Irish Government cabinet shakeup - What implications for Aer Rianta etc?

[eoinok]

Howdy all, some of you maybe aware that Bertie Ahern, the Irish Taoiseach(Prime minister), has announced that he is going to re shuffle his government on the 29th of September.

My questions are what implications do people think it will have for the break up of Aer Rianta and the development of a 2nd terminal at Dublin airport if Seamus Brennan is moved from his current position of Minister for Transport?

I probably have a vested interest in this. As living down in Cork, I would like to see what would happen in Cork if it becomes an independant airport and was able to compete with Dublin and Shannon for routes etc? I remember at the time it was 1st proposed (break up of Aer Rianta) that MOL said he would open 20 new routes out of Cork airport! Dunno if that offer still stands......

Also it would be interesting to see what happens with this "open skies" agreement being abolished? ORK has gained 10M in funding for an extension to the runway to allow the heavies to land, and more importantly, to allow the heavies to take off with a full fuel load to allow them to go across the pond, so as to speak........

Also, I would assume, a different Minister might have different views on the sale/privitisation of Aer Lingus?
This whole ordeal amazes me (Aer Lingus) I work for a large privately owned (American owned) multinational company based in Cork. If we were not making money, and I was surplus to requirements, then I would be out the door, no questions asked, it is a fact of industry now adays. Even if we were making money, but I was still surplus to requirements (company was making money because it was out sourcing etc) then I would still be turfed out. Why then does these general rules of industry not apply to semi state bodies, and in this case, Aer Lingus?

[akerosid]

If SB is moved (and I think it's still an "if", because he's one of the better performing cabinet ministers), the only one I'd really trust to continue the process of modernisation of change is Mary Harney. She has been linked with Transport before, but with other departments too. Other than her, I can't think who; FF is trying to re-connect with its roots and that would tend to suggest a more "cautious" approach. Translation: another MO'R, which would be a disaster.

Unfortunately, regardless of which minister comes in, the Open Skies issue with the US is pretty well stymied. I wrote to the Commissioner about this issue recently and the response was not at all encouraging. There's a new EU directive, 847/04, which states that any individual state wanting to open negotiations with another non-EU state must obtain the commission's approval to open and conclude negotiations. If one were legalistic, there is a way around this, but I'm not sure the motivation is there. Unfortunately, WW has shown that the only way to get them to move is a pitchfork in the rear end; it may well take the likes of CO or DL to threaten a pull-out "or else" to effect a change. I have to say, in fairness, that the fault lies squarely with the EU on this, since it had - and squandered a very good chance for Open Skies in June.

As for the break-up of Aer Rianta, I don't think any new minister could stop that, since the legislation has gone through, but an uncommitted minister could be swayed by the likes of Hanlon.

I would hope that the 2nd terminal issue could go ahead next year. However, the big development this month will be the cabinet sub-committee's decision on Aer Lingus. It is perhaps no surprise that Harney is among the ministers on that committee, so it will put her in a good position if SB is moved.

[akerosid]

Further to my previous message, above, I just received the most recent Irish Air Letter. The situation now appears to be that EI does not expect any change in the EU/US bilateral situation until 2007, hence its plan not to introduce a new aircraft type until 2008/9. It also seems to rule out long haul growth altogether before then (including mooted new routes to Asia/South Africa). This could, of course, be posturing, to try and get the government to be pro-active, although in fairness, it hands are tied.

The fact of the matter is that given the state of the US/EU negotiations, we appear to be stuck with the current 50/50 for another considerable period; this means US carriers, such as DL/CO/US are stuck with this and frankly, it's up to them whether they wish to put up with this; combined action on their part (a threat to withdraw services to SNN) might force the issue. It's difficult to know how the EU would react to this, but it's unlikely the government would be prepared to sit still for another year or two and wait for the EU to get its act together, if DL and CO pulled out (US, one assumes, won't be around that long).

Regulation 847/04 deals with countries entering direct negotiations with the US and concluding agreements, BUT ...
- there are no negotiations currently ongoing
- the "negotiations" would not be described as such, but rather as a realignment of current services and
- there would not be a "conclusion" because this would be the final EU/US deal, which would supersede any temporary arrangement reached. In this way, 847/04 would be circumvented.

[eoinok]

hi akerosid.
I'm afraid to admit that everything you are saying is correct and true, although I wish it wasn't!!

I do hope that Brennan is left where he is. Seems to be one of the few dynamic ministers there who goes out on a limb with decisions and is not afraid to upset the big boys.
Harney would probably be the next best choice, and as you rightly pointed out, M O Rourke would be a disaster!! Never liked her, always felt that everything she said or promised would never pass a lie detector test.

I was aware of the situation with the open skies agreement, but just thought I would throw it out there to open discussion on it. I am not 100% sure if I want it removed even myself! The biggest argument against for removing it is that we will all be forced to fly out of hubs. As in all the trans con flights will operate out of hubs like AMS, Frankfurt and LHR.

I wish though that I had a cyrstal ball where I could look 10 years into the future, after the open skies agreement had been abolished to see what was after happening.

Saying that, if I had a crystal ball, I would probably use it to try and pick out the winning lotto numbers :)

[akerosid]

The Shannon issue has been dragging on for God knows how many years and it now seems, according to EI's latest plan, that they're expecting it to drag out as far as 2007. Personally, I don't see this as being a likelihood, but it really does need to be dealt with. I'm not sure I understand your point about NOT removing it -if it's gone, we'll have unlimited access, no need to fly via other hubs and I'm sure given EI's commitment to be a low cost carrier, we won't want to either. I'm not sure I'm 100% agreement with EI's idea of going down the no-frills path, but at the end of the day, the choice should be with the consumer, with the govt getting involved as little as possible.

As good a job as I think SB has done, I think he's slowed down a bit and it may be time to bring someone in to shake the place down a bit - again, Harney being the choice.

I think things will crystallise a bit, later this month, as the decision on EI's future is made by cabinet; indeed, since MH is one of the cabinet committee members, it may well be left to her, as her first decision.

With regard to SNN, my view is that - if the motivation is there (which I tend to doubt) - they could agree a temporary reaignment, pending EU/US open skies; this would reduce the ratio of DUB:SNN to 2:1 and would effectively allow US (and Irish) carriers to double their flights to DUB, without any effect on Shannon (thus removing any political backlash); this means EI could go ahead with its t/a growth plans.

Another possibility is that with Boeing and Airbus touting for EI's business next month, for it's t/a growth plans, Boeing might be in a better position if it could persuade the DOT to be sympathetic to these plans: more access = more orders for Boeing ...

The Europeans may well cry foul, but sod them; the Commission had its chance to get things right and made a mess of it; if that has cost Airbus a big order, so be it; time they learned that not everyone stands still when they close the throttles.

[Tom the Tenor]

The Shannon passenger figures for the year so far have a lot to do with all this carry on allowing the current bilateral to continue for a few more years?

Mind you, Cork has done more than it's share to bolster up the figures for Shannon so far this summer what with all the diversions!

Not that it matters in the short term but will there be a version of the 7E7 comparable in size and range to the 757? A good aircraft for transatlantic flying from both Shannon and Cork?

[MarkD]

Do the SNN numbers include W's merry men (not WW mind, the other one in the White House)