Why has the Government not dismissed the chief executive, the chief financial officer and the chief operations officer of Aer Lingus in the wake of the stunning conflict of interest in which they placed themselves in seeking the privatisation of the national airline so that they could purchase it themselves and, in the process, make an obscene financial killing? Have neo-liberal capitalist values so saturated the Government that it sees no difficulty with Aer Lingus executives, charged with protecting a crucial asset of the taxpayer, sitting in their offices and plotting how they can make it their private property? To facilitate that plot, they are intent on stripping the asset of 1,300 jobs and key core activities to make it more attractive for venture capitalists whom they want to purchase it. Does the Taoiseach agree that in any other jurisdiction, where even the loosest norms of even bourgeois ethics apply, such an outrageous conflict of interest would be dealt with by instant dismissal?

Was the Taoiseach amazed, perhaps he was gratified, that during the summer entire swathes of the media devoted acres to engaging in idle and useless speculation about his intended Cabinet reshuffle — which eventually amounted to no more than a hill of beans — and scarcely passed comment on this breathtaking conflict of interest in our national airline? Am I missing something, or is there a credibility chasm between media condemnation this morning about a number of €9,000 watches presented to departing Aer Rianta board members at public expense — the Taoiseach correctly stated yesterday that this is inappropriate and even a spokesperson for the Progressive Democrats engaged in sanctimonious condemnation of this action — and the deafening silence about a critical strategic public asset, our national airline which is worth €500 million, being speculated with by those charged with its protection and the protection of the taxpayer? Fianna Fáil and Progressive Democrats members of Cabinet appear to have no problem with this conflict of interest. Will the Taoiseach explain how this is the case?

I will answer the questions on Aer Lingus. Throughout his contribution, the Deputy confused that company with Aer Rianta. I am aware that he does not represent that area of the city and probably does not realise that they are two separate State companies.

Will the Taoiseach give the Deputy a watch?

Deputy Joe Higgins needs a compass not a watch.

The Government has not attempted to remove any of the individuals to whom the Deputy referred because they have worked with the trade unions and the staff to try to get Aer Lingus out of the difficult position in which it found itself. They have been successful in doing so in recent years. There are only two airlines in the world, and in Europe in particular, which are making money and both are Irish, namely, Aer Lingus and Ryanair. The staff of Aer Lingus has worked hard in that regard. Alitalia, Sabena and all of the other airlines are gone, going or are drastically cutting back on their operations. Only the airlines in this country are making profits. I give credit for that obviously to the management but mainly to the staff of Aer Lingus who have turned the position around into one of profit.

Mr. Willie Walsh will today outline to a committee of the House the difficulties facing the aviation business. These are immense, particularly as a result of the escalation of oil prices in the past year. This escalation has placed huge pressures on the cost-base of airlines because an enormous proportion of their cost structures are based on fuel. The astronomical increases, which have been much greater than anything predicted by economists — not to mention the airlines — have placed pressure on the company. Mr. Willie Walsh and his staff and, by extension, the Department and the Government are trying to work through these difficult times in international aviation. The company has been doing so in conjunction with the staff. It has meant pain for some staff due to reductions in the workforce. In far larger countries, however, it has not stopped at small or considerable losses of jobs, entire airlines have gone to the wall. The trade unions, management and staff have tried to retain the greatest number of jobs and, in addition, to expand and not reduce the business in these difficult times. Aer Lingus has sought new markets and routes in Europe. These developments are commendable and require our support in order that the company can try to overcome any problems. However, the international position remains difficult.

If Deputy Joe Higgins believes that Aer Lingus, a relatively small airline from an island country, can stand up against what has happened in the international market in recent years, he confirms what I have always believed, namely, that he lives in cloud cuckoo land. It is not possible to do that. We must try to deal with this situation as best we can and both the management and the unions are doing that.

What about the conflict of interest? The Taoiseach should answer the question.

The Taoiseach is not hanging out with a soft-soaping Hector today, when any old answer might do. I inquired about a conflict of interest and the Taoiseach did not provide a reply. He accused me of confusing Aer Lingus with Aer Rianta. Admittedly, some members of the Cabinet have difficulty knowing where they were. When he was sent to the Department of Health and Children, the new Minister for Finance thought he was in Angola. I did not confuse the two. If a private company making a loss closed with 200 jobs lost, the air would be thick with gloom and the creation of task forces would be mooted. However, a publicly owned company that will make a profit of €90 million this year is proposing to savage 1,300 jobs and the political establishment and most of the media have not raised even a murmur. Is the Taoiseach aware that there is a callous and concerted strategy on the part of management at Aer Lingus to undermine and demoralise the company's employees in many areas of its operations such as reservations, telesales and baggage handling by outsourcing their work and making life impossible for them in order that they will walk the plank and feel they have no option but to accept redundancy? This is all aimed at stripping down the airline so that speculators will move in and buy it and the management, charged with protecting the interests of taxpayers, will make millions in the process. Is there a conflict of interest?

The redundancies are regrettable but they are voluntary.

Is there a conflict of interest?

People have to——

They are not voluntary. Decent workers in Aer Lingus are being hounded out of their jobs. That is the reality.

Deputy Higgins should allow the Taoiseach to reply without interruption.

Is there a conflict?

Is there a conflict of interest? That is the question.

The Taoiseach is entitled to the courtesy Deputy Higgins was afforded, to be heard without interruption. I ask the Deputy to resume his seat.

I am entitled to the courtesy of an answer.

Yesterday I stated that I did not believe a management buy-out was appropriate in the situation of Aer Lingus. I do not think that is a solution. While Aer Lingus has difficulties and aviation is having enormous difficulties there are now restrictions on investing capital. While in 1993 the State could give significant state aid, we cannot do that anymore. So the company——

That is not true.

The Government can.

This is Deputy Joe Higgins's question.

It is absolutely true. There is no possibility, as has been the case with Sabena and Alitalia in other countries, of the State investing under the old regime.

If venture capitalists can invest the State can.

Deputy Quinn is talking about a different issue now.

This is not Deputy Quinn's question.

We cannot give State aid. I do not believe it is compatible with the mandate of Aer Lingus to have a management buy-out.

Why is the management proposal still there?

We want to have a strong Aer Lingus in the future, which is what it is achieving. It is the only aviation company in the State sector, along with the one in the private sector I mentioned earlier, that is managing to turn things around. Yesterday Alitalia announced a workforce reduction of 3,000 and is in considerable difficulty of going under altogether. We are trying to avoid that. Deputies should not propose simple solutions suggesting that the aviation industry can act differently from aviation in Australia, Canada, America or anywhere else in Europe. They should not try to feed that kind of nonsense to people.

Is there a conflict of interest?