I did.
Sentiment score: 0.00
We went over that on Second Stage.
Sentiment score: 0.00
I thank the ten Deputies who have contributed to the debate so far. I will deal with the specific amendments first and a few of the other points. Some Deputies, such as Deputy Coppinger - not to pick her out - could have a look at the Second Stage speech. I outlined a lot of what we were talking about this evening on Second Stage. I will make a comment before I speak directly to the amendment but it is related. I know everyone in this House has an earnest and a well-held view about this. I think all of us agree that Dublin Airport is an important strategic asset for this State. That is the first thing. I will deal with regional as well because our regional airports are critically important for this country. By the way, it is not just those within the Republic. Derry and Belfast airports are on this island and are critically important. I will turn to regional development and the national aviation policy, which I clearly referenced in the Second Stage contribution. If we take the airport as it operates right now, last year, 36.4 million passengers flew through Dublin Airport. A small percentage, approximately 1.7 million or so, transited through it. They are passenger numbers, not flights. That was said earlier on and I know Deputy Ahern probably misspoke on that. They were passenger numbers as opposed to flights. That is important too. The ratio of passengers to jobs is about 1 million to 1,000. For every 1 million passengers, there are about 1,000 direct jobs. We have approximately 30,000 plus workers directly on campus and about 130,000 total between direct and indirect. I am speaking to amendment No. 1 to section 2, which is Deputy Ahern's amendment. Others have come into the House in a less constructive way, such as Deputies Murphy and Coppinger and others. We would be having a debate here, and rightly so, as to why we lost 4,000 direct jobs in the airport and 10,000 to 15,000 indirect jobs if we continued to operate it as it is now and did not try to address what is a legacy issue. To be fair, many Deputies recognised that as a legacy issue. There is an economic imperative here but there is a balanced approach. There is the good neighbour policy that needs to be operated by DAA, the airport operator. I said that really clearly on Second Stage. I have grown up beside the airport. I represent an airport constituency. I know the benefits of living beside the airport by way of proximity. I know the challenges for members within my community and my constituency and other constituencies like Deputy O'Gorman's. That has to be done in a proper and appropriate way. I said clearly on Second Stage that this has not always been the case by the airport operators. On page 8 of the Bill, someone bemoaned the powers that may be given to the Minister. That might be a well-held view but it states, "The Minister may give a direction in writing to daa for any purpose relating to this Act, including, but not limited to-". I have said it clearly on a couple of things. I have written to the airport and intend for it to do things such as improving and expanding the noise insulation scheme. I do not think Deputy Coppinger knew about ANCA's decision at the time. That decision in relation to aircraft noise has been published for 14 weeks, which would have a significant bearing on the scale and the breadth of the noise insulation scheme. I have put it on the record of the House here and directly to the DAA that the voluntary purchase scheme needs to be improved upon. There are people who have sold their homes under that scheme. It needs to be improved further. There are people, particularly on the western side, right on the airport campus, whose homes I visited. For others to make any suggestion that I have not met residents' groups is simply untrue. Again, that charge was made by Deputies Murphy and Coppinger. It is not true. Formally, I have had three separate meetings with three groups over the course of the past 12 to 18 months, listening to them directly. I represent residents and constituents who work in the airport as well as those who have issues with noise. I meet them and engage with them all the time, so what they said is simply not true. There is a responsibility to balance sustainable growth at the airport, supporting the jobs in the airport and supporting the potential to grow further jobs and further routes. On flight paths, I said very clearly on Second Stage - not on foot of a proposal from anyone else but I welcome the main Opposition party looking at this - that an independent assessment of flight paths will happen. We need it to happen because, as Deputy O'Rourke said, there are people, including in north County Dublin, who saw applications made for certain flight paths that were granted and were not adhered to. I will not say too much because that was a matter for a retention application as well. When you plan forward, you have to try to be very clear with people. Yes, I want the airport to grow. I want the good jobs that are in the airport to be supported and I want the reality of ensuring that happens in a sustainable way. I think it was Deputy Farrelly who mentioned SHDs and going over the head of local authorities. I agree absolutely - that is why as housing Minister I got rid of SHDs - but this legislation specifically references that we are protecting the existing infrastructure application in there. We are not overriding the application that has still not been heard. I take the Deputy’s point and am not dismissing it at all but, in line with the legal advice we had, fundamentally the policy direction that I wanted was to protect that application that is there because it has gone through a number of iterations by way of public consultation right the way through. It is a complicated decision-making structure between the aircraft noise competent authority, ANCA, and Fingal County Council. I was in this Chamber in the Opposition debating this when it was the subject of a Bill in 2018. I actually supported the Bill but managed to get some changes to it - parts of it were a halfway house – and on foot of that we have commenced the review of where planning should sit for an airport into the future, as a strategic asset, how the noise authority interacts with the local authority and all those different things. There were people in the Fingal area at the time, as I am sure Deputy O’Gorman will know, who were not happy with ANCA sitting within Fingal County Council even though it is an independent organisation. There were people who had concerns about that. I commend ANCA on the work it does. It operates very well and has protected the independence it has had. I mention that because these were points that were made during debates, genuine concerns that may have been raised, that have not come to pass. That is not to dismiss any of the points that have been made here either, because this is just the first iteration of this. When I say it will protect the existing application, that application, if granted, would supersede any order I would make. Again, that is clearly set down in the legislation. If it is refused, my order stays in place. How do I make the order? This question has been raised by many TDs here, and especially Deputies Ahern and O’Gorman have raised it in relation to environmental considerations. It is clearly set out in the Bill. I will not be doing the assessments. The full environmental impact assessment will be done in line with an EIA directive, which will identify, describe and assess the direct and indirect significant effects of making an order on several factors including climate. That will be independently undertaken prior to the making of the order. An Coimisiún Pleanála will do that and I have set out a timeframe. Any charge that we are setting aside any environmental considerations is absolutely not true. I will not prejudice the outcome of that assessment, which I will consider fully before making an order. I have made it clear that even though international aviation emissions are outside the scope of the climate action plan, which is a fact, we are taking actions that are aligned with the global approach to decarbonisation in the aviation sector. That is the element in relation to this. We are not setting aside climate obligations, climate assessments or environmental impact assessments. That is not correct. We are protecting the original planning application. That is being done and I have said that very clearly. It does give the Minister of the day the power to seek an application from the DAA for further increases. I am glad Deputy Murphy is back. I referred to him earlier - not in a derogatory way, I might add - in relation to his comment that the Bill has been rushed or not considered. There were ten weeks of pre-legislative scrutiny. It is a planning condition going back to 2007 and 2008. It is something that has been kicked around for a long time and has never been dealt with. Those pre-legislative scrutiny hearings were open to any Deputy to go and make his or her case or point of view.
Sentiment score: 0.17
Yes, Deputy O’Gorman was there. I was not saying he was not but I am saying there are others who have contributed here this evening who did not go to that committee to put forward their case. They are entitled to do it here this evening but I am just stating that. I did say, now that Deputy Murphy is here, that I have met residents. Deputy Coppinger made the charge the last time that I had not done so but I certainly have. On balanced regional development, national aviation policy has been rightly mentioned. Again, on Second Stage, I tried to be very clear on this. We have commenced work on the new national aviation policy, which is a commitment in the programme for Government. We will issue an issues paper on the new national aviation policy later this year. That will form the basis for stakeholder engagement and look at the balanced regional development of our airports. All our regional airports are growing and that is good. Cork Airport is growing. Deputy Pa Daly asked what was happening with Cork. There is a €200 million capital investment happening in Cork Airport. I visited it only a few weeks ago. It is a great airport with further potential to grow and I want to see that happen. I was at the 40th anniversary of Ireland West, where I met the team and saw the new infrastructure that is in place, fire services training, new stands and its development plan. Hopefully, Ireland West Airport Knock will hit 1 million passengers by the end of this year. Shannon is growing. It grew by 9% last year. It not only has really good plans in place but there is growth happening. I think there are 41 routes out of Shannon now, which is the highest number it has had in maybe 30 years. Donegal Airport is servicing the north west and we have managed to protect that airport with the PSO changes we made. The Dublin-Derry air route will open in October through PSO funding we secured through the shared island fund. Kerry Airport in Farranfore is continuing to grow. Commitment towards regional growth is why I have changed the regional airports policy to ensure that airports can grow up to 3 million and still receive support from the State to grow. I want to see them grow. There are really good jobs there. Connectivity is important for tourism and for our wider economy as well. If we were to stick to 32 million and a decision were made tomorrow that the cap currently in place would apply immediately such that we reduced the passenger numbers from 36.4 million to 32 million, we would be losing thousands of jobs in Dublin Airport. Deputy Coppinger would probably be the first to come here on that. She might not be the first but many Deputies would rightly come in here and ask what we were doing to support airport workers. What I am doing to support airport workers is making sure there are good jobs in the airport and making sure people can have good careers in the airport, not just in aviation itself and the airlines but in maintenance, repair and overhaul, MRO, leasing and all the other elements of the aviation sector in which Irish people are at the forefront right the way across the world. The airport has to grow in a sustainable way and it will. We are protecting the application that is before Fingal County Council. We have ensured that is the case with this legislation by specific reference to it. On future growth, the application right now would raise the cap to 40 million. The assessments that have been done will back up that 40 million. Any future growth would be based on an order that would be made. An application would be made to the Minister for a further increase if that was required in the future but you cannot just grow the airport and passenger numbers without having the infrastructure in place. That is why you need the new stands at the airport and all the various things that underpin the growth of the aviation sector and, indeed, Dublin Airport. To respond to Deputy Ahern, I was not being facetious the last day and I will not be facetious now either. It is very clear what international connectivity is and that is why I am not accepting either of the amendments he tabled. I have also clearly covered our obligations with regard to environmental impact assessments and how they will be assessed through An Coimisiún Pleanála, so I do not intend to accept amendment No. 13 either. I think I have covered most of what was there, but I assure people that residents and those living in proximity are at the forefront of my mind in ensuring the airport can grow in a balanced way on the basis that it operates as a good neighbour, which it has not always done. I have reiterated my commitment to ensuring an independent assessment of flight paths. That will happen. We will continue to support and grow the jobs at Dublin Airport and everything else that relates to the other, indirect jobs that flow from smaller and larger Irish companies thousands of people derive their income from. That is an important consideration, I would say, and should be for everyone in this Chamber.
Sentiment score: 0.24
That is the one in with Fingal now.
Sentiment score: 0.00
The Deputy can table amendments.
Sentiment score: 0.00
Am I allowed to respond?
Sentiment score: 0.00
This amendment proposes that I lay a report before the Houses in relation to the DAA's compliance with any direction I give it under the Bill. I think this provision is unnecessary. Under the Bill, the DAA is required to comply with a direction that I issue. Typically, this will relate to the provision of reports to allow the environmental assessments to be undertaken. If that information is not provided and the assessments cannot be undertaken, no order can be made. As such, it is in the interest of the DAA to comply with a direction I issue. I do not envisage a scenario where the DAA does not comply with a direction I give, so reporting on compliance will be unnecessary. In addition, it is open to Deputies to seek information by way of parliamentary questions. I again refer the Deputy to the powers of a Minister to give directions to the DAA. That will not be confined. We have discussed at length here too the importance of the DAA being a good neighbour. I think this has improved in the short term but it needs to improve further. In relation to things like flight paths, I have made this very clear. We are going to have an independent assessment of it. Additionally, as was referenced earlier in relation to flights, and the decision, in particular, that ANCA has issued for a 14-week public consultation, I encourage people to engage with it. It is a good piece of work and will feed into the planning application for 40 million passengers currently with Fingal County Council. That is why I was at pains to say earlier that we protect that current application because communities, individuals and other stakeholders have engaged directly with it. It would not be appropriate to set that aside, nor am I actually suggesting that happen. Furthermore, I have actually specifically protected it, and it is referred to in this legislation. In that instance, I am not going to accept this amendment for the reasons I put forward.
Sentiment score: 0.23
I have.
Sentiment score: 0.00
I have met them.
Sentiment score: 0.00