I want to ask the Minister for Finance about a second botched privatisation that we have experienced in recent days. The Minister will have heard a wide range of commentators on the mess that now confronts the Government. He will have heard the chief economist of the Taoiseach's favourite bank, Friends First, state that the sale of Aer Lingus is the second botched privatisation by the Government. What is the Government's strategic approach to the hostile takeover which is under way?

It does not have one.

How is it that the Government has been completely taken by surprise? How is it that we have had the Minister for Transport floundering in the fashion we have seen over recent days? A sum of €30 million of taxpayers' money was spent on advisers, yet the Minister comes into the House, flailing around the place, making clear that it never crossed his mind that this might happen and, effectively, that he does not know what to do about it.

The Minister stated: "A monopoly is bad for business. It is bad for this country, the customer, the travelling public and tourism interests." His conclusion is exactly the position he has brought about. He was warned that this was a probability if the company was floated. Maybe we anticipated that it would have been British Airways rather than Ryanair, but we are heading towards having a single private monopoly in the aviation sector here.

Of all the hapless Ministers in this hapless Government, the Minister for Transport, Deputy Cullen, is the most accident prone. Apparently Deputies were not supposed to hear the remark but I heard the Tánaiste state with relief yesterday: "We survived it." What a commentary on the Tánaiste. Can Aer Lingus survive this Minister?

The IPO was a successful floating of the equity by the State. It went well and was held up by the market as such.

Michael O'Leary agrees.

The only thing I recall during that period was silence from the Labour Party because——

It is our fault.

I listened in silence to what Opposition Members had to say because it would have shown up the obvious disagreement between the Fine Gael and Labour parties on the issue.

The Government is in favour of a strong and independent Aer Lingus. Access to private equity, which has been provided for now, enables the company to proceed with a strategic plan. Ryanair has made a proposal on what it wishes to do. It must acquire the shareholding in the first instance and has not done so. I understand it holds about 15% of shares as matters stand, which is a long way from——

It is not 15%.

Sorry, the figure has increased to 19% in the past couple of days, which is a long way away from the majority shareholding the company seeks. There are regulatory frameworks to deal with competition and other questions and the Government is preparing to engage fully in rigorous support of the public interest.

One would not want to rely on the Competition Authority.

One should not draw conclusions from the fact that one company wishes to proceed in a certain way because it does not necessarily mean that will happen.

I am completely taken aback by the Minister's apparent lack of grasp about what is happening. The shareholding of Ryanair in Aer Lingus is not 15% but 19.2% as every school child in the country knows. How can the Minister state with a straight face that the IPO was successful? The Government sold off the company at a bargain basement price, as everybody in the country now acknowledges. It did not see coming what has since transpired.

Why did the Government reduce its shareholding by 7%, from 35% to 28%, thus facilitating what is now under way? What is the explanation for that move? Apart from hiding behind the regulatory arrangements in place, what exactly is the Government's strategy? What does it propose to do and what is it doing? Does the Competition Authority have any role in this matter or is it a European competition issue?

Deputy Rabbitte should take his time. He is talking hot air as usual.

The Minister is awake.

Allow Deputy Rabbitte to continue without interruption.

Is the Government having any discussions with the ESOT?

These are important questions about which Deputy Rabbitte should ask his advisers.

The Minister was caught out. Where are his advisers now?

I am amazed at the Minister's brass neck. If he had worked out this privatisation on the e-voting machines he bought, he would not have made such a hames of it. Why did he reduce the Government's stakeholding in Aer Lingus? What strategy is the Government now pursuing? Has it had discussions with the ESOT or others about preventing the proposed arrangement? Will Ryanair not in any event have manoeuvred itself into a position in which it can stymie the future development of Aer Lingus? What will this development do for competition in the aviation sector? I would appreciate answers to these questions because this issue is very important for the country.

The Deputy obviously does not have a grasp of Stock Exchange rules if he thinks we can go off and talk to the ESOT on this matter. We cannot do so. Perhaps he should read up a bit on the situation.

The Minister should ask his expensive advisers.

The shareholding of the State is 28.3%. A shareholding of 25.1% ensures that another company cannot acquire the 75% threshold required to force delisting. It also means the company's memorandum and articles of association cannot be changed without the State's agreement. Maintaining this level of shareholding was designed, among other things, to frustrate any hostile takeover attempt. Even if another company buys a majority share, Aer Lingus will continue to operate on an independent financial basis. Without delisting and operational integration with Ryanair, it is hard to see how the synergies which motivate mergers could be realised.

The Government remains fully committed to competition in aviation markets and will not sell its shares in Aer Lingus. It is vigorously opposed to the emergence of a new monopoly in Irish aviation. An Aer Lingus-Ryanair merger is not in the best interests of competition.

Ryanair proposes a takeover, not a merger.

The economy has been well served by having at least two domestic airlines providing complementary but different services to and from Ireland. It is due to the value of having more than one domestic airline that a two airline policy was developed in the early 1990s by giving Ryanair exclusive rights on certain routes and securing the future of that company. The Government is firmly of the view that Ireland's economic interests are best served by having as many airlines as possible competing vigorously and seeking to exploit all possible opportunities for new services. It wants a strong Aer Lingus and a strong Ryanair competing with each other.

When the Ryanair offer is formally made, it will be a matter for the board of directors of the company to evaluate the offer and express an opinion to shareholders. It has done so. The board of directors of the company is working with advisers to ensure the position of shareholders is fully protected. There is a question over whether jurisdiction for merger clearance rests with the European Commission or member states, including Ireland, and it is expected that jurisdiction will lie with the European Commission.

What happened to the Ceann Comhairle's clock?

The Departments of Transport and Finance are working closely with advisers preparing a case for submission to the European Commission and will also consult the Attorney General.

What is the answer to the question? The messenger could have read that. It was embarrassing. Why did the State reduce its stakeholdings? That is contemptuous.

Deputy Rabbitte does not understand it.

There is no provision for a supplementary question. I ask Deputies on all sides to stay within Standing Orders on Leaders' Questions.

Deputy Cullen says I do not understand it.

I ask Deputy Rabbitte to resume his seat.

Clichés and soundbites will achieve little.