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

SECTION 11

Mr. O'Malley

I move amendment No. 9a:

In page 13, between lines 26 and 27, to insert the following subsection:

"(3) The headquarters of the company shall be located at, or close to, Shannon Airport, County Clare.".

Given the events of the last week or so and the problems that have been created for Shannon Airport, for that whole region and indeed for the west, it would be appropriate to locate the headquarters of this company in Shannon. I am not sure where the 550 people employed by the company will be placed, but a number of them are already in that region, either in Shannon Airport or Ballygreen which is nearby. On Second Stage my colleague Deputy Cullen, said that there are 300 people employed in that region — I am not sure where he got that information but I assume it is reasonably accurate. If that is so, slightly more then half the future employees of the company will be in Shannon. I would like some guarantee that the main operations of the company will take place in Shannon. There is always pressure and a temptation to move operations to Dublin and there is the possibility of such pressure or temptation being made in the future as technology improves. The case will be made that it will be possible to do work in Dublin that had been previously done in Shannon. In view of the great uncertainty in the region and the deeply felt anxieties and concerns of many people, the Government should be willing to accept this amendment to ensure that the major part of this company operates out of Shannon.

The Shanwick arrangement deals with the control of traffic in the north-eastern Atlantic. Most of that operation is based in Prestwick. Since Prestwick is now effectively closed as an airport, except for occasional military flights, the Government should take up with Euro-control and the UK authorities the question of moving the main part of Shanwick control from Prestwick to Shannon. If it does not succeed in doing that a guarantee should be given to Shannon by way of acceptance of this amendment. If the numbers employed at Shannon Airport and Ballygreen were to decline further it would be particularly serious in the present context.

I remind the Minister of State that while the main radio station for aircraft movement in Ireland is stationed at Ballygreen, up to 15 or 20 years ago there was another station at Bunratty which is now closed. I would not like to see the main station moved to Dublin and closure of the Ballygreen station. The only other station of its kind that I am aware of in Ireland is in Schull which caters for longer distance communications. That is more or less an automatic station and is primarily a radar station. The number of staff employed at Schull is very small. Therefore, it is important that the operations at Shannon are retained there, and the best way to do so is to make provision in the Bill that the headquarters of this new authority be located at Shannon. It would fit in very well with general policy, with what I hope is still the policy of the Government on decentralisation. Unfortunately, decentralisation is taking place very slowly, but the policy has been successful. Clearly the appropriate place for the headquarters of this body is at Shannon because most of the work is done there anyway, and there should be a statutory guarantee of the retention of operations there.

Miss Flaherty

I have great sympathy with the case made by Deputy O'Malley for the Clare region. I could not argue with a word of it, but I can make as strong a case for Dublin. Currently the headquarters is located within the Department in Dublin, with approximately half the staff based there. A very difficult decision will have to be made on this matter. Deputy O'Malley talked about uncertainties in the Shannon region and I have every sympathy with those, but in north Dublin, as a result of the Government decision of last week, a minimum of 1,500 jobs will be lost in Aer Lingus. We are committed to sending 300 people to Shannon.

Decentralisation is obviously very attractive for those who live outside Dublin, but the reality is that 7,000 to 8,000 jobs have been lost to Dublin as a result of decentralisation. Dublin has been losing out in employment creation at a greater rate than the rest of the country and it has a higher unemployment rate. The Dublin region is experiencing desperate unemployment.

It is inappropriate to give a new semi-State company an instruction of the kind proposed. Decisions will have to be made about two very needy areas. We could have tabled an amendment proposing that the headquarters remain in Dublin. I hope both regions will be served but the decision should be left to the commercial company on the basis of providing the maximum employment. The amendment seeks to transfer the headquarters from Dublin where it is located, with consequent further job losses for the area. As a result of a Government decision many jobs will be lost with knock-on effects in Shannon and Dublin. While I have every sympathy with the case made by Deputy O'Malley, an equally strong or perhaps stronger case could be made for north Dublin and the Dublin region in general.

Mr. Noonan (Limerick East)

There is obviously much dismay in the Shannon region at present about the Government decision last week. There is a fear among staff in Shannon Airport and Ballygreen who are now employed by ANSO that part of the downstream effect of enactment of this Bill will be that they will be relocated elsewhere, probably in Dublin. Most of the work carried out in the area not only relates to aircraft that land at Shannon Airport but is derived from the fact that Shannon is the point at which Euro-aerospace interfaces with the north Atlantic. The transfer of functions from Shannon on the one hand and Prestwick on the other will take place along that line because of historic reasons where Shannon was the first landfall. One could argue now that the numbers employed in Shannon are there for reasons of economic inertia because the technology has changed. Since the sixties the interface between Europe and North America could have taken place more or less anywhere across Ireland or Britain. For example a case could be made for Heathrow. In that context the Minister should appreciate the worries of people.

There is an awareness, because of changing technologies and because all aircraft no longer land in Shannon — according to the Minister's own figure 200,000 fly across Irish airspace and are handled by ANSO at present for traffic control purposes and fees are charged — that there will be a loss. There is a fear that following the changes in the transatlantic status of Shannon there will be a pull towards Dublin.

The Minister will note that the arrangement referred to in section 14 between the Irish and United Kingdom Governments in respect of both Shannon and Prestwick, was signed on 1 April 1966. The Prestwick arrangement with Shannon is relevant. Prestwick has closed down and I do not know whether air traffic control for the North Atlantic still operates at Prestwick; I understood some of it was being transferred to Glasgow. Will the Minister clarify that point?

Deputy O'Malley's amendment does not meet the concerns. I presume that there are very few civil servants designated in the Department to monitor the functions of the company. In a situation such as this the headquarters is not where the bulk of the staff is employed. The bulk of the staff is employed on the one hand in Clare and on the other at Shannon Airport. The headquarters could be designated in Shannon Airport and it would not mean that 300 staff would remain there. There would still be the fear of a staff transfer. I support the intention behind the amendment but it does not meet the concerns of people because the headquarters, in operations such as this, will not carry many staff. The real staff will be in the operating stations.

I am seeking a commitment from the Minister that there will not be widespread redesignation of staff from Clare to Dublin as soon as this Bill is enacted. I would like him to put that on the record. We know the position in north Dublin at present. On the face of it 1,200, 1,300 or 1,400 people in north Dublin will lose their jobs directly arising from the Aer Lingus rescue plan. The location of the headquarters is not the point at issue but rather that the bulk of the staff, the 300 people, should not be reassigned elsewhere as soon as the company is set up as a private company which is the intention of the Bill.

Mr. Flood

I support Deputy Flaherty in regard to the present headquarters as opposed to the amendment tabled by Deputy O'Malley. We are familiar with the difficulties in the greater Dublin region, not just arising from the Aer Lingus problems, but generally because one-third of the population is in difficulty with regard to the provision of jobs etc. As Deputy Noonan pointed out, the majority of those involved in ANSO will be based locally where they are required. In the ANSO headquarters in Dublin there are about 100 people employed. It would be a pity if we set about decanting those jobs to Shannon to a new headquarters. I would like to hear the opinions of the staff currently employed in the headquarters on such a move. The intention is that the transfer of staff to the new organisation will be done without their suffering less favourable terms and conditions. Generally speaking we should not interfere too much with them. Obviously, the vast majority of staff are located where they are required, at the airports around the country.

Miss Flaherty

Will the Minister give the exact figures? I gather that there are approximately 300 based in the Dublin area. It would be helpful if we knew the exact numbers we are talking about and what the implications of a decision like this will be.

Mr. N. Treacy

The complement of staff as of 31 December 1992 was as follows: 226 in Dublin — 101 in headquarters and 125 in Dublin Airport — 304 in Clare — 194 in Shannon and 110 at Ballygreen — and 43 in Cork which includes one at Mount Gabriel. I listened with great interest to the contributions of the Deputies from the mid-west and the east coast and I sympathise with what they said.

Deputies O'Malley and Noonan referred to Prestwick. The Prestwick air traffic control centre, in conjunction with our aeronautical radio communications at Ballygreen, is the main air traffic control centre for the North Atlantic on this side of the ocean. However, the importance of the Preswick air traffic control centre had no bearing on the fate of Prestwick Airport and it is the same situation in Shannon. In the Shannon context I can assure members that our Shannon air traffic control centre will continue to be our main en route upper space control centre. In my view our strategy for the Shannon air traffic control centre must be to maintain and operate our existing airspace with effectiveness and efficiency. Our policy will be to endeavour to extend the operational functions and responsibilities of the Shannon centre. Indeed investments now on hand will further increase and enhance the capacity of the Shannon centre. I assure members that there are no proposals to redesignate or relocate staff already based in the Shannon area to Dublin or any other location.

Miss Flaherty

Or vice-versa? Are there any plans to relocate the staff in Dublin?

Mr. N. Treacy

I am only able to give the assurance I have given.

Miss Flaherty

There is certainly an implication in that for Dublin.

Mr. N. Treacy

When the company is in position, the question of staff will have to be examined and decisions will have to be taken. I cannot give assurances on everything. As of now it is obvious to everyone that Shannon is a vital component in the workings of the aviation authority.

Miss Flaherty

Nobody is arguing against that. By implication people are arguing that staff should be taken from Dublin.

Mr. N. Treacy

The Deputy can take it that we will be as fair, equitable and as generous as possible in every decision taken. Human compassion will be a very strong component.

Miss Flaherty

There are guarantees for Shannon and none for Dublin. That seems to be the bottom line from the Minister's reply.

Mr. N. Treacy

One can take any interpretation one wishes.

Miss Flaherty

That is not what I wanted to hear. I was seeking fair play.

Chairman

The Minister to reply, without interruption.

Mr. N. Treacy

It is inappropriate to provide in legislation for the location of the headquarters or any part of any company in any particular area. The Shannon region has already more than half of the ANSO staff located in that area. The location of the headquarters of the new company will be a matter for consideration in due course when the Bill has been enacted. On the other hand, headquarter's functions will include many now discharged by ANSO headquarters staff, most of whom are based in Dublin and who will, by virtue of section 40, be transferred to the new company.

Deputy O'Malley, who is a very experienced Deputy, knows from experience the legislation does not state where the headquarters of any commercial company will be. We have had representations from Senator Daly and Deputy Carey regarding this matter. Deputy Carey raised the matter in the Dáil and Senator Daly raised the issue in the Seanad prior to that. When the Bill is passed the location of the headquarters will have to be decided and proper consideration will be given to that matter. Consequently, it is not be possible at this stage to enshrine in legislation a precedent that traditionally has never been put into legislation. Therefore, I regret I am unable to accept this amendment.

Chairman

Is the amendment being pressed?

Mr. O'Malley

I missed the first figures the Minister of State gave and I wonder could I trouble him to repeat them?

Mr. N. Treacy

The complement of staff in County Clare as of 31 December 1992 was 304 people — 194 in Shannon and 110 at Ballygreen; in the greater Dublin area there are 226 — 101 at headquarters and 125 at Dublin Airport and in Cork there are 43, including one at Mount Gabriel.

Mr. O'Malley

When the Minister of State refers to 101 staff at headquarters, does he mean they are in the Department?

Mr. N. Treacy

They are departmental staff in ANSO headquarters and they are in a separate building on their own. They are located in the communications building in Scotch House. They are in independent group within the Department — as part of the Department — but they operate under these functions and responsibilies.

Mr. O'Malley

In response to what has been said, and particularly in response to the claim by Deputy Noonan that a provision requiring the headquarters of the company to be located at Shannon is not adequate to guarantee that the 304 people in that region at present would be retained there, I know it is not a guarantee but it is the best possible way of trying to ensure that those 304 people, or some proportion of them, will not be moved out. We cannot provide in a Bill that 304 people in a particular place will remain there but we can strengthen the claim of that area to remain the most important and central factor in the new company if we provide in the Bill where its headquarters will be located. If its headquarters are in a particular area it tends to draw various powers onto itself in that area and to continue the employment of a significant number of people there. I do not know why it should be thought that living and working in the Shannon or mid-west region is somewhat of a handicap to people. Many people find it very attractive and more so than Dublin.

The Minister of State said he does not know of any provision in any Bill requiring a headquartes of a semi-State body to be located in a particular area. He is probably right in that. I cannot recall one either but because it is never specified almost every semi-State body — even the most rural — has its headquarters in Dublin. I can only recall two — one in Cork and one in Limerick — who do not have their headquarters in Dublin.

Mr. N. Treacy

There is one in Wexford.

Mr. O'Malley

I am talking about national as opposed to regional bodies. Regional bodies, obviously, would have to have their headquarters locally. The reason 96 per cent of semi-State bodies have their headquarters in Dublin is because it was not specified in the legislation that they should be located elsewhere. If it had been specified I think they would have located their headquarters elsewhere. It is very unhealthy that, with the exception of a small handful of bodies, they all have their headquarters in Dublin.

The reaction in the mid-west and in the west to the Government's decision last week extends beyond a feeling of anger and anxiety in relation to Shannon Airport. The reason for this anger in the west genrally is that it is felt that the Government decided deliberately to turn their back on the most successful experiment in regionalisation, the one that really did work and has worked over 40 or 45 years. The Government would be making some gesture at least towards trying to redress the balance and diffuse the anger that their decision has caused in the west if the Minister of State were to accept this amendment.

It is all very well to say it should be left to the commercial decision of the company when it is established but we know that its commercial decision will be the same as most of the others. The decision will be made by a handful of very senior people who will take the view that their roots are now in Dublin, that they have children at schools, universities and so on and they do not want to move. This service is at least as ripe potentially for decentralisation as any other service.

A significant section of the collection side of the Revenue Commissioners has at long last begun its move to the Limerick region many years after it was supposed to happen. I would have thought air traffic control and matters related to it are at least as suitable for decentralisation as the collection of revenue, particularly as more than half of the staff are there.

Our great fear is that in a few year's time there will be less than half the staff and that the number will continue to decline. As Deputy Noonan said, and I adverted to this when I opened the debate on this amendment, modern technology is such that that type of service could be located anywhere. If we were to cover the north eastern Atlantic 50, 100 or even a few hundred miles one way or the other on land, it would not make any difference. It was different 40 or 50 years ago when it was necessary to be close to the traffic but that is no longer the case.

I am fearful that the pressures that always seem to draw things towards Dublin all the time will be accentuated if this provision is not included. It is reasonable provision asking only for the headquarters. The number of people may be relatively small although 101 was mentioned in the Department. If the headquarters were there that would become the centre of gravity within the company. The centre of gravity will be in Dublin and it will be pulling towards Dublin as so many things have. For that reason the select committee should accept this amendment.

Mr. S. Ryan

I am disappointed to hear the response of Deputy O'Malley, particularly as he was held high office in this State and has been in Government and knows that the difficulties in Aer Lingus arose because of inaction both by management and Government. In this case decisions have been taken which will result in major difficulties for many families but particularly those in both the Dublin and Shannon areas. Irrespective of whether the number of job losses is 1,000 or 1,500 at the end of the negotiations, the Dublin area will be hit more than anywhere else. The commitment has been given by the Minister that Shannon will remain the strategic centre of upper airspace control for the Irish Aviation Authority in the future in response to local pressure. Notwithstanding that Deputy O'Malley put forward this amendment, the net effect of which would be to take from the Dublin region a further 266 jobs. That would not be the proper decision. I would put it to the Minister that in relation to commercial and strategic decisions the headquarters should remain in the Dublin region. There is justification for that and any decision to the contrary would be detrimental to the eastern region, particularly the Dublin area which in recent times has lost out not only in terms of job losses in Aer Lingus but in overall job creation. I hope if this amendment is put to a vote it will not be carried.

Sitting suspended at 1 p.m. and resumed at 2 p.m.

Miss Flaherty

Before the break we listened at length to the case made by Deputy O'Malley for his amendment. I find it difficult to oppose this view and I understand it from a parochial standpoint. However, Deputy O'Malley, as leader of a national party, has failed to put forward a series of compensatory proposals for the Dublin area. Instead he is effectively proposing that the headquarters, which are currently located in Dublin, be moved to Shannon. I acept that Shannon will suffer a great deal from the decisions of last week, but the north Dublin area will lose out also within the next two to three months because the bulk of Aer Lingus employment is in Dublin.

From my understanding, a substantial part of the employment in Shannon is focused on Aer Rianta rather than Aer Lingus. The bulk of Aer Lingus losses will be in Dublin Airport. I accept the regional argument for Shannon but there is a great case to be made for Dublin, particularly in north Dublin area. In the towns of Malahide, Balbriggan and Swords and towns in my constituency where unemployment is already extremely high such as Santry and White-hall, every second or third household will be affected by the recent decision. It is not a question of waiting to see whether people will lose their jobs in 12 months' time, there will be immediate job losses.

In addition, if we were to accept Deputy O'Malley's proposal a minimum of 100 jobs would be lost in Dublin. The logic of his argument is that if the headquarters is situated in Shannon employment would be protected there. However employment would gradually be lost in Dublin. Perhaps the minimum number of staff required for air traffic control work in Dublin Airport should remain there and the remaining staff placed wherever the headquarters is located. The potential number of job losses in Dublin would be 226. I find it very sad to be arguing against Shannon. A Bill like this is not the appropriate vehicle for such a relatively parochial amendment.

I repeat what I said when Deputy O'Malley was absent. Deputy O'Malley is a Deputy from the Shannon region but he is also leader of a national party and in proposing this amendment he fails to propose ameliorative mesures for north Dublin. I accept regional arguments, but Dublin cannot continue to lose jobs to other parts of the country. It is now a region in decline, and all the statistics bear that out. It will have to be put on the national agenda. I commend my colleagues from Shannon, Limerick and Clare for the good case they have made for their region, but we will have to start making a similar case for Dublin.

Last night Dublin City Council addressed the impact of the Aer Lingus decision. It agreed to take a number of actions including holding a series of meetings with the various Ministers involved with a view to introducing ameliorative measures for investment in the region. The workers in Dublin Airport have shown the way in this regard and they have never tried to set themselves against the workers in Shannon. They are united in their efforts to keep their jobs. To a degree this amendment sets the needs of one area against another. I do not like to oppose it because there are very real needs in the Shannon region, but there must be a balance.

As the aviation authority is expected to operate employment is spread rather well throughout the two regions affected. I do not see why we should seek to interfere at a time when both regions are facing difficulties. In the case of north Dublin there will be job losses in the order of 1,200 to 1,500 over the next few months, with long term consequences for both Dublin and Shannon.

I could not argue with anything the Deputy said in support of this amendment. However it proposes to take a share of the action away from Dublin and in the context of the decision taken in the past few weeks, that would not be timely or fair.

Mr. Noonan (Limerick East)

As regards the assurances the Minister is giving to staff resident in Clare, what precisely has he in mind and will he meet his commitment? The nub of the issue is that consequent on the adverse decisions made last week there should be no transfer of existing ANSO staff from Clare, particularly to the Dublin region. Rather than concentrate on the location of any particular office, I am interested in getting guarantees that staff currently working in Clare will not be relocated. There are 304 staff in all, including those in Shannon airport and Ballygreen and I would like a strong commitment from the Minister that these people will be allowed to remain resident in the region.

As regards the headquarters, the Minister should tell us again how many people work at headquarters in Dublin. He said 101, but I did not quite catch his full reply. He also said, in reply to a previous amendment, that he intends retaining in an advisory capacity a cohort of civil servants who at present work at headquarters. Is the Minister in a position to tell us how many headquarters staff he intends designating to the Irish Aviation Authority and how many he is going to retain as civil servants to advise him? We should be given the figure of how many staff will be in the new headquarters? It seems that the fear in the area is that the 300 well-paid jobs there, on the passage of the Bill, will be transferred to the greater Dublin area. I should like the Minister to give us strong assurances that this will not happen.

Second, if the amendment were to be accepted will the Minister say about how many staff are we talking, taking into account the fact that the Minister will retain some of the headquarters staff in the Department in their capacity as advisers to him? Does he envisage any possibility of new jobs being created in the immediate short term? If so will they be other than specialist jobs of radio operators and air traffic controllers?

Mr. Molloy

Two issues arise here. The first is in regard to overall Government policy in relation to decentralisation. So far the Minister's response has been very enlightening. If we are to take from it an indication that it is not proposed to locate the headquarters of this new body at Shannon — where most of the employees are located — that is a very surprising announcement in view of the stated commitment in the past by the Minister's side of the Government to a policy of decentralisation. Where stands the Government's policy on decentralisation now if the Minister is not giving an indication today that this new semi-State body will be located in the Shannon region?

I do not accept the Minister's argument that a decision in relation to a matter of this kind should not be included in legislation. I suggest, as Deputy O'Malley suggested, that the correct place for such a decision is enshrined in legislation. If the new body is established and under way it will seek to reorganise itself. In time it will fill new posts which will be advertised as Dublin posts. I predict it will be a very difficult task in the future to try to make a decision which will alter the headquarters from Dublin to any other part of the country. The time to make a decision in relation to the headquarters of any new semi-State body is at the time of its establishment.

I have had practical experience of the difficulties that arise because such a decision was not made in relation to Coillte Teo. There was a certain expectation but when people were subsequently employed, the terms of their employment stipulated that they were to be located at a headquarters in Dublin. All sorts of complications arose. The only time one can implement a decentralisation policy in regard to a new semi-State body is at the time of its establishment because it becomes more difficult thereafter. There are precedents where a decision in regard to the headquarters was made afterwards. For instance, Gaeltarra Éireann was relocated from Dublin to Galway many years ago. It was the first semi-State body relocated out of Dublin and it was proven very successful. That body deals with regional development in the Gaeltcht areas. But, in the case of this body, it employs people in about three or four different locations only.

I urge the Minister to give serious consideration to the principle contained in the amendment as it affects the Government's decentralisation policy. I am surprised there is not more support for Deputy O'Malley's amendment from other Members. The Government's decision to abandon the Shannon stop has damaged confidence in the western and adjoining regions.

I suggest that Deputy Flaherty look at this from another perspective, that the decision to abandon the Shannon stop-over is to the advantage of Dublin, it will help Dublin. Shannon, and the western region, has been abandoned in order to alleviate the position in Dublin, where, obviously, the growth in transatlantic traffic into and out of Dublin will be substantial, with a commensurate fall off in transatlantic passengers landing at Shannon, and in tourism. It will also have a bearing in decisions of major corporations with regard to locating in the western region in the future. It is very parochial of Deputy Flaherty to suggest——

Mr. S. Ryan

Deputy Molloy should ask Deputy Harney for her views.

Mr. Molloy

Those Deputies may not see it through our eyes in that it constitutes a very serious loss to the west of Ireland.

Miss Flaherty

Deputy Molloy does not see it through our eyes.

Mr. Molloy

I do not know what is in the Fine Gael policy in regard to decentralisation.

(Interruptions.)

Chairman

The Deputy should be allowed to continue without interruption.

Mr. Molloy

I do not mind being interrupted. Nonetheless I contend it is a pity if the debate is to be reduced to a parochial one, with accusations being made that one is interested in something only because it is closer to one's constituency. Over the years one of the major complaints made about the development of our country — back to the time when the State was founded — was the huge imbalance in growth that has taken place, the huge increase in population in the Dublin region and the denuding of other regions. Successive Governments set out deliberately to try to redress that by trying to create poles of growth in different regions. They began with the establishment of industrial estates, which was followed by other Government decisions and, more recently, the Government decision to implement a strong decentralisation programme for the very purpose of encouraging regional development as a counter to the development of Dublin which was not able to manage its affairs because it was becoming so big. Indeed the whole quality of life in Dublin has been affected by the massive growth that has taken place there. There is no point in all of us looking at this on the basis of a narrow focus. We must look at it from the wider, national interest, that it is wrong to abandon decentralisation, to abandon a policy of regional development.

The Shannon stop-over was one of the advantages the western region had and it is now being taken away in order to benefit Dublin. As we are discussing the establishment of a new semi-State body, it is appropriate that a clause be incorporated in the Bill establishing that new authority stipulating that its headquarters should be at Shannon. There are many good reasons for that. If the amendment is not accepted it gives another signal which is not a very cheery one.

Mr. Kemmy

I often ponder when I hear Deputy Molloy speak like this, he being a most experienced politician and a senior Minister for a long time. He knows that, in this so-called sterile debate about Dublin versus Shannon as Dr. Tony Ryan said last week — the issue is not black and white. Even though I come from Limerick East and the mid-west and as a spokesman on transport, to be honest I would have to say the issue was never black and white. While naturally we in the mid-west saw it from our point of view and focus if one is a party spokes-person one must have a wider focus, one must view it in terms of national policy. I must endeavour to see the other side of the story even though I may not agree with it.

There are two sides to this story. I do not mind admitting that on this issue divisions arose in all parties except one. The only party that adopted a unanimous policy was Democratic Left, their Deputies being against the Shannon stop-over and in favour of Dublin. All other parties were divided on the issue and, when the crunch came, there was a minority in all parties in favour of a Shannon stop-over. I do not mind admitting that at my party meetings I fought the case as vigorously as I could. I make no apology to anybody for having done so. That is the truth of the matter.

I agree with Deputy Molloy's statement that Dublin is lopsided. The fact that it has the same amount of unemployment as other parts of the country does not take from the central argument that Dublin is lopsided while other parts of the country, including his own constituency on the western seaboard has been denuded of people, and suffers enormously as a result of unemployment and emigration. Therefore, it is important that we have a policy for the decentralisation of certain Departments, not merely for the sake of doing so, but to ensure value for money. We must not only pay out money but adopt wider criteria to ascertain how successful is its expenditure and in this case, ascertain its impact on aviation policy.

I should like to see Shannon being developed. We could learn a great deal from Dr. Brendan O'Regan's philosophical objective outlook on this matter, he being the founder father of Shannon. He has had some wise words to say. Neither would I debunk what Dr. Tony Ryan is doing. I am not a person who would be envious of anybody who makes money. I like to see people succeeding. Dr. Ryan has done a great deal for our region. I am against those who criticise what he has achieved. While he has run into some trouble I contend it does not do anybody any good to knock him at this stage. He has done a great deal and knows much about aviation. Indeed, the company he helped establish — Shannon Aerospace — has been most successful since its spectacular beginning. Dr Walsh, who took a different view from me on the Shannon question, is somebody who has much to offer in that region. I do not know whether we can envisage the establishment of a world aviation park in Shannon.

I am not here to score points. If the Minister thinks this is a good idea, let him say so; if not then let us hear from him. But I would not agree with setting up the headquarters of any State body merely for the sake of establishing it in somebody's constituency; that would solve nothing. As much as I should like to see international airports in every part of the country, common sense and our economy decree that we must have some selection process to ensure the investment will yield a good return, particularly since resources are very limited.

I hope to see a new role for the Shannon Development Company and greater status. I support what Deputy Noonan said, that there are fears among the 300 staff that they could be transferred to Dublin at some stage. I am more interested in ensuring the continuity of employment in that area which is more important than anything else.

Mr. Dukes

This may have nothing to do with the amendment but in the last week or so I find Deputy Kemmy's apologia pro vita sua becoming more and more ingenuous and desperate. I have the impression that there are so many chickens coming home to roost that he is going to be overcome in a sea of feathers to speak of nothing else.

Mr. Kemmy

Whose side is the Deputy on?

Mr. Dukes

Deputy Kemmy should keep out of arguments like this as I intend to do. I am not particularly pushed one way or the other about this issue although I have to say I am a bit surprised to find Deputies O'Malley and Molloy — I am not surprised, I can understand the reason — conducting such a determined war on this without any back-up economic analysis. We should really look somewhat further than the rather superficial things that have been said about the whole process of decentralisation. I was amused to hear Deputy Molloy accuse people of taking parochial points of view on this because it seemed that we had two parishes arguing on this and if one is a decent hurler, one will not get involved between two other parishes; I will stay out of that one.

On the whole question of what is called decentralisation, there is a great deal of mythology. What we have in fact is not decentralisation, we have dispersion, and there may be a great deal to be said for it. The process of decentralisation Governments here have sold — usually Fianna Fáil Governemnts and sometimes Fianna Fáil-Progressive Democrats Governments — is nothing like what it is cracked up to be. It is the movement of some employment from one part of the country to another. It benefits the places that the jobs are moved to and disadvantages the places that the jobs are moved from. It is an argument about where work takes place. It is not an argument about overall development and it is not an argument about regional development. It is an argument only about where the jobs are going to be because the net sum of national welfare is not affected by it directly one way or the other.

Sometimes there is a downside to it. If I am correct in looking back over the experience so far, the usual upshot of this has been that a given volume of public administration work carried on in this dispersed fashion has tended to cost the Government more than it did when it was carried out in a centralised fashion. The Government has usually paid over the odds for the buildings. In addition, these new creative financial formulae that come up usually mean that the Govenment pays more for the buildings under these projects than they would pay by borrowing the money on the gilt market. That is the first downside and it is done to satisfy local concerns.

Second, it is a process which has let Governments off the hook of making real decisions about devolution. If a Government can say it has moved a bit of this Department and a bit of that Department, we are actually diffusing the locus of decision-making. They are not doing anything of the kind. The decisions are all being made by the same people, the same Ministers and the same Secretaries of Departments, of course, with the difference — as we find — that from time to time meetings that used to require people to walk from one end of a corridor to another now require them to drive from Castlebar to Dublin, from Limerick to Dublin, or somewhere else to Dublin or vice versa and clocking up mileage expenses. Therefore, it is not a very sensible procedure from that point of view.

I will freely admit that on the first occasion it was proposed to me when I was Minister for Agriculture to move another section of that Department I said I did not like the idea but for God's sake if it was to be moved, not to move where it is being proposed. I suggested it be moved to Castlebar where other sections of the Department had gone so that we would have some kind of a critical mass of a unit there that would make some kind of administrtive sense. That is not what is proposed. Of course, the psychosis goes very deep. It is a part of the traditional mytholoogy that Deputies should never oppose.

I remember receiving a deputation about a project that was not going ahead. When they finally came to the conclusion that the project still was not going to go ahead they wanted me to find some bit of the State that I could locate in their county or even an advance factory to build — not that there was any hope of having anybody to put in it — that is the decentralisation psychosis. More often than not it actually ends up costing the State money rather than making a net addition to national welfare. It is good for the places that the people are moved to but there is a corresponding reduction elsewhere. Therefore, I cannot see why otherwise economically sensible Deputies like those in the Progressive Democrats are getting themselves into a dreadful lather about this. It is not an argument that should detain us any length of time.

Mr. Lawlor

Based on the figures the Minister gave us it is not really a question of giving something to Shannon because a substantial number of employees of the proposed authority are based and will continue to be based at Shannon. Therefore, making a great case for taking the token decision of the location of the headquarters — which could involve a handful of jobs rather than some expansion of the technical activity that could go to Shannon and for which probably it would be ideally suited — is not warranted. If the Minister can give us an undertaking in relation to whatever technical and other staff may be required for the future growth of the company that Shannon will be given a high priority, that would make a great deal of sense.

In relation to decentralisation, while it sounds heretical to say so, an area like Tallaght has too few population to warrant rapid rail and/or the whole hierarchical structure, if one takes, say, the 6,000 or 7,000 people wanting to move in and out to the city. That would be uneconomic with that sort of population. Indeed one million people in the capital city is also probably too few to support all that is needed. That is not to say that, in the totality of our population, it is not a large percentage. The best thing we can do about decentralisation is have our roads network extended so that all areas become accessible, and then the private sector and so on will relocate. Hopefully, the type of infrastructure moving into the midlands will be a bonus as will the Euro-route on the east coast when it becomes operable. We should accept what the Minister said about the numbers that will be retained and that in any additional aspects of the company's operation Shannon should be given priority.

Mr. O'Malley

I have no intention of withdrawing the amendment which makes eminent sense. I have listened carefully to the debate and I have not heard anything which causes me to change my mind in regard to it. I am surprised at some of the things that were said. Although Deputy Molloy and I were described as getting ourselves into a lather, we are about the only two Members who are not in some respects in any kind of a lather about this or other matters. It is interesting to note the reasons some Members are opposed to this amendment. It appears that the whole concept of decentralisation here is about to become unfashionable. We are the most heavily centralised country in Europe. Decentralisation has taken place successfully in Britain and France where tens of thousands of civil servants and public employees have been moved out of the capital city. In some cases entire Departments — not just small units — have decentralised. As that is seen as eminently sensible and beneficial in those countries such a policy would be even more useful here where we tend to be more centralised and have proportionately a much more densely populated capital city vis-�-vis the remainder of the country than is the case elsewhere.

I make no apology for arguing in favour of the concept of decentralisation whatever Department or agencies it relates to. If we cannot accept decentralisation more readily than seems to be the case at present the outlook for this country is bleak particularly for Dublin as the congestion, overcrowding and loss of quality of life becomes greater and greater.

Mr. Kemmy

There is more to this than meets the eye. Deputy O'Malley is attempting to extract the maximum embarrassment from a Labour Deputy such as I from the mid-west, who is supporting the Government. I would remind him that the pendulum of politics swings back and forth and little apples will grow again, beidh lá eile ag an bPaorach. Two can play that game and I am a fairly dab hand at it; I am resourceful and can give an uppercut when necessary.

Mr. Dukes

We would never believe that the Deputy is so sanctimonious.

Mr. Kemmy

I am very resourceful. I am just reminding Deputy O'Malley that some of his remarks were made tongue in cheek. There are two sides to every story and we will have another day.

Mr. N. Treacy

Some worth while points were made from all sides and I will respond to some of them. Deputy Noonan asked about the statistical position and I will put it on record once more so that we all will be aware of the position. As of 31 December 1992 there were 226 staff in the city of Dublin, 101 in the communications division of the headquarters in Scotch House and 125 at Dublin Airport. There are 304 staff in County Clare; 194 at Shannon and 110 at Ballygreen. There are 43 in County Cork, including one at Mount Gabriel.

As Members will see from some of the amendments tabled to this and related sections I am well aware of staff concerns about various issues. I thank Members who raised various points during this debate. First, I will give a broad picture and then focus on particular aspects.

At present there are approximately 580 staff in ANSO. In Civil Service terms it operates as a largely self contained unit. It is mainly an executive agency and when policy matters arise ANSO, along with other divisions in the Department, advises the Minister in so far as issues in their areas are concerned. As prescribed in the Bill, all ANSO staff serving immediately prior to vesting day and who are designated by the Minister will on vesting day be transferred to and become a member of the staff of the Authority. Deputies Noonan and Dukes raised valid questions about who in the Department would monitor the new State body and give advice to the Minister on special technical issues once the Authority is established. Once the new Authority is established there will be a need for a small departmental unit to monitor the new company and the Minister will have to be advised on the investigation of aircraft accidents and other matters. There will be a need also to advise the Minister on general safety issues arising in connection with his directive powers or in connection with the technical and safety audits of the company. It is intended that this unit will comprise a small number of staff, the majority of whom will be senior technical specialists. No decision has yet been made as to how these technical specialists will be appointed. The Minister has a number of options. He could select the staff concerned before vesting day from among existing ANSO personnel. Alternatively, such specialists could be seconded from the company to the Minister or the Minister could recruit such staff directly. The method of appointment of the staff concerned will fall to be considered when the Bill is enacted and closer to vesting date.

In regard to the points raised about location and designation in this Bill for a new headquarters for the Authority, positive points were made from both sides as to why it should be located in Shannon and why it should be located in Dublin, the adverse effects of not locating it in Shannon, the necessity to locate it in Dublin and the logic of having certain technical staff in Shannon and administrative and other technical staff in Dublin. Deputy Lawlor asked for an assurance on technical staff being recruited pertaining to opportunities arising at Shannon. I can give that assurance. However, it would not be prudent to enshrine in legislation the location of the headquarters. I will take everything that has been said on board, make a recommendation and, after due consideration, a decision will be taken. I respectfully suggest that in view of the worth while points made from both sides on this issue that the normal conventional wisdom should prevail and the decision should be taken in the normal way. I suggest, therefore, that Deputy O'Malley withdraw his amendment rather than divide the committee on this issue. We have a duty to ourselves, to aviation and to our country, therefore, it is better that we conclude positively together and allow the usual procedure to prevail.

Chairman

Is the amendment being pressed?

Mr. O'Malley

Yes.

Chairman

As there are fewer than 31 Members present we are required under Standing Orders to wait eight minutes until full membership is present before proceeding to take a division.

Amendment put.

The Select Committee divided: Tá, 7; Níl, 15.

Tá
Crawford, Seymour.	Molloy, Robert.
Creed, Michael.	Noonan, Michael
Deasy, Austin.	(Limerick East).
Dukes, Alan.	O'Malley, Desmond J.

Níl
Briscoe, Ben.	Kemmy, Jim.
Byrne, Hugh.	Kirk, Séamus.
Doherty, Seán.	Lawlor, Liam.
Fitzgerald, Brian.	O'Sullivan, Toddy.
Fitzgerald, Liam.	Ryan, Eoin.
Flood, Chris.	Ryan, John.
Hughes, Séamus.	Smith, Brendan.
	Treacy, Noel.

Amendment declared lost.

Sections 11 to 13, inclusive, agreed to.