Madam, - The announcement by the Government about the second terminal at Dublin airport and the future plans for Aer Lingus is far from being a decision which "for the first time puts Irish aviation in a position for long-term growth" (Martin Cullen, The Irish Times, May 19th).
Instead it is a craven abdication by sections of our democratically elected public elite by surrendering to the unrepresentative and minority view of the most reactionary vested interest group in Ireland, ie public sector trade unions. Two years ago when the Government sought formal indications of interest from parties interested in building the second terminal at Dublin airport it received replies from 13 (later 14) private consortiums. A number of these were from significant international airport operators. The Government subsequently hired consultants to examine these and they concluded that an independent second terminal at Dublin airport was a viable option. There was never any follow-up to this process despite numerous promises by the Government to do so.
Instead, we now have the project for a second terminal at Dublin airport awarded without any public tendering option to the Dublin Airport Authority. Whilst the new DAA board led by Gary McGann is a huge improvement on the disastrous regime that led Aer Rianta for the last 10 years, the DAA is nonetheless the inheritor of a regime at Dublin airport which is generally recognised as having managed and operated the airport wastefully, inefficiently and incompetently over the past decade.
All we have to do is ask the millions of air passengers who regard travelling through Dublin airport as being nothing short of a nightmare.
And yet the Government has decided that this is the most competent body to take responsibility for the provision of a new terminal at Dublin airport. Of course we know that in reality competence was not the primary criterion under consideration in making the final decision. And most definitely the public and consumer interest was nowhere of significance in the list of important considerations.
Instead the public interest is being surrendered for short-term electoral considerations in North Dublin in a craven surrender of Government authority to the whim of public sector trade unions. These are the same public sector trade unions who promote restrictive practices that have for decades forced high costs and inefficiencies on Irish air travellers and the Irish economy.
The one silver lining on an otherwise dark cloud is that the build and design specification will have to be independently validated and that the vestiges of the old wasteful Aer Rianta regime will not have a free hand in building a gold-plated white elephant like much of the other capital investment carried out by it over the last decade. So this validation process is welcome.
As regards the competition element for the operation and management of the new terminal, one is sceptical about the sincerity of the commitment to this in light of how the 14 private-sector groups who indicated that they wanted to build the terminal were completely ignored when it came time to make the final decision. The tendering process for the operator of the second terminal must not be a con job to cover up a predetermined conclusion to satisfy DAA, the Government and their union bosses, but must instead be transparent and vigorous.
In relation to Aer Lingus, we are told that "the Department of Transport, in partnership with the Department of Finance, is to move to appoint financial advisers to advise the Government on the size, type and timing of the sales transaction." Let no one expect this to be a binding commitment to a sale of part of Aer Lingus by the Government. If they are serious about freeing Aer Lingus from the dead hand of State ownership, then why don't they take down the previous, at least two, reports prepared for Government in recent years on this issue. On each previous occasion, despite numerous announcements by ministers to the contrary, nothing was done to introduce private capital into Aer Lingus because permission could not be got from the real government in Liberty Hall.
The air transport market has shown that it can be competitive, efficient and offer better choice and value to the consumers when Government gets out of the way. Unfortunately, this lesson appears not to have been learned and the loser as usual will be air travellers, tourism and the overall economy. - Yours, etc,
TADHG B. KEARNEY, Castletroy, Limerick.
Madam, - Ulick McEvaddy desperately wants his terminal, but can't get access to the runways at Dublin airport. He should build a terminal and a runway (ie an airport) somewhere else. In exchange for his very valuable land at Collinstown he could probably treble his acreage somewhere around Newbridge, for example.
Newbridge is well served by transport links. The National Spatial Strategy describes the junction of the M7 and M9 as the junction of two Strategic Radial Corridors. This junction, 35km from the M50, is only a few kilometres from Newbridge Station on the national rail network linking Dublin to the west, south and southwest.
I understand that a Dart-type suburban rail link to Kildare is currently being planned.
If you live in Foxrock you would probably get to a new airport in that area more quickly than you would get to Dublin airport. It would provide real competition to the Dublin Airport Authority's airport.
It would also prevent the total gridlock of North Co Dublin, which will result if a new runway and two new terminals are built at Collinstown to handle 40 million passengers. - Yours, etc,
MATT HARLEY, Martello Court, Portmarnock.