so inform the Minister.

There is a mechanism for the Irish Aviation Authority to object to a direction given by the Minister, but there is no mechanism for adjudicating between the Authority and the Minister. Therefore, first, the Minister will be deprived of all independent expertise once the Irish Aviation Authority is set up an, secondly, in circumstances where a conflict is envisaged no adjudicating process is provided for.

We do not propose to lose the expert advice available from ANSO at present. Some of the expert staff in ANSO will be retained by the Minister so that there will be consistency and a continuation of the expert advice available to the Minister and between the Minister and the Authority.

That is not what the Bill states. The Bill states that all employees of ANSO on vesting day will become employees of the Irish Aviation Authority.

Initially some ANSO staff will be retained.

Which section empowers the Minister to do that?

Section 40, which states:

Every person who is on the day immediately before the vesting day a member of the staff of the Air Navigation Services Office of the Department of Transport, Energy and Communications and is designated by the Minister for employment by the company shall, on the vesting day, be transferred to and become a member of the staff of the company.

I presume a number of other Acts give certain powers to Ministers pertaining to civil servants, employment regulations and so on.

What the Minister is saying is that if people are not designated they will not be automatically——

That is right.

In that case one gap is being closed but a bigger one, the industrial relations gap is being opened. The fear among many employees is that the Minsiter will retain the right to pick and choose, to designate some and not others. If the Minister can designate experts for his own good reasons he can also refuse to designate people who do not get up early in the morning.

That would be a very technical matter. A number of staff in Departments have been seconded from various authorities and the Irish Aviation Authority will be in a position to second expert staff to the Minister at any time.

That is not what is provided for in the Bill. The section the Minister has read out makes it clear that it is up to the Minister to decide who to designate. Deputy Noonan's question is a very interesting one. How will the Minister decide who will be designated? Will the decision be made on the basis of some qualification or expertise, or the colour of the person's eyes, where they are from or whether they are good football players? There is no criterion laid down to guide the Minister on whom he shall designate.

From reflection of the matter, in the provision of public services and management thereof staff may be required to fulfil certain duties in the interests of the proper management and professional discharge of State services. In this case the Minister may designate all the staff of ANSO to the Authority. ANSO, in turn, may second staff back to the Minister and the new Authority will have power to recruit staff to replace them. There can be no difficulty with that. It does not have to be laid down in the Bill.

Nobody knows whether they are coming or going.

Most people have a good idea where they are going.

Much depends on the whim of the Minister.

It is not at the whim of the Minister. The Minister will act with the utmost responsibility. If necessary he will take advice from the management of ANSO and he will make a final decision based on that advice. There will be a cadre of experts available to the Minister to advise him on aviation matters.

We will agree to the section but we will seek to tease out the issues later, particularly section 40, with a view to getting more detailed answers.

I will certainly clarify the issue on Report Stage because I do not want any doubt or ambiguity about any matter.

I gather from the Minister's presentation of the amendment that his reflection on this matter — mature or not — includes consideration that there should be a means of enforcing orders to aircraft that do not act in compliance with the terms of the Bill. The Minister said that in the event that an aircraft acts in a way that is in conflict with the requirements we will be entitled to pursue that aircraft and oblige it to land. On the basis of the equipment now available to the Air Corps — I am not quite sure how to put this question — and in the event that somebody is travelling eastward or westward from Baldonnel, what kind of commercial aircraft would the Air Corps be able to pursue, overtake and oblige to land? There are different ways of intercepting aircraft, depending on the direction in which it is travelling. If one is in front of an aircraft it is not too difficult to intercept it and if it is to one side, it is also fairly simple to calculate the intercepting course. However, if one is behind the aircraft and has to chase it and if that aircraft can travel faster there is no chance of catching up with it. Most commercial jet aircraft can travel faster than the Marchettis and Fougas Magisters used by the Air Corps. My understanding is that to the extent that they have an offensive capacity those aircraft are equipped for ground attack, not to fire threatening shots across the bows of aircraft in the air. Is there any real capacity to intercept and oblige offending aircraft to land, or is this provision just a bit of puff?

The Deputy asked a very interesting question. However, this is really a matter for the Minister for Defence who is responsible for military aircraft. If the Deputy wishes to take up the matter with him he may do so, or if he wishes me to refer it to him I have no difficulty in doing so.

Surely the Minister, who is proposing this legislation and seriously telling us that the legislation gives us the right and indeed the duty to take action under the terms of international conventions, when told we may not be able to enforce this legislation, is not entitled to say: "It is not my problem, it is somebody else's problem". We could save ourselves the bother of talking about the matter in that case.

What Deputy Dukes is suggesting is that aircraft should be permanently available for this purpose, but this is a very irregular occurrence. Most aircraft in the sky conform rigidly and adhere absolutely to international civil aviation rules. In the event of failure to do so I presume we would have reasonable knowledge of the position, would have anticipated what might happen and would have taken the relevant action to ensure the proper resources were in position to enforce this provision.

What does that mean?

The Minister has responded to Deputy Dukes and we should move on.

This section requires the company to give a direction in relation to specific restrictions on the flight of aircraft in a specified area of airspace. Will the Minister address the position regarding the use of light aircraft for training purposes, aircraft which would operate from an airport but which would use the airspace adjacent to a built-up area? There is much concern about this matter in my area in north County Dublin and complaints have been made about light aircraft flying over built-up areas. What controls are set out in this Bill to restrict such movement?

I thought we dealt with that matter earlier but I will respond briefly. Light aircraft must conform to the rules of the air and any complaints pertaining to a matter such as this would be investigated in the normal manner.

By ANSO at present and by the new authority in the future.

The Labour Party seems to be a little late on all issues lately.

These questions were answered under an earlier section

They are referred to in this section.

The section deals with the giving of directions to the company by the Minister. Obviously if a complaint is made to ANSO which warrants a recommendation to declare a particular area prohibited or a restricted or danger area, in the same way in future the Irish Aviation Authority may make a similar recommendation. This provision is included specifically for that purpose. Any complaints will be investigated.

I thank the Minister for clarifying the position.

Amendment agreed to.
Section 7, as amended, agreed to.
Sections 8 to 10, inclusive, agreed to.
Top
Share