Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 19 Nov 2009

Vol. 695 No. 2

Adjournment Debate.

Job Protection.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan

I welcome the opportunity to finally debate the critical threat to Aer Lingus jobs and our national strategic aviation connectivity. I have asked for this debate on this matter at least six times over the past three weeks. However, it is deplorable the Minister for Transport is not in the Chamber to respond to my questions.

The threat to jobs and working conditions at Aer Lingus is now serious. Aer Lingus management has reportedly set a two-week deadline for agreement on a €97 million per annum cost-cutting plan which includes the astonishing loss of 676 jobs in Dublin, Cork and Shannon.

This terrible news comes after an incredible direct haemorrhaging of several thousand aviation jobs over the past 18 months including at SR Technics, the Dublin Airport Authority and Ryanair. The loss of another 676 jobs, including 489 pilot, cabin crew and ground staff and 187 back office jobs, at Aer Lingus will be a hammer blow to communities in Dublin, Cork and Shannon already under severe pressure. I am sure most colleagues have heard from Aer Lingus workers who are shattered at the current proposals from Mr. Colm Barrington, chairman of Aer Lingus, and Mr. Christoph Mueller, chief executive officer.

Aer Lingus staff believe the current management plan could see pay cuts of up to 40% for remaining workers. IMPACT cabin crew representatives this afternoon told the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Transport that the new terms would see new cabin crew start on as little as €16,754 per annum, rising to an incredible €18,754 per annum. This is the yellow-packing of jobs at the airline.

Everybody, including staff and their representatives, acknowledges the massive difficulties in the aviation sector and the large and often painful changes that are taking place in this industry. The merger announced last week between British Airways and Iberia is an example of this. Aer Lingus management has posted losses of €93 million in the first half of this year when traffic volumes increased but fares fell. It has also blown €400 million of its cash horde in incredible bad management decisions.

The global and domestic recession has significantly impacted on the aviation industry. The suspicion remains, however, the current turmoil in the industry may be used by the new Aer Lingus management team to implement a savage and severe programme of cutbacks. There is already a disturbing move towards outsourcing at the company with the use of Astraeus crews on Aer Lingus planes flying out of Belfast.

Will the Minister enlighten us on the use of Astraeus airlines by Aer Lingus and how the terms and conditions of Astraeus crews differ from those of Aer Lingus workers? What did the Minister know about this development? Staff rightly fear this is the start of their replacement by contracted staff on massively reduced pay and working conditions.

More disturbing is the so-called Project Greenfield as devised by Mr. Christoph Mueller and Mr. Colm Barrington. A core part of this proposal is the transfer of Aer Lingus to the UK aviation register. More surprising is the fact that Ryanair is not on this register but the Irish one. Aer Lingus, in effect, will become primarily a British-based airline on the UK Civil Aviation Authority register with a negative impact on jobs and connectivity in Ireland. Has the Minister been briefed on Project Greenfield? Did he approve it through the three Aer Lingus directors he appointed to the board?

Two representative of Aer Lingus management told the committee on transport an hour ago that the Minister supports the loss of 676 jobs at Aer Lingus with the reduction of pay and working conditions for the 3,000 remaining workers. This will mean immense hardship for the people of north Dublin, Meath, mid-Leinster, Shannon and Cork. It is incredible that the Minister would support this and that Irish tax and legal social obligations could potentially be at least partially avoided at a company where the State has a 25% stakeholding.

Aer Lingus staff have already made many sacrifices through the implementation of a series of previous cost-cutting plans. In 2008 staff proposed 4% to 8% pay cuts and some senior and higher paid staff worked without pay for up to four weeks in order to protect key US routes including the Shannon to JFK route. It is unacceptable that the Ryanair and Irish Ferries model would be applied to Aer Lingus workers. This is a Ryanair takeover of Aer Lingus by stealth. Will the Minister explain in simple economic terms how Aer Lingus can run a transatlantic and global aviation operation on Ryanair-style, short-haul terms and conditions?

The Minister for Transport has the key responsibility for the 25% state stakeholding in Aer Lingus. He must immediately direct the Government's directors on the board to oppose current outsourcing practices, Project Greenfield and associated plans. The Minister and the Government must recognise the key employment and connectivity role of Aer Lingus in Ireland's core national interest, a role it has played in the past 70 years. The Minister for Transport, Deputy Dempsey, must stop this race to the bottom by Aer Lingus, which is becoming a pale imitation of Ryanair, because if this continues the company will have no future.

Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Dara Calleary)

This matter has been referred to the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment as it relates to jobs. I wish first to brief the House of the overall situation in regard to the aviation industry before dealing with the issues in regard to Aer Lingus.

The Deputy will be aware that the Tánaiste, on behalf of the Government, has taken a proactive role during this year to maximise and retain our skills base in the aviation sector following the decision by SR Technics to cease operations at Dublin Airport. Following that decision, the Government's priority was to take all possible steps to maximise the potential of the skills base and infrastructure at Dublin Airport and to retain as many jobs as possible in the sector.

The Tánaiste, therefore, immediately tasked IDA Ireland and Enterprise Ireland to work with SR Technics and other interested parties to find the best possible outcome for Dublin. The two State agencies then engaged additional aviation sector expertise and set about establishing a team to market the Dublin operation internationally through their overseas office network. They received a total of 16 expressions of interest in the facility, each of which were contacted to evaluate their level of interest in the operation and to encourage and, where possible, assist them in putting forward investment proposals to take over all or part of the operation.

In addition, SR Technics received more than 30 direct expressions of interest in the operation, subsequently receiving five bids from interested parties for parts of the business. I understand that following this process SR Technics subsequently negotiated and reached a provisional agreement with a bidder for the sale of the APU and landing gear assets. However, it transpired that the bidder planned to remove the assets from the country, which would have had a terminal effect on the continuation of a maintenance, repair and overhaul, MRO, business in Dublin. Following direct intervention by the Tánaiste, a reversal of that decision by SR Technics was secured and a subsequent bid from Dublin Aerospace Limited, an Irish based company, for the APU and Landing Gear assets was accepted. The Government, through Enterprise Ireland, assisted that bid.

On 2 September, the Tánaiste formally announced the establishment of Dublin Aerospace Limited as a new aviation maintenance provider at Dublin Airport. The company plans to provide 226 jobs within five years with the support of the Government through Enterprise Ireland. Dublin Aerospace Limited aims to establish a best-in-class MRO facility at Dublin Airport, servicing APUs, landing gear, base maintenance and training.

I should also point out to the House that the garage business unit of SR Technics has been successfully taken over by the M50 Truck and Van Centre, who secured the Airside vehicle maintenance contract from SR Technics. In addition, I understand that SR Technics is to continue to operate the line maintenance contract for Aer Lingus until such time as a suitable alternative operator is identified and agreed as acceptable by both companies.

I want now to refer directly to the issues raised by Deputy Broughan in regard to Aer Lingus. In terms of the ongoing restructuring of Aer Lingus, it is clear that the company intends to make a significant number of redundancies across its operation. My Department has to date been notified of redundancies of 676 employees, including ground services, cabin crew and pilots. These redundancy levels are on the basis of agreement being reached on the company's proposed restructured business model. I understand that portions of these are also to be achieved through the outsourcing of various activities at the airline. This is, as pointed out by Deputy Broughan, understandably a difficult time for the employees of Aer Lingus to be affected and I understand that engagement between management and the unions is ongoing.

A sustainable Aer Lingus operation based in Ireland and competing with other airlines for business to and from Ireland is in the best interests of Irish passengers, the Irish economy and airline employees in the long term. I draw the Deputy's attention to the statement made during the week by the National Implementation Board and to my response to a parliamentary question on legislation to protect employees which was tabled by another Deputy. I assure the Deputy that the Government remains fully committed to the aviation sector and to supporting a vibrant air passenger operations based in Ireland.

Company Closures.

Deputy Eamon Scanlon

I welcome the opportunity to raise this matter on the Adjournment.

Last week, GlaxoSmithKline announced it was ceasing its operations in Sligo and would be making redundant 250 employees redundant over the next three years. Stiefel which commenced operations in Sligo in 1975, some 34 years ago, has been a reputable company and has provided great employment down through the years but is now proposing to make 250 employees redundant.

The announcement of the closure of Stiefel and the resultant redundancies came as a hammer blow. At the same time Abbott Ireland in Sligo announced it proposed to make 40 employees redundant. Abbott Ireland is also an excellent employer, employing 1,100 people. The Stiefel plant was purchased in July 2009. It would be wrong if multinational companies were allowed to buy out the opposition and later close those factories. I acknowledge that GlaxoSmithKline employs approximately 1,500 people in this country at their Dublin and Cork plants. However, this type of trend should not be permitted. I am not suggesting that that is what happened in this case but, that a company bought out in July 2009 has now announced its intention to cease operations at that plant is, to me, suspicious.

I call on the Minister to bring together the IDA, Enterprise Ireland, Sligo Chamber of Commerce and Sligo Enterprise Board to work to ensure this excellent and modern factory is reopened. All that can be done should be done to attract into Sligo a new manufacturing company which could provide employment for the excellent staff of Stiefel. I call on the Minister to ensure this is done as soon as possible. There are a number of empty factories in the IDA business park in Sligo. There is no doubt but that Sligo is suffering like every other region in the country. The immediate availability of these factories must make the task of attracting business into the area a lot easier.

The temporary employment subsidy scheme was established to support manufacturing companies which employ more than ten people. I ask that this scheme be extended to cover small indigenous companies who employ more than ten people, such as in the hotel and motor business. These businesses need support in the current climate. It would be better for us to support these people in their current employment rather than have to support them through social welfare and so on. I know the people concerned would prefer to be working. I call on the Minister to consider introducing a scheme to support indigenous companies.

Deputy Dara Calleary

I thank the Deputy for raising this matter on the Adjournment and for his contact on the Stiefel and Abbott Ireland issues since the announcements were made last week.

As the House will be aware, on 11 November GlaxoSmithKline announced that it intends to cease its operations at its Stiefel plant in Sligo. However, this will not happen for another four years. The eventual planned closure will result in the loss of 220 permanent and 30 temporary positions. The proposal, as set out by Deputy Scanlon, has been made as part of an overall global review of the Stiefel business following its acquisition by GSK in July 2009. GSK has stated that this in no way affects its other operations in Ireland, to which the company remains fully committed.

The company states that the proposal is the result of under-utilised capacity not alone across the Stiefel network but across the network of GSK sites. Production will continue at the Sligo site until all products are transferred to alternative facilities within the GSK manufacturing network. FÁS will be in contact with the company to discuss the services available to meet the potential needs of employees. Each response will be tailored on a case by case basis. The FÁS services to business unit will be also involved in these consultations. Sligo County Enterprise Board and Enterprise Ireland will also offer their full range of services to assist any workers considering business start-ups.

As the House will be aware, Sligo has traditionally been a centre of manufacturing. However, over recent years it has proved challenging to maintain and attract foreign direct investment, particularly in manufacturing, as much of this investment is now going to low-cost destinations such as eastern and central Europe and China.

At present there are 19 IDA Ireland-supported companies in Sligo, with 2,273 people in full-time employment. IDA Ireland's current strategy for County Sligo and the north west includes the development of a knowledge economy so that the region can compete both nationally and internationally for foreign direct investment, in particular as a key location for investment in globally traded business and financial services. There have recently been some positive announcements in this regard. The strategy also involves working with and expanding the existing client base in the region and providing modern property solutions with supporting infrastructure, as mentioned by Deputy Scanlon.

The Minister met representatives of IDA Ireland this week and discussed the matter in detail. She has asked the agency to increase its efforts to attract and retain industry in the region. The Minister has also asked the State development agencies to work closely with the county development board in assisting with the local response to the planned job losses. She will also meet representatives of GSK to discuss the matter further. I will consider Deputy Scanlon's comments and suggestions with regard to the employee subsidy scheme and report back to the House.

Waste Management.

Deputy Chris Andrews

I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak on the Adjournment and I welcome the presence of the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. Since it was first proposed, both the Minister and I have vigorously opposed the proposal to locate an incinerator at Poolbeg in Dublin. One does not need to be an engineer to see that it does not make any sense to put an incinerator in what is effectively a large cul-de-sac.

The proposed Poolbeg incinerator, which will be Dublin's first municipal waste incinerator and one of the largest such facilities in Europe, was granted planning permission by An Bord Pleanála in November 2007. In December of last year, the proposed facility was granted a licence by the EPA. The concerns of the local community about this facility are well known, with over 3000 objections registered with An Bord Pleanála.

This week, the Irish Waste Management Association, IWMA, which represents almost 95% of private waste management collections in Ireland, released the findings of an independent report commissioned to examine the need for the proposed waste incinerator at Poolbeg. The results of this report make worrying reading and reinforce the Minister's own point that this facility could end up costing the taxpayer up to €18 million per year over the next 20 years. We must ask ourselves what we are thinking of in allowing the local authority to impose this extra tariff on the taxpayers of this country.

The proposed plant has capacity to treat almost 600,000 tonnes of waste. Under the current contract, which was negotiated by Dublin City Council, the State is required to supply 320,000 tonnes of waste annually to the plant. If this is not reached, the State will be charged almost €90 for every tonne not supplied. The council has said it is taking the long view, but by the time this incinerator reaches its capacity of 600,000 tonnes it is likely, given the considerable progress in research, that new technology will be in place.

The cost to the State of not supplying waste is a deterrent to recycling and composting. Its is also potentially anti-competitive to allow one operator to have such control over the market, and it could prove very costly to the taxpayer if these targets are not met. Having to transport waste from the rest of the country to fill the incinerator would, in environmental terms, be robbing Peter to pay Paul, and would negatively offset any proposed benefits.

I have made my opposition to the incinerator well known, and this report further compounds my concerns. I do not believe Poolbeg is the correct location for a facility of this size and scale. The increased traffic flow into the region will cause further congestion in an area that is already at saturation point. It is similar to a car park in the mornings and evenings. Dublin Bay itself is an area of high conservation importance and is legally protected under both the EU habitats directive and the EU birds directive. Specific sites of conservation importance include the Liffey and Tolka Estuaries and Sandymount Strand, all immediately adjacent to the proposed development. The incinerator is bound to have a negative impact on these amenities.

The Minister is committed to reviewing the capacity of the incinerator. If the capacity is found to be incorrect, I urge the Minister to make the appropriate changes and reconsider the future of the plant.

Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy John Gormley)

I thank Deputy Andrews for raising this issue.

As the Deputy is aware, waste management infrastructure projects are advanced by private sector service providers or by local authorities, generally by way of a public private partnership. It is a matter for the promoters of such projects to seek and obtain the necessary regulatory approvals — that is, planning permission and a waste licence. In carrying out their functions, the planning authorities, including An Bord Pleanála and the EPA, which deals with waste licensing, act independently of the Minister. The approved capacity of individual facilities is a matter for determination through these processes, as provided for in the Planning and Development and Waste Management Acts.

Since taking office I have continually stressed the twin environmental priorities of dealing with climate change issues and ensuring we take the necessary steps in managing our waste. We must explore the full range of technical solutions as well as modifying our behaviour in support of sustainable waste management. Undue emphasis on incineration as the cornerstone of waste management policy is detrimental to the development of alternative solutions. While incineration may well have a role in our future waste management strategy, I do not believe it will be on anything like the scale that was previously envisaged.

As a first step in my approach to modernising and reorienting the waste management sector, I arranged for an international consortium of consultants to undertake a comprehensive study on the waste sector, covering a wide range of issues which will help identify how best to proceed with further efforts to reduce waste levels, improve recycling rates and deliver equitable and cost-effective waste management solutions. Earlier today I published the consultants' report. This will be the launching pad for putting in place the policies that we now need to mark a new departure in our approach to waste management. I will bring proposals to Government which will ensure the proper ordering of the waste collection and wider waste management market. This in turn will provide the context in which many of the other recommendations contained in the report can be addressed. I wish to provide certainty for those in the waste management sector and a framework within which the necessary legislative changes can be brought forward.

With regard to the capacity of the proposed incinerator, it is my understanding that the quantities of residual waste currently being collected by the Dublin local authorities would not be sufficient to meet the put-or-pay requirement referred to by the Deputy. We have recently seen further increases in recycling rates in Dublin, with a corresponding drop in residual waste volumes. It is important to note that the recommendations of the report published today, which I intend to implement, will have the effect of further reducing the volumes of residual waste generated and driving more waste towards recycling. I am therefore concerned that the proposed incinerator will prove to be seriously oversized, and indeed that a liability for the ratepayer and taxpayer may ultimately arise. In these circumstances I have decided that the most appropriate course of action is to appoint an authorized person under section 224 of the Local Government Acts to conduct a full review of this project. It remains open to Dublin City Council to engage with my Department to discuss how the project might be brought into line with the emerging reality of the waste market and waste policy generally.

Bovine Disease Controls.

Deputy Mary Alexandra White

I wish to raise this matter to find out more definitively what replacement methods are proposed for the culling of badgers with more effective and humane methods of control, as set out in the revised programme for Government. My concern is that the current method of control, a stopped-restraint, is a euphemism for an ugly snare which can have the effect of causing intense suffering to the badger. This decade alone has seen more than 50,000 badgers snared or removed by trapping. My understanding is that a vaccine is being developed. However, until the delivery of that vaccine thousands more badgers will suffer horribly in this manner.

My area in south Carlow is one of the chosen areas where a licence has been issued to the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food under Part 3(d) of the Wildlife Act 1976, Approved Traps and Snares Regulations 2003, which stipulates that a stopped body restraint must be used when capturing badgers. I understand also that 30 such licences were issued in 2008. What will happen in the meantime before the vaccine comes on stream? Will the Department continue to use this brutal form of snaring? If every badger in the country were wiped out I do not believe tuberculosis would be stopped. Although the badger is seen as one vector, or carrier, for TB, mycobacterium bovis, other animals such as deer, dogs or cats may also be carriers. We must eradicate TB, not the badger, and must find ways of doing this.

An answer to a parliamentary question revealed the total cost of the eradication programme for the 11 years from 1997 to 2007 to be approximately €414.47 million. That staggering figure excludes administration costs, travel and subsistence. When one adds in those costs, based on a figure for 2006 of €33.8 million and multiplies that by 11 one gets a further €371.8 million. The total approximate spend in eradicating TB over 11 years is €786.27 million.

My point is that we have had these extraordinary costs, coupled with the cost of taking out the badger at a cost of €12.79 million, and still have not controlled bovine TB. In the meantime, a gentle unobtrusive nocturnal mammal is being wiped out. We are the only country to allow such methods at present. I would support caged trapping to be used as a more humane method of control until the vaccine comes onstream.

Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Trevor Sargent)

Ba mhaith liom buíochas a ghabháil leis an Teachta as an gceist thábhachtach seo a árdú. I shall investigate the feasibility of the cage trapping described by Deputy White after delivering my reply.

A considerable amount of research which has been conducted over the years both by my Department and elsewhere has shown that the eradication of bovine TB is not a practicable proposition in the short to medium term because of the reservoir of infection in wildlife, particularly among badgers, which seeds infection into the cattle population. The published results of the four-area project carried out in counties Cork, Monaghan, Donegal and Kilkenny in the late 1990s and the early years of this decade demonstrated that there was a significant reduction in TB levels in cattle following the removal of badgers. In particular, the total number of herd restrictions in the removal areas for the study period was almost 60% lower than the pre-study period.

In view of this research, the bovine TB eradication programme implemented by my Department contains a comprehensive wildlife strategy in order to limit the spread of TB from badgers to cattle. Under this strategy, badgers are captured under licence issued by the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government wherever they are implicated in an outbreak of TB.

Capturing is undertaken only in areas where serious outbreaks of tuberculosis have been identified in cattle herds and where an epidemiological investigation carried out by the Department's veterinary inspectorate has found that badgers are the likely source of infection. In addition, approval to capture a sett is contingent on the total area under capture nationally being maintained below 30% of the agricultural land in the country.

With regard to the animal welfare aspect of badger culling, my Department continually monitors damage and injury to badgers captured under this programme. Badgers are captured using a specifically designed stopped-body restraint by trained farm relief service contractors, who are monitored and supervised by staff of the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. The restraints used in the capture of badgers are approved under section 34 of the 1976 Wildlife Act and are specifically designed with a 'stop', so as not to tighten beyond a predetermined point. All restraints are monitored daily and any badgers are removed within a maximum of 24 hours of capture. A condition of the licence granted is that restraints are checked before noon the next day. Capturing of badgers is not permitted during the months of January, February and March in new capture areas. Research undertaken by the centre for veterinary epidemiology and risk analysis, CVERA, in UCD has shown that damage or injury to captured badgers is either non-existent or minimal while in the stopped restraint.

The recent programme for Government included a commitment that the Animal Health and Welfare Bill, currently being drafted by my Department, will include provisions relating to the replacement of culling with more humane and effective methods of control. The Deputy will be aware of this, given her close involvement with that negotiation. The preference — and our intention — would be to replace culling with a vaccination programme.

With this in mind, my Department has been collaborating for some years with CVERA in UCD on research into a vaccine to control tuberculosis in badgers and break the link of infection to cattle. Research to date has demonstrated that oral vaccination of badgers in a captive environment with the BCG vaccine generates high levels of protective immunity against challenge with bovine TB. It is now necessary to undertake research to establish whether this protective effect exists in field conditions and my Department, in conjunction with UCD, has commenced work on a three-year field trial in County Kilkenny that is designed to assess the impact of vaccination on badger to badger transmission of tuberculosis in a natural environment. This trial involves vaccinating several hundred badgers over three to four years, with continuous monitoring of the population to assess the impact of the vaccine on the incidence of disease in the vaccinated and non-vaccinated control badger populations.

Success in the field trial will eventually lead to implementation of a vaccination strategy as part of the national TB control programme. However, it will be some years — 2013 at the earliest — before the benefits of a vaccine can be seen and therefore targeted badger removals will continue in the medium term.

My Department is satisfied that the introduction of the badger removal policy has contributed to a reduction in the incidence of TB in recent years. In this regard, it is noteworthy that the incidence rate of new herd breakdowns has fallen significantly between 2000 and 2008. The average number of reactors removed in the five-year period 2002-08 was, at just over 26,000, 26% lower than in the preceding five-year period. In addition, reactor numbers have remained below 30,000 per annum since 2002, the longest period since the 1950s and while a number of factors were involved, it is likely that the enhanced badger removal strategy, which was implemented from 2004, is a factor in this.

In effect, this strategy is a pragmatic response, based on sound science, to a complex problem. In pursuit of our objective, my Department is involved to a research project with UCD on the development of a vaccine for use in badgers that would lead to a reduction in the current high levels of TB infection in that species. It is hoped that this strategy will, in the longer term, reduce the need to cull TB infected badgers as tuberculosis levels fall in both cattle and badgers.

The Dáil adjourned at 5.20 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 24 November 2009.