Open Skies deal now unlikely, says FF MEP

Schuhart

Looks like we're stuck with the Stopover for the foreseeable.


http://www.rte.ie/news/2006/1114/air.html

MEP Seán Ó Neachtain has said that an Open Skies deal between Europe and the US is now unlikely as a result of the recent elections in the United States.

Speaking in Strasbourg this morning, the Fianna Fáil MEP said that European states are now going to have to negotiate their own deals with the US to regulate access to transatlantic routes.

He said that the onus was now on the Government to safeguard Shannon Airport's position.

CtrlSource

Disappointing. There are a number of US airlines looking to get direct routes into Dublin.

The Shannon stopover is a BIG PAIN. It's inevitable that it will have to go. Shannon still does well out of military stopovers (:(), but they're likely to dwindle too, in time.

I don't see why the Democrat majority will be a setback for an Open Skies agreement though?

Ste.phen

CtrlSource wrote:

Disappointing. There are a number of US airlines looking to get direct routes into Dublin.

The Shannon stopover is a BIG PAIN. It's inevitable that it will have to go. Shannon still does well out of military stopovers (:(), but they're likely to dwindle too, in time.

I don't see why the Democrat majority will be a setback for an Open Skies agreement though?

its probably just a handy excuse

secret_squirrel

Its a pretty flimsy comment with nothing to back it up.

Would like to see why the democrats are against this. (Assuming they actually are). It could of course be a politician talking from their arse.

Slice

That comment was probably aimed at his constituents - coincidentally he happens to be MEP for the West.

road_high

CtrlSource wrote:

Disappointing. There are a number of US airlines looking to get direct routes into Dublin.

The Shannon stopover is a BIG PAIN. It's inevitable that it will have to go. Shannon still does well out of military stopovers (:(), but they're likely to dwindle too, in time.

I don't see why the Democrat majority will be a setback for an Open Skies agreement though?

Totally agree in a free market economy I fail to see the point of planes having to stop at Shaanon when they are really bound for Dublin. And for what exactly? A few extra jobs down in Shannon. What is really needed is for Shannon to develop its' own sustainable business instead of protecting this silly stop-over thing.

jd

mfitzy wrote:

Totally agree in a free market economy I fail to see the point of planes having to stop at Shaanon when they are really bound for Dublin. And for what exactly? A few extra jobs down in Shannon. What is really needed is for Shannon to develop its' own sustainable business instead of protecting this silly stop-over thing.

It annoys me that I cannot fly directly to San Francisco as a result of this Shannon stopover nonsense.

Chris_533976

It is nonsence, theres no other way to put it.

CtrlSource

Chris_533976 wrote:

It is nonsence, theres no other way to put it.

Here's another way: it's a steaming pile of pants... that's gone on for far too long!

Zoney

mfitzy wrote:

Totally agree in a free market economy I fail to see the point of planes having to stop at Shaanon when they are really bound for Dublin. And for what exactly? A few extra jobs down in Shannon. What is really needed is for Shannon to develop its' own sustainable business instead of protecting this silly stop-over thing.

Shannon is a larger airport with more connections than would otherwise be usual for a region such as the Midwest. This is a vital element to the economic centre of the region.

You may ask why special treatment should be given to the regions. Well, without it, they will only fall further behind Dublin. You might think that this is well and good if you are in Dublin, but it's missing the point. The State does not consist solely of Dublin. What is good for the regions benefits Dublin, by having a stronger state as a whole. The regions would already be more on a par with Dublin if this had been recognised far earlier in the State's history; it still has not been fully recognised despite the ill-planned decentralisation and ignored NSS.

The same rationale applies to the distribution of funds throughout the EU from richer states to poorer. Ireland has been helped into its current situation partly by EU funds, but at the same time our success benefits the rest of Europe. It is far better for the UK for example to have a vibrant economy as a neighbour, rather than a backwards nation that isn't much good as a trading partner.

FWIW, I don't in fact think that the Shannon stopover can sensibly be maintained. I do believe in the absolute necessity of cushioning the impact of its demise, and devising new support mechanisms for maintaining high levels of connections into and out of the airport. The airport will have a larger cachement area with the N18 dual-carriageway extending to Galway, and the Southern Ring Road. A route bypassing Limerick to the north is also needed to expand the cachement area. With the work underway to link Limerick and Galway by rail (Ennis-Athenry reopening), it would be absurd not to further enhance the cachement area by linking the Airport/town to the rail network.

CtrlSource

Zoney wrote:

FWIW, I don't in fact think that the Shannon stopover can sensibly be maintained. I do believe in the absolute necessity of cushioning the impact of its demise, and devising new support mechanisms for maintaining high levels of connections into and out of the airport.

You're spot on, "cushioning" is needed. However, I think some job losses are inevitable?

Schuhart

Zoney wrote:

You may ask why special treatment should be given to the regions. Well, without it, they will only fall further behind Dublin.

This is a false argument. We're not arguing against regional development. We're arguing for the abolition of a parochial fix that cost the country dearly at a time that we needed the business.

Zoney wrote:

FWIW, I don't in fact think that the Shannon stopover can sensibly be maintained.

In which case can I suggest you might need to reflect on why you seemed to feel the need to rush to the defence of the Stopover.

If you agree that in Stopover does not make sense, and favour meaningful action aimed at really promoting regional development instead of peppering every county with some monument to the limited outlook of the average voter, then there''s really no reason for us to disagree. All that bothers me is seeing the national future sacrificed for no particular gain.

Capt'n Midnight

Zoney wrote:

You may ask why special treatment should be given to the regions. Well, without it, they will only fall further behind Dublin.

Before the boom almost all of the unemployment black spots (>90% unemployed) were in Dublin, ( + one in Limerick )
So to be fair parts of Dublin should have greater investment than parts of the country

The whole BMW farce :mad:
typical of our politicials to add in larger areas to get the quick buck from the EU but at the long term cost because the richer parts will raise the average such that the areas that really need help won't get it in the future.

the money wasted in Dublin by not providing public transport could have sorted out much out in the sticks

The lack of civil servants transferring shows that forcing planes and bodies to places they don't want to go doesn't guarantee they will stay there even if there econimic incentives. IMHO Shannon has had the writing on the wall for ages and there was plenty of opportunity to develop alternatives already, or blackmail the govt into doing so.

Perhaps a TGV link "from landing to Dublin City Centre faster than Dublin Airport if you used the long term car park"

/RANT

I've missed a good bit on the open skies, can someone remind me -
are EU airlines allowed to use any EU airport to fly to any US airport ?
or is it that any US airline is allowed to fly to anywhere in EU but each EU carrier is restricted to flying to any US airport from anywhere in their home country ?

Zoney

Schuhart wrote:

In which case can I suggest you might need to reflect on why you seemed to feel the need to rush to the defence of the Stopover.

I'm not defending a continuance of the stopover, but I think it has been vital to the Mid-west region in the past. I am defending government support and intervention in sustaining the scale of operations that are present at Shannon. The Shannon stopover is part of these; with its elimination, other methods of support need to be looked at.

secret_squirrel

Capt'n Midnight wrote:

I've missed a good bit on the open skies, can someone remind me -
are EU airlines allowed to use any EU airport to fly to any US airport ?
or is it that any US airline is allowed to fly to anywhere in EU but each EU carrier is restricted to flying to any US airport from anywhere in their home country ?

The hoped for result from the current negotiations is to take individual EU countries access (Bilateral) agreements with the US for their Carriers and the mirror image agreements for the US carriers arriving into the EU countries, and replace it with a pan-eu agreement that EU carriers can land anywhere in the US and vice versa.

Currently most agreements only allow US access to certain gateway airports and vice versa.

For example carriers from Irl can only land in 5-6 gateway cities in the US whilst US (and Irl) carriers have to service both Dublin and Shannon in return.

Its a real mess. Made complicated by the fact that the rules are different for charter services.

Other countries Bilateral agreements would differ wildly from the Irish one, with their own strange quirks.

sceptre

Zoney wrote:

Shannon is a larger airport with more connections than would otherwise be usual for a region such as the Midwest. This is a vital element to the economic centre of the region.

I reckon you'll have to expand on that significantly before readers will swallow it.

Schuhart

Zoney wrote:

I think it has been vital to the Mid-west region in the past.

I'm not convinced that forcing a load of transit passengers who don't want to be there was actually that vital to the Mid-West region. It seemed mostly to be about keeping some people in Shannon in make-work jobs.

Zoney wrote:

I am defending government support and intervention in sustaining the scale of operations that are present at Shannon.

I'm not sure that Government can do that much to sustain passenger numbers in Shannon, if that is the objective. Probably the best way of them achieving that result is to withdraw support for Knock and Kerry Airports, so that demand for air services is concentrated. How do you feel about that?

Zoney

Schuhart wrote:

I'm not convinced that forcing a load of transit passengers who don't want to be there was actually that vital to the Mid-West region. It seemed mostly to be about keeping some people in Shannon in make-work jobs.

It's nothing to do with the in-transit passengers, and to do with ensuring high levels of transatlantic services from Shannon where there are not sufficient passenger numbers in the region to support dedicated Shannon links. Said links are nevertheless essential to retaining the tens of thousands of jobs supported by US multinationals in the region. It wouldn't exactly be great for Dublin or the country as a whole if the Midwest region lost a significant amount of this US investment.

I'm not sure that Government can do that much to sustain passenger numbers in Shannon, if that is the objective. Probably the best way of them achieving that result is to withdraw support for Knock and Kerry Airports, so that demand for air services is concentrated. How do you feel about that?

Well, as I suggested, transport links are key, the government can help passenger numbers by connecting it to the reopened Limerick-Galway railway line, and can get on with the planned dual-carriageway from Ennis to Galway, as well as provide a decent connection north of Limerick somewhere between Killaloe/Ballina and O'Briensbridge/Montpellier. The latter is critically needed anyway for local traffic and heavy trucks currently using mediaeval virtually one-lane town bridges (I kid you not, despite the gloss of our roadbuilding, there are so many places like this that show up how backward we are).

Shannon airport is in a strategic area (as is Limerick City) where Galway, Clare, southwest Midlands, Limerick, North Cork and Kerry can be served (especially when the Limerick Southern Ring Road phase 2 opens).

I think Knock is fair enough, it is an essential transport link for a wide area of the country; even if population levels aren't enough to sustain it on purely "market forces" terms (although I believe its circumstances in that respect aren't so very bad).

Kerry is probably more about politics and the weight given to influential forces in the county. In fairness, Kerry can in theory be served by Shannon or Cork; it's close to both. Of course, in practical terms, transport links necessary for that are pretty dire.

Schuhart

Zoney wrote:

Said links are nevertheless essential to retaining the tens of thousands of jobs supported by US multinationals in the region. It wouldn't exactly be great for Dublin or the country as a whole if the Midwest region lost a significant amount of this US investment.

But this is not really relating cause and effect. A cluster of foreign firms did set up in the Shannon area, but that more likely reflects the specific incentives given in the shape of the Shannon development zone. Air access would only be a convenience in that context, and one provided at great cost to the country as a whole. The break-up of Aer Rianta reveals that Shannon Airport’s payroll was packed to such an extent that even the landing fees extorted in respect of passengers forced to land there did not cover the cost. And that’s not to count the cost of business driven to Manchester, and lost to the State, because of the restriction of the Stopover.

It needs to be stressed that this happened at a time when the country was strapped generally. We needed the business, but lost it to keep some people in unneeded airport jobs at great cost.

Zoney wrote:

Shannon airport is in a strategic area (as is Limerick City) where Galway, Clare, southwest Midlands, Limerick, North Cork and Kerry can be served (especially when the Limerick Southern Ring Road phase 2 opens).

I think you are on the right lines in seeing that all Kerry and Galway airports achieve is to take the necessary economies of scale from Shannon, and that there is a need to concentrate demand to achieve regional development. I cannot understand your attachment to Knock in this context.

CtrlSource

Returning on an 8 hour flight from Atlanta to Dublin a few days ago, I had the early morning pleasure of stopping off in Shannon so we could pick up a few bewildered tourists.

What an ongoing pain in the ass and international disgrace this is! :mad:

dowlingm

well, *some* people want Open Skies...

http://www.tc.gc.ca/mediaroom/releases/nat/2006/06-h166e.htm

Just in case the DofT can't find their number:
Telephone: 613-991-0700
Fax: 613-995-0327
E-mail: mintc@tc.gc.ca

bk

Zoney wrote:

It's nothing to do with the in-transit passengers, and to do with ensuring high levels of transatlantic services from Shannon where there are not sufficient passenger numbers in the region to support dedicated Shannon links. Said links are nevertheless essential to retaining the tens of thousands of jobs supported by US multinationals in the region. It wouldn't exactly be great for Dublin or the country as a whole if the Midwest region lost a significant amount of this US investment.

I think the Shannon stopover has very little to do with all the US business there and it is more due to all the government tax incentives, etc.

I work for a US company myself and people don't really move back and forth from the US that much anymore, certainly not enough to justify. And the problem can be mitigated with a regular link service between Dublin and Shannon and also with the improving road networks.

Personally when I fly to San Francisco, I fly to London first and then fly Virgin Atlantic to SF. Worth the hassle given how much better VA is to Aer Lingus.

bk

I expect Boeing to campaign hard in favour of the open skies policy as their new jets (787) are designed for long distance point to point travel, rather then hub to hub like the moment. So the open skies policy is very important to them.

Victor

bk wrote:

I expect Boeing to campaign hard in favour of the open skies policy as their new jets (787) are designed for long distance point to point travel, rather then hub to hub like the moment. So the open skies policy is very important to them.

Hub to hub tends to have cost advantages over point to point, which is more suited to super-busy routes.