asked the Minister for Transport when he proposes to establish customs pre-clearance facilities at Shannon Airport.

20.

asked the Minister for Transport the present position regarding customs pre-clearance facilities at Shannon, County Clare; the measures he has taken and proposes to take in the matter; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

21.

asked the Minister for Transport if he is prepared to overrule the Aer Lingus objections to the provision of facilities at Shannon Airport for pre-clearance of passengers for United States immigration and customs.

22.

asked the Minister for Transport the date on which he received the Arthur Walls Report concerning the US customs pre-clearance project for Shannon Airport; if he intends to lay it before this House; if so, when; and if he will make a statement on the up-to-date position of this project.

(Cavan-Monaghan): With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 19 to 22, inclusive, together.

Mr. Arthur Walls' report concerning the US customs pre-clearance concept was submitted to me in August 1981.

The pre-clearance concept raises a number of complex issues from an Irish perspective. It would also be dependent on a decision by the US authorities before the project could be proceeded with. These matters, as well as the consultant's report on the merits of the scheme, are still under active consideration but at this stage I can give no indication when, or if, it may be possible to establish pre-clearance facilities. Meanwhile I do not propose to lay the consultants' report before the House.

When will the Minister consider the Arthur Walls' Report? Furthermore, would he say if it is true that the report has been locked away in a safe, never to be seen again because its implications are political dynamite on which the Minister over there must take a decision. Would the Minister indicate what is generally known, that the report favours the pre-clearance project for Shannon Airport?

(Cavan-Monaghan): There is no question of the report being locked away in a safe never to be heard of again. It was furnished to the Minister's Department in August 1981. I think even the Deputy will agree that, in departmental time, that is not very long. The Minister is considering the report. It was a private report sought by the Department. It is not usual to publish such reports and it is not proposed to publish this one.

Even the recommendation?

(Cavan-Monaghan): No.

The Minister will not even tell us what it recommends.

(Cavan-Monaghan): That is the information available to me.

Would the Minister deny that it is generally accepted now in various circles that the recommendation of the report is to go for the pre-clearance project at Shannon?

(Cavan-Monaghan): I told the Deputy that the report was one commissioned by the Department, that it is not for publication and I am not going to publish it in reply to cross-examination in the House today.

And the Minister is not going to take any decision on it either.

(Cavan-Monaghan): The Minister will take a decision on it without delay.

In view of the considerable public interest in and debate on this whole question, which has been pursued for some time now, would it not be helpful to the furtherance of that debate on an informed basis if the report were published, and what has he to hide?

(Cavan-Monaghan): The Minister has nothing to hide. It was never intended to publish the report and Deputy O'Malley, who was Minister for quite a while will know that these reports are not published.

Would the Minister not agree that it is sometimes better to publish such reports rather than have each side of the argument leak its version of what is allegedly in it?

(Cavan-Monaghan): It could be said that many changes would be desirable but a decision on a change of policy in this direction has not yet been taken, nor was it taken when the party opposite were last in Government.

But we had not got the report; it was furnished to the Minister only in August 1981.

(Cavan-Monaghan): I am talking generally about reports of this sort.

Would the Minister reply to Question No. 21 and deal with the question of overruling the Aer Lingus objection to the provision of these facilities?

(Cavan-Monaghan): If there are such objections they will be considered in the overall context of the matter.

There are such objections and is it the Minister's intention to overrule them?

(Cavan-Monaghan): They will be considered in the overall context of the matter in the light of the report.

Is the Minister committed to the project of establishing pre-clearance facilities at Shannon Airport if and when the United States Authorities so agree?

(Cavan-Monaghan): The Minister is committed to giving the whole matter serious consideration, amongst other things, in the light of the report.

Is it not obviously in the Irish national interest to have the dozens of extra flights this would generate coming into Shannon? Therefore why will the Minister not assure the House that the Government will support it, assuming the Americans agree to it?

(Cavan-Monaghan): The Minister got a report. It is his duty to consider the matter in the light of the report and of the overall situation. I am not going to answer questions on behalf of the Minister, who is abroad. I am not going to commit the Minister——

That is regrettable.

Are this Government committed to the expansion of Shannon Airport at all? If they are then why delay much longer with a report, there now for three months, which makes a simple recommendation? The Minister and the Government must know the enormous benefits to be derived by Shannon Airport and the western region generally from this project. How soon will the Minister get down to business and tell us whether they are at all committed tothe development of Shannon Airport?

(Cavan-Monaghan): Without any equivocation I can confirm that the Minister and the Government are committed to the development of Shannon Airport. There is no doubt in the world about that.

But not to this project.

(Cavan-Monaghan): And to the building up of the airport. The Minister is seriously committed to considering this project in the light of the information he has received. I might say that Deputies opposite are not being serious when they contend that three months in departmental time is a long time for considering a report.

On the question of publication of the report, would the Minister agree with me that sometimes it is in the best interest of the public administration not to disclose the contents of a particular report, the arguments put forward on both sides, the different commercial considerations and all that type of reasonably confidential information? But would the Minister not also agree that there can be no damage caused anybody by disclosing to the House, even today, the recommendation — the recommendation is either for or against. Would the Minister not agree that nobody could possibly argue that simply disclosing whether the recommendation is for or against would be of any harm to any of the interests concerned?

(Cavan-Monaghan): For one thing it would be setting a precedent for such reports.

I am not asking for publication of the report.

(Cavan-Monaghan): Even publication of the recommendations would be setting a precedent in dealing with such reports. The practice in the past has been not to disclose or publish them and not to disclose the recommendations. On his return the Minister will see the points which have been put forward by the opposite side of the House and can consider them.

Is the Minister aware that Shannon Airport may well be competing with other international airports for this facility — for instance, Frankfort Airport — and would he agree that any undue delay on the part of our Government in pressing the American authorities for these facilities may well mean that they will be provided at other European airports, which would be damaging to the provision of these pre-clearance facilities at Shannon? Would he agree that it is frightfully important that the Irish Government press the American authorities in this respect, as I understand that some discussion has already taken place at official level in relation to this project? It is imperative that the matter be dealt with immediately. Otherwise other international airport in Europe may well be given the facility and we will lose out.

(Cavan-Monaghan): I appreciate what the Deputy says, which will be borne in mind.