Since the announcement by the Minister for Transport last July, the Labour Party has indicated it would oppose the break-up of Aer Rianta unless the business case is clearly established in advance.

I have available to me the legal advice furnished last week to the company from Arthur Cox solicitors which appears to confirm the fears I raised by letter with the Minister for Transport on 27 July last year. In essence, the Arthur Cox advice appears to conclude that, at its mildest, it is problematic whether the Minister can proceed as outlined in the Bill and certainly not without securing express waivers from the company's bankers and bond holders. Otherwise, the restructuring would constitute an event of default and the banks would be entitled to accelerate and demand immediate repayment of the loans.

In the opinion of the company's legal advisers, the bank terms do not permit Aer Rianta "to cease to carry on any part, or in some case, any substantial part, of its business" or "Aer Rianta ceasing to retain ownership of, and to conduct operations from Cork and Shannon without an express waiver" or it would constitute an event of default. The advice also states:

The Bonds contain a cross-acceleration Clause pursuant to which if any indebtedness of Aer Rianta ... of more than 32 million were declared due prematurely by reason of an event of default this will constitute an event of default under the Bonds.

Has the Minister or the company been in contact with any of the company's lenders or the bond trustee to seek such a waiver? What is the view of the Minister for Finance? How much are the fees referred to by the legal advisers for securing such a waiver?

According to the advice from Arthur Cox:

It appears therefore that waivers will be required from some lenders under the Bilateral Facilities and possibly from the bond trustee to avoid defaults arising in connection with the proposed restructuring. These lenders may baulk at issuing a general waiver in connection with the restructuring and may wish to limit the scope of any such waiver, adopting a 'wait and see' approach.

The bondholders' issue is being dealt with by the Department of Transport. The maintenance of good communications between Aer Rianta and all its funders, including the bondholders, is an important but normal part of the process upon which the Government has embarked in restructuring Aer Rianta. The company is handling the funder relationships in a professional and business-like way. The appropriate initial communications were made by the company in July of last year on the announcement of the Government's decision to restructure Aer Rianta and more recently on the publication of the Bill. That has been accompanied by appropriate communications between the company and its funders. The communication process will continue in the coming weeks and months.

While the handling of this important aspect of the restructuring process is a matter for the company, both the Department of Transport and the Department of Finance are involved and continue to offer whatever advice or assistance the company may seek from the handling of these communications. The Department of Finance is fully involved in this matter. If necessary, senior officials from both Departments will participate appropriately in such communications. The issue is being dealt with and has been dealt with for the past 12 months and this will continue to be the case.

I asked the Taoiseach to clarify whether the matter is being dealt with or as he said, has been dealt with. It is important that we are precise. We have been going on with this for a year. The Government is proceeding to break up a company and then to give the justification for breaking it up afterwards. The advice I partially put on the record of the House is dated 30 June and states:

The purpose of this letter is to confirm the current status of our analysis in relation to the implications that enactment of the Bill may have for the Aer Rianta group's funding arrangements.

Has the Taoiseach provided for that? There is no point telling me that it is being provided for, as this has been going on for a year. I wrote to the Minister on 27 July last year and raised this very particular point about the indebtedness denominated in bonds at that time. I explained my advice in terms of the implications for funding of the dismantling of the company in terms of company law and so on and so forth. In response, the Minister said he did not know but he was having it examined. The Taoiseach appears to be saying now in one breath that it is being examined and in another that it has been examined.

Has the waiver been sought from the bankers and the bond trustee, has it been received and is there a clear position on this in terms of Aer Rianta itself? Why would the company be seeking legal advice if the matter were secured and approved by Government.

I will repeat what I said. The initial communications on this matter were made a year ago when the Government announced the decision to restructure Aer Rianta. More recently, the discussions have continued by the appropriate communications between the company and its funders. It is an ongoing issue. The funders must be involved and the bondholders must be informed. As I said, this is an important but normal part of the process upon which the Government has embarked in the restructuring of Aer Rianta. That process will continue in the coming weeks and months. The process to be followed between now and next April has been set out in——

The Bill will be enacted tonight.

—— a Bill that is before the House.

That is a damning report from Arthur Cox.

Deputy Seán Ryan should be silent and allow the Taoiseach to answer the question without interruption. It is not Deputy Ryan's question; it is his leader's question and Deputy Rabbitte is entitled to hear the answer.

I cannot keep quiet and listen to the Taoiseach codding people.

The Deputy should be quiet.

Both the Department of Transport and the Department of Finance are involved in the handling of this important aspect of the restructuring process of the company. There is no ongoing difficulty with this issue. The matter is being handled. The Department of Finance is involved in the issue and any matters arising will be dealt with between the two Departments.

Why would the legal advisers say there are difficulties? That is a ridiculous answer.