A Government decision to sanction the construction of a second terminal at Dublin Airport offers long-suffering air travellers some hope for the future. Severe congestion during the summer months emphasised the fact that action should have been taken years ago. Even now, the capacity of the proposed facility to meet rapidly-growing transport demands for an extended period is in doubt. Still, any improvement is better than nothing.
Political in-fighting between Fianna Fáil and the Progressive Democrats in Cabinet over whether new airport facilities should be publicly or privately owned and run - along with intensive lobbying by trade unions and public and private interests - added to delays. The Government promised "immediate" construction of Pier D to cater for growing airport numbers during the last general election campaign. But the facility is only now being built and will not be ready for 12 months. The new terminal proposed yesterday by Dublin Airport Authority (DAA) will not be operational for about four years. In the meantime, passengers will have to endure a continuation of sub-standard services - and pay higher airport charges for them.
There is a deficit in long-term strategic planning in each and every government. Politicians think in the short-term only. They are reluctant to confront vested interests. It is a major indictment of this Government that it failed to anticipate the infrastructural implications of the Celtic Tiger over ten years. It is an even greater indictment now that the projected needs of a burgeoning population are not being met in terms of social housing, education and healthcare services. The hit-and-miss approach is reflected in the DAA's revised plan to construct a 75,000 square metre airport terminal when, one year ago, a facility of 50,000 square metres was regarded as sufficient. And, if air traffic continues to grow at present rates, congestion will again be a problem some two years after the new terminal opens.
Aer Lingus was nominated by the DAA as the primary user of the new terminal, along with other transatlantic and international carriers. It will have a capacity for 15 million passengers, compared to 20 million at the existing building. The time-lag for the delivery of new long-haul aircraft is three or four years. If Aer Lingus is successfully floated next month, completion of the terminal may coincide with the delivery of its new aircraft. Such an arrangement may not commend itself to Ryanair.
Construction of the proposed terminal also requires the development of a road and transport network in the vicinity of the airport. That will generate considerable disruption and inconvenience, which may not be conducive to voters in an election campaign. It is already clear that passenger capacity at the airport will become an issue again in a matter of years. The Government must now address long-term requirements. If that involves bringing in the private sector to build and operate new facilities, so be it. The public wants efficient and comfortable airport services, not ideological wrangling.