On a point of order, why is this Minister of State taking the Bill in the House as this is a Department of Transport Bill?
Air Navigation (Eurocontrol) Bill 2005 [Seanad]: Second Stage.
It would not be unusual for me to take a Bill when the Minister for Transport is unavailable.
The Minister of State who was sacked took the Bill in the Seanad.
I presume the Deputies are anxious to proceed with the Bill.
Might this be an indication that the Minister of State has been moved to the Department of Transport?
I would not presume anything.
I invite the Minister of State to proceed.
I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
The main purpose of this Bill is to give effect to the international convention relating to co-operation for the safety of air navigation signed at Brussels on 13 December 1960, as consolidated by the protocol signed at Brussels on 27 June 1997.
Eurocontrol, the European organisation for the safety of air navigation, was established by an international convention in 1960. The provisions of the 1960 convention were given effect in the Air Navigation (Eurocontrol) Act 1963. The formal accession of Ireland to the Eurocontrol organisation came into force on 1 January 1965. Membership of the organisation has continued to grow and has now reached 35 states, including all EU member states except Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. The accession of the European Community to Eurocontrol took place on 8 October 2002.
Eurocontrol has, as its primary objective, the development of a seamless, pan-European air traffic management system. The achievement of this objective is a key element to the present and future challenges facing the aviation community, which are to cope with the forecast growth in air traffic, while maintaining a high level of safety, reducing costs and respecting the environment.
Eurocontrol develops, co-ordinates and plans for implementation of short, medium and long-term pan-European air traffic management strategies and their associated action plans on a collaborative basis. It is a collective effort involving national authorities, air navigation service providers, civil and military airspace users, airports, industry, professional organisations and relevant European institutions.
Since the 1960 convention a number of protocols have been adopted. Two of these dealt with tax provisions while the third protocol of 12 February 1981 was on a multilateral agreement on route charges. This provided for a common policy and joint system for the establishment and collection by Eurocontrol, on behalf of the contracting parties, of en route air traffic control charges in European airspace covered by the agreement.
The provisions of the convention and its subsequent protocols were given effect in Irish legislation by the Air Navigation (Eurocontrol) Acts 1963 to 1983. These Acts were subsequently repealed and the provisions of the convention and subsequent protocols given effect in the Irish Aviation Authority Act 1993. The Irish Aviation Authority is required under the latter Act to implement specific provisions of the Eurocontrol convention.
A revised Eurocontrol convention was concluded following several years in negotiation. The changes represent a major revision of the convention and are designed to update the convention to take into account progress made in the area of air navigation services. The final Act to the convention and the protocols amending and consolidating the text of the Eurocontrol International Convention were signed by Ireland, subject to ratification, on 27 June 1997. The revised convention will come fully into force when it is ratified by all member states. To date, 26 of the 35 member states have ratified the revised convention.
The amendments are designed in particular to strengthen the co-operation between contracting parties via joint activities in the field of air navigation. I must emphasise that these objectives do not prejudice the principle that every State has complete and exclusive sovereignty over the airspace above its territory, nor the capacity of every State to exercise its prerogatives with regard to security and defence in its national airspace.
The main provisions of the revised convention include an updating of the objectives of the organisation, commensurate with its current and possible future activities; a new institutional structure for formulating and implementing the organisation's policy; an expansion of the tasks of the organisation to achieve a European air traffic management system; more effective decision-making based on majority voting; and an enabling provision for European Community membership of Eurocontrol.
At about the same time as the revised convention was signed in June 1997, EU member states agreed in principle to Community membership of Eurocontrol, facilitated by the new article 40 of the convention, as the most appropriate way for the Community to exercise its competence in air traffic management. Negotiations between the European Commission and Eurocontrol subsequently resulted in the text of an agreed accession protocol in 2002.
Signature of the accession protocol took place at a diplomatic conference held on 8 October 2002. The accession of the European Community to Eurocontrol was the culmination of negotiations aimed at ensuring consistency between the two organisations as they work together to develop the European air traffic management system. This move was followed by the conclusion of a memorandum of co-operation between both organisations in December 2003, establishing a framework for mutual co-operation and support in five areas. These were: the implementation of the single European sky, research and development, data collection and analysis in the areas of air traffic and environmental statistics, satellite navigation, and international co-operation in the field of aviation.
In this context, it is important to explain what is meant by the single European sky. The European Communities' single sky and the revised Eurocontrol convention are deeply interlinked initiatives designed to tackle structural inefficiencies in European air traffic management. The approach represents in many respects a marriage of the technical expertise of Eurocontrol with the political and legal wherewithal of the Community.
In the late 1990s, the sharp rise in European air traffic led to substantial air traffic control delays. These delays prompted the European Commission to launch its own initiative with the issuance in December 1999 of its communication entitled "The creation of the single European sky". Significant progress has been made on the move towards implementing the single European sky policy, which attempts to reform the current air traffic management system.
Air traffic management in Europe, with 73 air traffic control centres operating in the pan-European airspace, is fragmented and is facing capacity constraints in the future. An estimated 350,000 flight hours a year are wasted due to inefficient air traffic management and airport delays.
The European Commission has proposed a regulatory approach in the area of air traffic management with the objective of achieving a harmonised approach to safety in air traffic management, ATM, the regulation of air traffic services, technical inter-operability of systems and airspace design and management at a European level.
A key element of the institutional arrangements is the single sky committee which provides a mechanism for collaboration between member states' civil and military authorities on airspace allocation and use. The single sky policy is the best means of overcoming the current institutional and structural problems that exist in the European ATM system. It offers an effective process for securing the compliance of states with agreed system improvements.
The single European sky initiative marks the beginning of what I consider to be a new, dramatic and exciting chapter in European air traffic control. The development of the single sky proposals is both a challenge and an opportunity for air navigation service providers to demonstrate in a practical way the greater efficiencies that can be obtained through the integration and development of services on a European scale while ensuring uniformly high safety standards throughout Europe.
A single sky committee chaired by the European Commission will oversee the preparation of implementing measures to establish the appropriate regulatory framework. These proposals envisage Eurocontrol acting as the technical adviser to the single sky committee and playing a significant role in defining and developing rules in accordance with mandates given by the Community.
The commission sees Eurocontrol reflecting the single sky rules across its membership and, therefore, achieving some of the single sky objectives in the wider European sphere. At the same time, the intention is that the single sky committee would adopt Eurocontrol's own rules when these were considered appropriate. In this way, the synergies between both organisations can be developed.
The single sky legislation has implications for the organisation and management of air traffic control services in Ireland. It will require changes to the Irish Aviation Authority as service provider and regulatory authority for air navigation services. These developments and other evolving policies at international level, give rise to the need for a critical examination of the structure and functions of the Irish Aviation Authority with a view to ensuring continuation of the highest safety standards, maximising organisational and operational efficiency, and ensuring alignment with international and European air navigation and safety policies.
The single European sky regulations require that all air navigation service providers be certified. Certification encompasses the following areas: air traffic services, ATS; meteorological services for air navigation, MET; aeronautical information services, AIS; and communications, navigation and surveillance services, CNS.
Common requirements for the certification of air navigation service providers, when adopted, will cover a range of criteria, including technical and operational ones. Air navigation service providers will also be required to demonstrate suitability in the areas of ownership and organisational structure, as well as human resources, including adequate staffing plans and security.
These criteria provide the foundation for national supervisory authorities to certify service providers. Only validly certified air navigation service providers can then be designated to provide air traffic services on an exclusive basis within specified, constituent airspace blocks of the national airspace. The safety regulation division, SRD, of the IAA has been nominated as Ireland's interim national supervisory authority.
While Eurocontrol was previously almost exclusively concerned with air traffic management activities for the en route segment, the revised convention has considerably extended the scope of its activities to include the entire spectrum of air traffic services.
The changes enable: the introduction of independent performance review and target setting; improvements to safety regulation; strengthened policy and planning for the airport/air traffic system interface as part of the "gate-to-gate" concept; improved airspace design processes; improved standards making; the provision for common design and procurement of systems; enhanced research, development, trials and evaluation, and more effective introduction of new technology; enhanced user consultation/ involvement; and enhanced global co-operation and influence.
With the growth in air traffic and the expansion in membership it was recognised that the previously unanimous decision-making structure was unwieldy. Under the revised convention most decisions can be taken by a majority vote. The revised convention will enable Eurocontrol to pass binding decisions on contracting parties in the fields of air safety, which is seen as a significant step in the right direction towards a more harmonised, safer European air traffic management system.
Even though the revised convention will not come into force until all contracting parties have individually ratified it, the contracting parties agreed to implement certain provisions of the revised convention early. These have included: (i) expansion of the scope of the organisation's activities; (ii) establishment of the provisional council and advisory bodies to it, including the performance review commission and the safety regulation commission; and (iii) delegation of broader executive powers to the Eurocontrol agency and its director general for the day-to-day running of the organisation. These important developments have enabled Eurocontrol to function more effectively.
The European Commission sees Eurocontrol reflecting the single sky rules across its membership and, therefore, achieving some of the single sky objectives in the wider European sphere. At the same time, the intention is that the single sky committee would adopt Eurocontrol's own rules when these were considered appropriate. In this way, the synergies between the two organisations can be developed. Eurocontrol can play an important role in bridging the gap between EU states under the new air traffic management, ATM, regulatory structure being devised under single sky, and the non-EU contracting parties and will also continue to act as the main technical support body for Europe's air traffic management industry.
The Bill amends the Irish Aviation Authority Act 1993 and also makes provision for related matters. Specifically, the Bill reflects changes in the management structure of Eurocontrol and provides for the making of regulations requiring the Irish Aviation Authority to comply with any conditions laid down for the operation of a common European air traffic flow management system at a common international centre. Eurocontrol already operates such a centre, the central flow management unit based in Brussels, which has worked well with national air traffic service providers over a number of years. Furthermore, the Bill provides that Eurocontrol officers may give evidence in Irish courts and also provides for such officers to carry out on-the-spot inspections.
Government policy on air navigation services is designed to ensure that Irish controlled airspace is operated safely with maximum efficiency and effectiveness and that the highest internationally set and agreed safety standards are applied to the operations of Irish airspace and those using it. This policy is based on standards that are set internationally, mainly through the International Civil Aviation Organisation, ICAO, Convention to which Ireland is a signatory. Effect is given to this policy through the Air Navigation and Transport Acts and the Irish Aviation Authority Act 1993. Both Government policy and the development of these standards are designed to ensure continuing acceptable passenger and aircraft safety levels.
Having regard to the largely executive nature of air navigation and safety regulatory functions, the requirement to ensure that these remain responsive to market needs and the desirability of capitalising on its potential for additional commercial and employment opportunities, the Government assigned these functions to the Irish Aviation Authority in 1994. The authority has responsibility for regulating the technical and safety aspects of civil aviation and for the provision of air traffic standards. In its regulatory capacity it oversees the safety standards in the operation, maintenance and airworthiness of Irish registered aircraft, Irish air navigation services, Irish airlines and aircraft maintenance organisations, the competency of Irish pilots and aircraft maintenance engineers and the operation of Irish aerodromes. In fulfilling its role, the IAA operates to international safety standards and procedures as laid down by the International Civil Aviation Organisation, the European Joint Aviation Authorities, Eurocontrol, which is the European organisation for the safety of air navigation, the European Civil Aviation Conference and the European Union.
During the debate on this Bill in the Seanad, a number of amendments were proposed to address concerns raised by some aircraft leasing companies on the issue of detention and sale of aircraft for unpaid debts. Articles 5 to 9 of Annex IV to the revised convention refer to the issues of attaching the en route charge as a lien on the aircraft, making the operator and owner jointly and severally liable and detention and sale of aircraft to enforce recovery. These provisions are not included in the published Bill. Under the convention, Ireland is under no compulsion to legislate for creation of liens or joint and several liability. Rather it is at the discretion of each contracting party to introduce domestic law to implement this element of the convention. I therefore assure Deputies that the passage of this Bill in its current form will not increase our current powers relating to detention and sale of aircraft for unpaid charges. These provisions have been in place since 1988.
The leasing companies have also voiced concerns about the powers contained in earlier Acts dating from 1988 and they have asked that they be modified in the Air Navigation (Eurocontrol) Bill 2005. As a result, the Minister consulted the Office of the Attorney General and other interested parties, namely, the Irish Aviation Authority, the Dublin Airport Authority and Eurocontrol. All argued against the removal or dilution of the existing powers of detention and sale. Following consideration of all the views expressed on both sides, it has been decided not to make any changes to the existing powers at this point.
A number of technical amendments to the Aviation Regulation Act 2001 will be tabled on Committee Stage. Included in these technical amendments will be a provision to extend the timetable for the consideration of any appeals submitted to the Minister with regard to airport charges and aviation services charges determinations made by the Commission for Aviation Regulation. The existing timescales set in the legislation for the consideration of appeals by an appeal panel and by the commission, where issues are referred back to it by the panel for review, are relatively tight and the main aim of the amendments is to ensure that the various parties involved have sufficient time to give due consideration to any appeal.
Under the European Communities (Compensation and Assistance to Air Passengers)(Denied Boarding, Cancellation or Long Delay of Flights) Regulations 2005, SI 274 of 2005, the Commission for Aviation Regulation was appointed as the designated body for the purposes of implementing Regulation (EC) No. 261/2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of being denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights and repealing Regulation (EEC) No. 295/91. However, the European Communities Act only allows for summary convictions and associated penalties for infringements of the legislation. The Minister is taking this opportunity to re-cast the commission's role in primary legislation as this will allow it to pursue prosecutions on indictment in the event of serious breaches of the legislation.
I now turn to the main provisions of the Bill. Section 1 defines the Act of 1993 as the Irish Aviation Authority Act 1993. Section 2 provides for miscellaneous amendments to the Act of 1993 reflecting the new and more streamlined organisational arrangements within Eurocontrol and updating the penalties contained in section 74 of the Act of 1993. Section 3 provides for amendment of Part III — Eurocontrol Convention — of the Act of 1993 to delete references to the statute of the agency and the multilateral agreement on route charges, which are incorporated into the new convention.
This section also empowers the Minister to make regulations for the purpose of giving effect to the common European air traffic flow management system at a common international centre, specified in Articles 2(e), 7.2(d) and 19 of the new convention, and ensuring compliance with that system by way of random checks and inspections and evidence in proceedings. Eurocontrol already operates such a centre, the central flow management unit based in Brussels, which has worked well with national air traffic service providers over a number of years.
Section 4 repeals section 67 of the Act of 1993 on the detention of aircraft. Section 67(a), (b) and (c) relates to the transfer of powers from the Minister to the Irish Aviation Authority set out in section 32 of the Air Navigation and Transport Act 1988. Section 32 was repealed by the Air Navigation and Transport Act 1998 so these subsections are already in fact redundant. Section 67(d) and (e) of the Act of 1993 comprises textual amendments to section 41 of the 1988 Act, which also relates to the transfer of powers from the Minister to the IAA. I am advised that the repeal of the entire section 67 of the Act of 1993 does not affect the status of section 41 of the 1988 Act as amended by section 67.
Section 5 is a standard provision in legislation providing for the Short Title. The Schedule to the Bill reproduces the text of the consolidated Eurocontrol convention. I commend the Bill to the House.
I thank the Minister of State. On behalf of Fine Gael, I welcome the introduction of this legislation, which asks us to ratify a European convention. We are late in the day to do so. I understand from the Minister of State that there is a certain urgency about it and Fine Gael will not delay the Bill's passage through the House.
This is one of those Bills in which the media has no interest and about which the public knows nothing. Nevertheless, the Eurocontrol organisation is vital to the operation of modern society and plays a key role in safety and the continuation of business, travel and so on. As such, this is important legislation.
While welcoming the Bill and the changes it makes, Fine Gael has some difficulties with the powers the Bill confers on Eurocontrol. It is a vital body in the regulation of air traffic across the Continent and I wish to record my regard for the work it does. Everyone appreciates its work in managing the system and ensuring the safety of every air traveller. As far as I am aware, the system is unique in the world and is a model for aeronautical and air traffic control co-operation.
As the European organisation for the safety of air navigation, Eurocontrol has been central to the successful development of a seamless pan-European air traffic management system. It is to be lauded and praised for the manner in which it has coped with the significant increase in the amount of air traffic in recent years. It delivers a wide range of services to the aviation community in the very broadest sense. It is no small task to co-ordinate the 35 national aviation authorities.
In addition to joint aviation authorities, those involved include hundreds of airports, airlines ranging in size from single aircraft to medium-sized airline companies such as Aer Lingus to enormous international characters such as Air France, KLM, Lufthansa and British Airways, private and military aircraft, the aeronautical industry, the European Aviation Safety Authority, NATO, the European Space Agency, the European Commission, the International Civil Aviation Authority and many more. For that work and the processing of the average 25,000 daily flights, I understand that Eurocontrol has more than 2,000 staff. To put that in perspective, it is on the scale of more than 9 million flights per year. Therefore, Eurocontrol's role and contribution is significant.
When this matter was discussed in the Seanad, a particular aspect of the convention that gives rise to concerns among the industry here was focused on. Irish operators take their responsibilities to Eurocontrol and the industry as a whole quite seriously. While I would like to praise our airlines and charter companies for their conscientiousness in dealing with Eurocontrol, there are carriers in Europe that take a less responsible view and are less conscientious, especially when it comes to the payment of dues to Eurocontrol for the use and management of the air traffic control system. As a result, there have been examples of airline companies that have refused to pay their fees to Eurocontrol to the tune of many millions of euro. I cite the example of an Italian airline that recently became insolvent, leaving Eurocontrol with an outstanding debt of €17 million.
People who do not pay their debts are unreliable and are the last type of people one would want involved in the aviation industry, running airlines and transporting passengers. They should be named and shamed. Where possible, airports should make it clear early on that they will not co-operate in future business with airlines defaulting on Eurocontrol bills and fees to airports.
However, some of the blame for the accumulation of very large debts must lie at the door of Eurocontrol itself. It must be vigilant and timely in its debt collection systems. We would not be sympathetic to any business that, having allowed large debts to accumulate, began to moan and seek draconian powers to improve its ability to collect when it did not make any efforts at an early stage. It inevitably increases the cost to all compliant users of the service around Europe. It would be grossly unfair for them to take up the cost of what has not been paid by defaulting airlines. Timely and efficient debt collection is important but particularly so within an international organisation.
When this Bill went through the Seanad, a number of my colleagues raised issues with the former Minister of State at the Department of Transport who said he would examine the matters before the Bill came to the Dáil or moved on to Committee Stage. Fine Gael's overall support for the Bill is predicated on the provision of a number of changes as a result of the Minister for Transport's consideration since it went through the Seanad. From what the Minister of State said this morning, it seems that some of those expressed concerns have not been addressed. I have not had time to examine his statement in detail. I am concerned about this matter. Amendments will be pressed on Committee Stage.
Section 4 of the Bill repeals section 67 of the Irish Aviation Authority Act 1993. This pertains to the detention of aircraft and extending this power to Eurocontrol. In repealing that section, it is not clear whether the power to detain aircraft is being removed altogether or this provision simply removes that power from Eurocontrol. If this is the case, the situation would not appear to be fair or even-handed and would be at variance with the thrust of the legislation. It would compound an existing problem. As I understand it, the purpose of the legislation is merely to transpose the convention into Irish law. Will the Minister reconsider the position on this matter and clarify it on Committee Stage?
Eurocontrol can and will be able to collect unpaid charges from those airlines that do not discharge their debts by creating a lien on the aircraft belonging to them. Fine Gael and many in the industry have a problem in that Eurocontrol can register those debts, not just against the defaulting airline but third parties who are in no way responsible for incurring the debts in the first place. This is where a third party is perhaps the owner of an aircraft but not the operator, is the owner of any part of the aircraft — it is quite common to have a separate owner for the engine — or has merely leased the aircraft to an airline. The defaulter is, in fact, the airline operator. In such a case, the owner of the aircraft, any part of the aircraft or the lessor of the aircraft has no role in incurring the charges in the first place. For example, if A leases an aircraft to airline B and airline B fails to pay the charges due to Eurocontrol, the agency can seize the aircraft of A to satisfy the debt of B. Eurocontrol can pursue A, which may not be the owner but has leased a small part of the aircraft from the owner.
This is against natural justice and should not be allowed to persist. To be even-handed, Fine Gael would not support a situation where this power would be available either to Eurocontrol or the national airports. It is not an appropriate power to give to anyone in pursuit of a debt.
Similarly, it seems that the Dublin Airport Authority and the other airports can ground aircraft where the airline has defaulted on landing charges to any Irish airport authority. Not only does this go beyond what is required of us in the convention, it goes well beyond powers given to airports in any other country and can only act to the detriment of Irish business by making Ireland a much less attractive venue for those financing, servicing or providing parts to aircraft.
As it stands, if this principle were to be enshrined further in Irish law, it would represent an inequitable legal burden on lessors and an inadequate responsibility on lessees and operators. Furthermore and probably more seriously, this Bill would create circumstances wherein there is no incentive for Eurocontrol to expeditiously collect moneys due to it as it will always have recourse elsewhere to institutions, bodies and companies that are more reliable than the defaulting operator against which it has a genuine case. If a company that owes money and has defaulted becomes insolvent, as is quite likely, Eurocontrol can turn with the greatest of ease to another corporation and pursue it in law even though it had no role in incurring the debt. This allows Eurocontrol to be inefficient in the collection of its dues and it is in nobody's interest that Eurocontrol should be given this additional avenue of debt collection that is not available to any other company in any sector. No one should be able to ground aircraft to cover the debts of others. It seems the Minister is rejecting these concerns and I ask him to reconsider. It would appear there is no need to give this additional debt collection power to Eurocontrol. It already has a significant success rate in collecting unpaid fees and it is not clear why it needs further assistance in this regard.
The most serious aspect is that it would put Ireland in a position where it would have gone further than any other country in providing Eurocontrol with powers to seize and to dispose of assets. As a result, the legislation would undermine any claims by Ireland that it supports the aerospace industry. Irish companies have fought hard to attract maintenance and repair business to the country. Making Ireland a country where aircraft are more likely to be grounded and held as a lien against the debts of others would make it extremely difficult to attract business into this country. Ireland would be an unpopular place to allow a company's aircraft to land and this is an unnecessary liability to Irish companies and is simply bad business for airlines as they would choose to avoid Irish airports wherever possible. The former Minister of State promised he would look at this issue when he steered the Bill through Committee Stage in Seanad Éireann and I ask the current Minister to reconsider before the debate on Committee Stage.
I wish to avoid tabling amendments in order to deal with this situation but I will have to do so if the concerns raised are not satisfied. These amendments are minor in the context of bringing this convention into Irish law and we will support this.
The Minister in his speech said:
The Bill amends the Irish Aviation Authority Act 1993 and also makes provision for related matters. Specifically, the Bill reflects changes in the management structure of Eurocontrol and provides for the making of regulations requiring the Irish Aviation Authority to comply with any conditions laid down for the operation of a common European air traffic flow management system at a common international centre.
I presume this refers to the single sky policy and the regulatory framework, which I support. I have difficulties with granting further responsibilities to the Irish Aviation Authority in view of concerns expressed recently, arising either from the recent reporting of a number of incidents or the growth of low cost airlines. Although the incidents were not recent they were recently reported together. Some concern was expressed in the industry and I believe the chairman of the Irish Airline Pilots Association was quoted in a recent article as stating that safety in Irish aviation is being eroded. This is an extreme statement and I have no way of knowing if he is correct. We must examine what concerns this association has. If the Irish Aviation Authority does not have the resources to deal with these problems, given the growth in flights to, from and over Ireland, perhaps the Minister should liaise with those in the industry who express these concerns. I make this point in respect of the Minister's point that the Bill "provides for the making of regulations requiring the Irish Aviation Authority to comply with any conditions". If we are asking the authority to comply with further conditions and undertake additional work, we must ensure it has the resources and technical expertise necessary to deal with the challenges that lie ahead. I do not wish to criticise the Irish Aviation Authority, which does a fantastic job.
I support this legislation and will support its passage through the House.
The Labour Party welcomes and supports the thrust of this Bill concerning the ratification of the Eurocontrol convention and the most recent protocols. The recent protocols are primarily concerned with increasing co-ordination of air traffic control in Europe, which we support. The Bill allows for Irish ratification, thereby updating the functions of Eurocontrol to achieve European air traffic management, revising its institutional structure and allowing greater majority voting. We support these measures and do not seek to slow passage of this Bill through the House. We note it will not take effect until all contracting parties have signed it.
Issues have been raised about this legislation, discussed in the Seanad and referred to by Deputy Olivia Mitchell. Opposition spokespersons and the Minister have had representations from various interests in the industry. To date, the concerns raised in correspondence have been referred to but not addressed.
Industries are concerned that the Bill does not delete existing regulatory provisions that are not applied elsewhere and because of that Irish industry is at a competitive disadvantage. The measures envisaged in the Bill have the potential to render Ireland less attractive as a place to bring aircraft. The maintenance and repair business is highly competitive and we accept that Ireland is a relatively high cost base from which to deliver these services. The proposed legislation would compound the industry's difficulties and draw business away from Ireland to other European jurisdictions who are less inclined to confer extraordinary collection powers on Eurocontrol. Many different interests in the industry hold the view that the legislation, if enacted, will make it easier for Eurocontrol to take action against its customers, putting Ireland in the position of going further than any other country in providing Eurocontrol with powers to seize and dispose of aircraft.
The legislation would undermine Ireland's claim to support the aerospace industry. As Eurocontrol is already highly successful in collecting unpaid fees the industry questions whether further assistance is needed from the State. The Labour Party believes genuine concerns are being expressed as the ratification of the convention does not require measures envisaged in the Bill, as was acknowledged in the Seanad. It is difficult to understand why the Minister wants to go further than other European countries. No adequate explanation has been given for this.
The Minister, the previous Minister and replies to various parliamentary questions suggested negotiations would be held with those who express concerns about the impact of this legislation on the industry. While some communication has taken place nothing has come of these discussions. The Minister has not explained this.
It is not solely leasing companies that have raised these issues. Airbus, Boeing, SR Technics, Royal Bank of Scotland and the Federation of Aerospace Enterprises in Ireland raised concerns with the Opposition and the Minister. They have followed the debate closely since it began in the Seanad. The reasons for changing the law have been outlined by the industry. The main problem is that those supporting the changes have been given no idea why the Irish Aviation Authority and the Dublin Airport Authority have argued against the removal or dilution of the existing powers.
In his opening comments, the Minister of State merely stated that having consulted both bodies, it was decided not to make any changes to the legislation. However, he did not explain the thinking of the IAA or the DAA regarding the matter and how the concerns expressed by the industry, which seem to be genuine, can be allayed. There is no justification for failing to address those issues. In summing up, the Minister of State might explain precisely what concerns the IAA and the DAA have regarding diluting the existing powers which are considered too draconian.
No argument can be made that aircraft engines and equipment should be immune from seizure and sale. For effective collection, an operator's aircraft should be liable to be detained and sold where the operator has not paid his or her charges. It seems to come down to who is being asked to bear the risk. The risk is seen to arise as a result of the lax credit control by Eurocontrol and Dublin Airport Authority. Both bodies have powers to sue airlines which do not pay to recover the debt with interest.
It is also important to bear in mind that regional airports, such as Kerry, Sligo, Knock and Galway, operate without the benefit of the 1998 Act statutory detention rights enjoyed by the three DAA airports. If such statutory detention rights are so beneficial to the three main State airports business, it seems the legislation also potentially creates an unjustified and uneven playing field for competition between all Irish airports. The point was made that Ireland would not be alone in making a declaration or reservation when ratifying the 1997 protocol. I understand Spain decided to ratify with reservations and had no difficulties in doing so from a procedural view.
Those in the industry, which has been successful, point out they do not always operate from the most competitive cost base. Extremely large numbers of people are employed in the industry here. In fairness to them, they deserve a clear explanation from the Minister why they are expected to compete in an uneven environment where they operate under much stricter controls than their competitors. They should also be told the precise concerns of the Minister, the IAA and the DAA in respect of removing those existing tight controls. Eurocontrol is seeking a belt and braces approach to credit control. The Bill goes much further than the other European states with which our industry competes. I ask the Minister for clarification. In the absence of clarification I reserve my right to table amendments on Committee Stage.
I wish to share time with Deputy Boyle.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
There is no doubt about the need for a co-ordinated approach on this matter, especially given the growth in aircraft movement throughout Europe. In Ireland we can see the growth in aircraft numbers. The perception is that the Bill concerns large aircraft. The growth in the number of smaller aircraft is equally significant, if not more so. Increasingly, people use helicopters to move around while small aircraft are used for hobby purposes and to move between smaller airfields and aerodromes. We must consider those issues when considering the Bill.
When discussing aircraft safety, people consider legislation requirements from the point of view of passengers and those working on aircraft. However, another group of people, made up of those who live under flight paths, is also keenly aware of the need for safety. It is equally important when examining legislation that we consider the issues from that perspective. In that context, I will focus on the Irish Aviation Authority.
I live quite close to a growing aerodrome, Weston Aerodrome, and owing to some of the significant problems which have arisen I have become conscious of some shortcomings in the regulations. Weston Aerodrome cohabits the airspace with Casement Aerodrome and a flight path from Dublin Airport also goes over it which means there is a great deal of movement. Keeping planes apart in the air is even more difficult when one considers that much of the airspace around it is unregulated. A person can literally get into his or her plane, set off from south Kildare and land at Weston without being required to record the flight. They simply make arrangements to land at the aerodrome.
At least four Departments and two local authorities are involved, as is the Irish Aviation Authority. I am concerned about the lack of co-ordination between them. I am also concerned that the expanded role of the Irish Aviation Authority means that functions are merely tacked on rather than having a comprehensive organisation dealing with all aspects. The authority states its primary function is to keep planes apart in the air as though what happens when they land and the planning required on where they land is a disconnected function.
The Chicago Convention tends to be used in terms of safety standards and is the internationally recognised convention. Some countries have regulated upwards from that. For congested areas, the UK regulates above what is required by the Chicago Convention. We must examine that when considering safety, particularly regarding smaller airfields and aerodromes. Public consultation does not take place if an airfield or aerodrome seeks a change in its licence. In a current case, the Air Corps, the owner of Weston Aerodrome and the Irish Aviation Authority are discussing a change in licence that would potentially mean a move from visual to instrument control. Essentially that will mean a larger piece of airstrip will be used. If one uses a larger airstrip, one moves from a small, two-seater to six-seater aircraft up to a 50-seater one. That is significant yet the public is treated as a disinterested party and the local authorities are not even consulted. That is no way to regulate. If one looks at this legislation in a pan-European context, one must also look at getting our house in order. A root and branch examination of the role and function of the Irish Aviation Authority and how it relates to the local authorities and Department is needed.
I apologise for the absence of our spokesperson on transport, Deputy Eamon Ryan, who must attend the Select Committee on Communications, Marine and Natural Resources. I admit to being somewhat bemused when legislation is presented by the Department of Transport as a priority. Although the last revision of the convention was in 1997 and Ireland signed it, nine years later we are being asked to ratify this document. The question is, why now?
The last aviation legislation before the House related to the Government underwriting liability in the event of dirty bombs. That legislation was rushed through and all Stages were taken on one day. It seems that legislation has not been replicated in other EU countries and that it has not even been applied. One must ask why we were presented with that legislation and whether we should give this Bill equally serious consideration given that type of track record by the Department and the Minister concerned.
That said, there is little in this Bill to oppose. However, it offers the opportunity to debate where we stand on air traffic control and the common responsibilities we have as regards our European neighbours. While the organisation and the convention are centred around civil aviation, I would like to think this debate offers us an opportunity to talk about other air traffic control issues which we, as a nation, seem to be blurring — that is, civil and military aviation — and how membership of this organisation and this convention could be used to bring clarity to those grey areas in the future.
The increasing number of military aircraft landing at Shannon Airport is a matter of great concern to people and the seeming indifference of the Government to those landings, whether involving troop movements or, more insidiously, the transportation of people for torture. That is something which should be subject to international agreement and for which the Government should be responsible. On those grounds, questions on landings at Shannon Airport, as recorded by air traffic control and as reported by US aviation officials, would benefit from clarification by a European body because we do not seem to be getting the correct figures. Perhaps when concluding, the Minister might use the opportunity to explain why there are varying figures with what seem to be phantom flights in and out of this country.
The central aspect of this Bill concerns membership of Eurocontrol by the European Community. I am at a bit of a loss as to why this is considered necessary because outside of Poland and the three Baltic countries, all other members of the European Union are members of this body in their own right. This issue needs explanation. Of the 34 countries, 22 are required to ratify this. I missed the Second Stage contribution of the Minister of State at the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources and I do not know whether he clarified this. However, if 22 countries are required to ratify this protocol to the convention, is Ireland the twenty second country? At what stage is ratification when this House passes the Bill?
That brings me back to my original point about the type of legislation presented to the House by the Department of Transport, the background information and the seriousness attached to it. On the question of seriousness, this is a Department of Transport Bill, Second Stage of which was introduced by a Minister of State at another Department and which is likely to be concluded by a Minister of State from yet another Department. I seriously question whether the Government is treating this legislation with any degree of seriousness. The Government seems to be saying this is matter of fact legislation that happens to be in the Department of Transport which seems to care little about whether or how legislation goes through this House. That is a matter of concern for those on this side of the House.
This Second Stage debate also gives us an opportunity to discuss European air traffic control and recent incidents, particularly involving Ryanair, and runway mishaps which might be indicative of the relentlessness of low cost airlines, the competition in that sector of the airline industry and of the particular pressures on air traffic control. This can only be tackled at a European level. There has been silence from the Government and from the Department of and the Minister for Transport in expressing concern about the incidents. The Minister for Transport should make statements about these incidents assuring people that proper measures will be taken in respect of air safety, as he seems to be doing belatedly on road safety.
The public has had confidence in air safety. The number of people injured or killed as a result of air travel is far less than for other modes of transport. When we see reportage of and an increase in such incidents, the Government has a responsibility to comment on them, offer reassurance, state the legislation in place and what enforcement mechanisms are being used. If there is a deficiency in any of those areas, it should move to fill in those gaps. The silence of the Government on many of these issues indicates a degree of indifference on this matter.
I refer to statements made in the Seanad on Tuesday night on the future of Cork Airport and its new terminal which has much to do with air traffic control and the number of passengers who will and will not be able to use that facility into the future. The Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Killeen, said the expectation was that the debt of the new terminal building in Cork Airport was to be met by the new company replacing what was Aer Rianta, the Dublin Airport Authority, but that it would not now be met. At best, it seems at least half the debt will be met by the new Cork Airport Authority. If that is the case, the Government has engaged in a huge deceit of people in the Cork region and it needs to explain itself.
I find it particularly incredulous that the excuse used by the Minister of State was that in forming this new company which is, in effect, the Dublin Airport Authority and which has responsibility as of now for Cork and Shannon, there is a fiduciary duty of care on the directors of that new company that they cannot enter into an agreement to underwrite a loan of €180 million on behalf of Cork Airport.
However, this was the very commitment given by the Minister for Transport in this House to elected representatives of the Cork region on behalf of the people of Cork, regarding a specific political promise that their expectations would be met. If there has been a slithering away from that commitment and promise, it is of a piece with the seriousness with which I have witnessed the Department and Minister of Transport deal with many transport issues and with aviation policy. As a representative for the Cork region, I am ashamed to state that it is of a piece with the manner in which the entire area of regional aviation policy, particularly regarding our other national airports, has been dealt with.
As far as the management and streamlining of Europe's air traffic is concerned, the adoption of the Eurocontrol Convention by 34 states is a massive step forward. At a time of rapidly growing demand in air transport, Europe's scattered air traffic management framework is in urgent need of a fundamental overhaul and full Continent-wide integration. The current critical situation of long and worsening air traffic delays causes massive economic losses to all market participants. This is mainly due to the insufficient co-ordination between air traffic control centres and insufficient route and air space structures across national boundaries.
This can no longer be accepted at a time when passengers should be at the centre of air traffic concerns. It is also a time when Europe's future integration and growth critically depends on efficient but safe air transport. Moreover, technology, in the form of satellite navigation and computer capacity is readily available to make a reality of the concept of the single European sky. Eurocontrol has made valiant efforts to prevent delays from worsening further within the parameters of the current framework.
The new revised Eurocontrol convention to which this Bill will give force of law is a major step forward in the direction of an integrated air traffic management system. This will also entail the separation between air traffic management service providers and a European air traffic management regulatory authority, preferably Eurocontrol itself. It will be responsible for safety, optimal air space use, economic efficiency and interoperability between system components. The full participation of Eurocontrol's widening membership in central and eastern Europe in a single European sky is vital to the Continent's future, including successful EU enlargement. Already, Europe has a tremendously complex and busy airspace, including 560 airports, 450 control sectors and 75 control centres. Europe's airspace is one of the busiest in the world, with more than 9.2 million flights in 2005, which carried some——
Does the Deputy propose to share time with Deputy Crowe?
Yes, I wish to share time with Deputy Crowe.
A total of 11 minutes remain in this slot.
On most days, there are upwards of 30,000 flights with more than 3,000 aircraft in the air over Europe at the same time. While that fact would once have given me some cause for concern, thankfully it no longer bothers me so much.
In the coming years, this airspace will become busier, as Europe's air traffic has grown by 14% in the past six years and by more than 4.5% within the past 12 months alone. Hence, air traffic is growing rapidly and the forecasted growth for the coming year is in the order of 3%, with peaks of growth in eastern Europe. It is estimated that Croatia's traffic will grow by 18%, that of Slovakia by 17% and that of Poland by 16%. All of them are signatories to the Eurocontrol convention. Overall, air traffic growth in Europe in the next seven years is expected to be in the order of 3.7% annually.
This is as important a piece of legislation to come before the House this year as any other. It will also be one of the most neglected, as the Government parties will concentrate more on what they might view as the juicier vote buying Bills and announcements, which are sure to flood the Chamber in the coming months.
The Bill is important because it links future economic development on the island and the role and influence of the European Commission, the decision-making powers of the Government and the transparency within that Government, the issue of public ownership of national resources and the role of the private sector in the economy. The Bill also raises the subject of the impact of international military and defence policies in the Irish economy and in Irish politics.
In respect of air transport strategy, Members are asked to support this Bill on the basis that Europe's airspace is one of the busiest in the world and that we must ensure its future growth. In 2005, there were more than 9.2 million flights and it is estimated that this figure will double by 2020. On busy days in Europe, more than 30,000 flights take place. While the number of flights is an impressive marker of the growth of the European economy and the level of interconnectedness of its people, there are also strategic concerns for the Irish economy which have not been adequately addressed by this Bill. For an island that depends on its ability to export and import efficiently and cheaply, this legislation is vital. More than 35 billion tonnes of freight were carried through European airspace last year. The proposed legislation frequently makes reference to the efficient and safe running of airports in member states which caused me to wonder about the whereabouts of the strategic plans for Irish airports which were promised during the break-up of Aer Rianta.
If one can come to any conclusion from considering this Bill which promises a seamless air traffic management system for Europe, it is to question whether a seamless air traffic transport strategy exists for the island of Ireland. The answer must be a resounding "no". Essentially, the Bill deals with the administration of Eurocontrol, the European organisation for the safety of air navigation. It is a civil and military organisation which currently has 35 member states. One of Eurocontrol's key concerns is the construction of sufficient capacity to enable future growth in European air travel. Again, this raises questions of the situation in Ireland, where congestion in Dublin airport, combined with the underdevelopment of other regional airports means that no matter what happens within European air management, we will still be left with a creaking airport network.
I refer to powers to enter premises. The Bill offers interesting powers to ensure compliance with the Eurocontrol convention. Section 3 of the Bill alludes to them, where the legislation empowers an authorised person to enter any premises of any aircraft operator and to inspect, take copies of any books, records and other documents, as well as copy or extract any data needed for any aircraft operator. The Bill also empowers the Garda to accompany any authorised officials carrying out random inspections. It should be noted the legislation includes aircraft in its definition of a premises. Hence, this is a tool for the Garda and for the Government's officials to inspect a small number of the hundreds of United States flights which touch down in Shannon Airport, without infringing on the rights of what the Minister for Foreign Affairs tells us is a friendly nation.
As for protocols, I note from the draft Bill the presence of protocols inserted by the Belgian and German Governments. In particular, the Kingdom of Belgium has declared that what is behind the Bill "attaches particular importance...to the airspace being organised in such a way as to guarantee there will be no discrimination in the accessibility of its airports". Is the Minister responsible for this legislation not concerned that the Government should have included such a clause itself?
As I have already stated, air travel, in terms of passengers and freight, as well as access to international airspace, is emerging as a key factor in the future economic development of this island. Hence, we must ensure that every effort is made to guarantee the best quality of infrastructure in international and European air travel management. I wonder how much thought has actually been given to this issue. I hope the Government did not, as is often the case in EU and international negotiations, merely act as yes-men or yes-women when it came to negotiating the Eurocontrol convention. I refer to harmonisation of air traffic management and military implications. If an inclusive Europe is being built, harmonisation of air traffic management is vital.
However, while I welcome a civil aviation air traffic management strategy, I am concerned about inserting references in domestic legislation to meeting the requirements of all civil and military users. The requirements of civil users are plain enough as they want a safe, dependable air traffic management system with a minimum of delays. What are the requirements of military users? They are not spelt out in the legislation. What are we being asked to support? The convention also commits Ireland to participate in the design, implementation and monitoring of a global navigation satellite system. I take it this refers to the Galileo project which is estimated to cost €3.4 billion. The explanatory memorandum states there are no additional costs to the Exchequer. How much is the Government contributing to this project? Under whose budget will the costs be borne?
The convention agrees to establish an independent performance review system that will address all aspects of air traffic management, including policy and planning safety management on the ground in airports and in the air. This is important as competition between airlines and airports is creating intense pressure within the industry. All passengers flying in Europe should be able to undertake a journey in the knowledge that the highest safety standards are in operation no matter where they are flying to or who they are flying with.
The convention is short on specifics but long on commitments. Article 2(m) commits the Government to support the improvement of efficiency and flexibility in the use of airspace between civil and military users. Tens of thousands of US military personnel travel through our airports and airspace. What does such efficiency and flexibility mean, given that until now, we have seen only expediency and cover-up regarding the military use of domestic airspace? For example, is the Government aware that, at the end of this month, Dallas, Texas plays host to a conference on communication navigation surveillance air traffic management? This year’s theme is integrating military operations in a civilian CNSATM environment. Representatives of NATO and the US and other national air forces will attend. This is one example of the not so hidden aspects of the Bill we are being asked to support.
While the Bill is worthy of consideration, it does not deal adequately with ensuring Irish interests are being promoted and protected efficiently and leaves many unanswered questions about its military applications.
I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate. The twin aims of the legislation are improved safety and seamless travel between European destinations. They are the key outcomes projected by the Bill. These developments will be supported by the millions of passengers using airports such as Dublin, Shannon and Cork regularly. I was glad that Deputy Olivia Mitchell welcomed the Bill because it is important that we should all support necessary legislation on safety and related matters.
The legislation, by modernising air traffic control, will greatly assist the 35 member states under the remit of Eurocontrol, and the planned revision of its operations will only come into full force when the remaining nine of the 35 member states ratify it. That cannot happen quickly enough because there has been foot dragging internationally on the question of safety. People are sceptical about handing over control to an organisation that has a Europe-wide remit but it is essential to have greater co-ordination of airspace and more work is needed in this regard.
The rapid and massive expansion of air travel has led to a need for better control. It is frightening for intending passengers to read about major air incidents involving aeroplanes flying too close to each other or entering the wrong airspace and so on. One feels a little helpless because airspace control is technical and almost beyond our comprehension. When experts and pilots' representative associations highlight such incidents, it gives a fair warning to the air navigation authorities and Transport Ministers to get their act together to enact the necessary legislation. Factors other than overcrowding generate negative coverage and, for instance, one pilot had a reported breakdown last year as a result of stress. Complaints have been made by one pilots' representative association that attempts to generate faster turnarounds are creating a more dangerous environment for everybody involved. These issues need to be addressed by legislation that will cover everybody.
I will be parochial and refer to Cork Airport. If Ireland is to adhere to the requirements regarding controls, safety, services, engineering, maintenance, security and so on, it is essential that funding is available for all airports. The capacity of Cork Airport is set to increase to 3 million passengers annually from 2.5 million in 2005, and it will reach 4.5 million in a decade. Interwoven issues such as traffic volumes and passenger safety take on a hugely important meaning in that context. Standards of aircraft, security services and engineering staff must be supervised and maintained. Cork Airport has a fine reputation and remains at the top of the competitiveness chart in the air travel market, but to ensure that position is maintained, it does not need to labour under a financial millstone.
There will be a transitional period for the Shannon stopover during discussions on an open skies agreement between the EU and the US and there are clear advantages for Dublin Airport in such an arrangement. It must be ensured, therefore, that a progressive airport such as Cork emerges from its period of reconstruction debt free so that it can compete with Dublin and Shannon airports immediately. A share of the transatlantic market enjoyed equally by these airports is not an unrealistic or selfish aim for Cork Airport. As a member of the airport consultative group, it is my ambition that this should happen reasonably quickly.
The Governments would like the three airports to operate effectively and to be successful in their own right because this will lead to a more localised or regional roll-out of economic benefits in tourism, trade and industrial development. Autonomous boards such as that governing Cork Airport are designed to give strong local leadership which will enable the airports to equip themselves with new strategies to maximise returns from the ever changing environment of air travel. The State Airports Act 2004 offers new challenges for Cork Airport to reorganise its activities and to maintain progress because it will lead to increased choice for passengers, which in turn will present more opportunities for airport business and airline companies. The national development plan is based on a model that identifies various cities and towns as gateways to regions or particular zones, and Cork Airport is the gateway to the southern region. Its importance to the region cannot be exaggerated.
In the period prior to completion of the Cork and Shannon airport authorities, it is imperative that the group acting as Aer Rianta, namely, the Dublin Airport Authority, is not allowed to impose long-term financial conditions which would effectively spancel the new Cork authority. It must be borne in mind that these will be two competing authorities within a very short period. It is a worry to locals that conditions imposed now could jeopardise the future of Cork Airport. It is worth noting that Cork has been voted the best airport for the past four or five years in succession and we must not allow that status to be undermined.
Arguments are taking place in other areas about the future of Cork Airport vis-à-vis Dublin, Aer Rianta, the national plan for aviation and so on. However, we must look back a little bit when the first split up of the airports was mooted. The official line at the time is worth repeating, which, I hope, is still the case. A letter from the private secretary at the office of the Minister for Transport reads as follows:
It is envisaged that the two new independent airport authorities for Shannon and Cork will both commence business free of debt and that the debts associated with these airports, including the debt associated with the major new investment programme currently underway at Cork Airport, will remain with Dublin Airport.
It also states:
The Minister is also giving detailed consideration to the implications for Dublin Airport of absorbing the debt of Shannon and Cork as currently envisaged. . .
Aside from a debt-free start, which of course in itself will be a major boost for the new Cork enterprise, the funding of future developments at each of the three airports will be a matter for commercial consideration by the new independent airport authorities.
I do not wish to get into another argument about this matter. I am concerned that for commercial and other reasons the people who have their hand in the till at the moment, namely, the Dublin Airport Authority, may be inclined to impose a situation that could distort the commercial future for both airports. This should not happen because if there is a policy, it should be adhered to.
It is obvious that the existing Irish Aviation Authority would have to alter some of its current practice to fit in with the changing nature of air traffic management, including compliance with a new European air traffic flow management system. The new air traffic control building which is currently being constructed on the western side of the airfield in Cork will be equipped with the latest technology. This will enable it to comply with any regulation of air traffic management. I express my ignorance of the technical aspects of this, but I am sure we can comply with any new requirements.
The current Government policy is aimed at safeguarding the integrity of Irish airspace, which includes utilising the airspace to maximum commercial advantage in a safe and effective fashion. I take Deputy Crowe's point that we need to maximise the benefits of it. As one of my broadcaster friends, Mr. Tom MacSweeney of RTE, said, "We are an island race", therefore, we must recognise the importance of aviation and utilise it for commercial and passenger use.
Under the Bill, it is essential to put in place standards from which any company cannot deviate. Commercial requirements must not be allowed to dictate the agenda, especially where safety is concerned. Other people referred to this aspect. We are hearing from the professionals involved that safety could be compromised because of some new efforts to make more and more money.
The passage of the Bill will allow the Irish Aviation Authority to prepare, with confidence, for the expected further growth in air traffic volumes. It will have an obvious impact on issues such as safety, security, the environment and the entire air travel community. Air traffic is increasing, and will continue to do so. As Deputy Crowe said, it is important that the link between huge commercial development and the public is maintained. There is huge commercial development, thank God, which I expect to continue. As a result, there will be greater use of air transport, for which we must budget and plan. Ireland has a significant role to play in this co-operative arrangement, whether in the area of extending practices that would lead to better collective safety or the more mundane but important matter of collecting control charges and taxes. While the new Act would not compromise our airspace or defence strategies, it would help establish a framework for the so-called single European sky policy as well as international co-operation in aviation matters. Less bureaucracy and more pan-European compliance would help to streamline traffic management and, ultimately, combat the dreaded delays to which we can all relate. This, in turn, would help reduce the 350,000 flight hours wasted each year, the benefits of which will be clear for all to see. We all have concerns in that area which we may not always understand. Mismanagement, difficulties with air control, conflicting objectives of airlines and airports and the competition between them comes into play in this regard. There needs to be a set of standards and guidelines.
The Bill will provide for greater access to inspection. Deputy Crowe referred to seizing papers and so on, but many people have been concerned about the present situation in regard to inspections at Shannon. I am sure anything that will improve this situation will be welcomed.
While I will not say people have been lackadaisical, the energy has not been shown to deal speedily enough with the rapid increase in air travel. I am not talking about just Ireland, but European-wide. People are competing for their own space, and there is only so much airspace available. European airspace is said to be the busiest in the world. There are particular patches within this airspace that are extremely congested and need to be monitored carefully. It will be too late to do so when an accident happens. Given the capacity numbers on larger airplanes, if anything goes wrong, it will lead to a horrific situation.
A number of Deputies referred to civilian and military use of airplanes. I am sure this question will be answered by the Minister in his closing statement. The issue that appeared to grab most attention up to now was the leasing of aircraft and the possible seizure and detention of them. The Minister of State, Deputy Gallagher, said that it was not intended to deal with that issue in the Bill, even though all those concerned were listened to. I am sure the Minister will also comment on this aspect.
I am pleased to have had an opportunity to contribute to the Bill. I do not mind being parochial, because I am speaking about a national airport which has been voted the best in the country for years. It earned that title. The staff worked hard, dealing with passengers in a humane and business-like manner and everyone made an effort. We cannot allow a situation to be created artificially whereby this effort is spancelled. I look forward to fighting the case for Cork and my constituents.
I am pleased to have an opportunity to say a few words on this legislation. I hope the title of the Bill does not have any more connotations other than to improve the situation. When I hear about eurocontrol I envisage bureaucratic centralised control, for which our modern society has become very famous. As someone who believes in some kind of latitude, I am always worried about this aspect.
I refer to an issue which I hope the legislation will address. This relates to how planes must remain on the tarmac at Dublin Airport for up to two hours awaiting a landing slot in another European airport or verification of a flight plan.
Debate adjourned.