I had not expected to speak yet but I will take the opportunity. Things have moved very quickly. The benefit of Dublin Airport to Meath East is unquestionable. The opportunities for employment, the increase in the number of residents or constituents in the area and the opportunities for travel are all to our advantage. However, in recent times, the residents of Meath East have, without consultation, been affected by the increased number of flights to and from Dublin Airport. I will speak in particular about the north runway. My comments will be no surprise to the Minister, his officials or the Taoiseach as I have raised these issues previously. As I have said before, I try to focus on solutions. In that vein, I will read solutions into the Dáil record, some of which were conveyed to the Committee on Transport. I am not a member of that committee. I am grateful to Deputy Michael Murphy for his indulgence in letting me speak there. As we know, there are many affected residents in Meath East. There are people who bought homes in the constituency who never anticipated being overflown. The impact of the noise preferential route on these communities was never measured. Consultation with Meath County Council was never considered. Consultation was not extended to that council. I welcome the consideration within the Bill regarding public consultation in respect of environmental impact assessments being extended to Meath County Council. I will read something into the record. I hope it will come in under time. Parts of it have previously been read into the record. As I have said before, I am a solutions-focused person. This is a solution to the issues facing the St. Margaret's residents and the Meath East residents. It is provided by the North Runway Technical Group, a voluntary group comprising residents and pilots with technical expertise. There is a way out. It reverses a change rather than making a change. The 28R departure routes flown since 2023 have turned aircraft off the straight-ahead procedures for air navigation services-aircraft operations, PANS-OPS, default without the safety assessment that change required. Returning these routes to the default removes the unassessed change. Most of it can start this month with no loss to the capacity Dublin Airport operates today. Indeed, there is a possible opportunity for increased capacity. We currently have DAA and AirNav flying 28R departures straight ahead on the omnidirectional departure route DAA already publishes, operated using the dependent mode. That is the mode Dublin Airport already operates whenever there is a missed approach on the parallel runway. Given that the straight-ahead path follows the corridor the original assessment reserved for departures, every population count falls under this approach. The number directly overflown drops by nearly 80% and the number in the wider affected swathe falls by more than 40%. This fix reduces the impact rather than moving it onto anyone else. That has been cited repeatedly. It stops the steep low-altitude turn and only needs procedures and a mode that already exist. It is a permanent and independently designed solution. In this instance, the Government can commission a qualified procedure designer independent of AirNav and DAA with a proper published brief to design the durable solution, turning the 28L missed approach - the south runaway missed approach - rather than the departure and run it through a full four pillar balanced approach. Everyone wins - the DAA keeps its capacity and growth, the residents come out from under the routes and AirNav and the IAA get a defensible design. We are solving the problem ourselves and then moving forward with the Bill in the intended mode. However, the affected residents are my primary concern. The Minister knows from the committee that there have been presentations on the health impacts to residents in the area, which is estimated at a cost of €800 million per annum. Again, this reverses a change rather than making a change. I wish to raise the overflight of Meath. The current situation that we have is the 30-degree separation from the missed approach path of the parallel runway, 28L. That separation is a requirement of independent, segregated, parallel operations. It does not apply when the two runways operate in dependent mode. Dublin already operates in a dependent mode in this respect. The north runway already holds whenever there is a missed approach on the south runaway. The dependent operation is not something that AirNav would have to create. It is already there. It operates in constrained conditions, such as strong winds. It is the co-ordination process. Operating in dependent mode and releasing the north runway departures straight ahead on the omnidirectional procedure changes nothing except the direction of the turn. I repeat that it does not reduce the capacity that Dublin already operates. I hate to sound repetitious but the solution is here in reversing a change and the impact on the 30,000 people. Without referring directly to challenges that exist, we are aware that there are legal challenges take place. In the spirit of offering a solution, it is to reinforce this. I apologise for my repetition but there is a solution to this, which then it allows moving forward without opposition. Reversing the change reduces both the overflown and the affected population. The interim arrangement will deliver that reduction immediately. The North Runway Technical Group has published geographic information system, GIS, analysis. It has been measured on the published departure centre lines against the convention of an overflown swathe within 1.5 km based on the UK's department of transport track keeping norms and an affected swathe within 3 km of the track flown. It gives the total population within each corridor. Regarding the statistics in relation to Fingal and east Meath and the routes flown since February 2023, 13,923 residents have been overflown, and 30,540 residents are in the affected swathe. On the straight-ahead design based on the 2004 to 2005 environmental impact statement, EIS, for the 2007 application, the figures here are stark. This is where the solution focus is. A total of 2,888 residents are overflown and 17,481 residents are in the affected area. This is a reduction in the total impact, not a redistribution of it, which I can understand is a fear. I am somebody who would be living in the affected swathe where the straight-ahead mode be complied with. In the spirit of being solution focused, I seriously ask for this consideration to be acted on. However, first of all, I wish for it to be analysed. I have requested the safety reports that relate to the current 30-degree departure, and the subsequent 56-degree turn on departure from 28R. I await those. This is something that can be implemented within a very short timeframe. In the spirit of being the good neighbour as per the Dublin Airport Authority's website, a good neighbour in this instance is about reducing the health impacts, recognising the benefits of the airport and recognising our island status but trying to factor in, plan and implement for a win-win situation for our residents.

Sentiment score: 0.12