Gerard P. Craughwell: Bill is Populist and Unworkable

Go raibh maith agat, Cathaoirleach, Minister, you're welcome to the House. Minister, this Bill purports to offer clarity, control and enhanced protection within our aviation system. Such aims are, of course, both necessary and commendable. However, it's incumbent upon us as legislators to look beyond the language and intent and to scrutinise the substance of what's being proposed. On that basis, I contend that the Air Navigation Amendment Bill is, in its current form, both populist in concept and unworkable in practice. At its core, the Bill reduces highly complex international integrated systems into a series of overlaying simplified measures. Aviation is not a policy domain that operates in isolation. It is governed by rigorous international standards, cooperative regulatory frameworks and technical precision. Any attempt to impose sweeping unilateral changes without full alignment with these structures risks significant operational and legal consequences. The Bill places considerable emphasis on decisive national action. However, decisiveness alone does not equate to effectiveness. By prioritising immediate political appeal over careful policy design, the legislation introduces provisions that may conflict with established international obligations and practices. This creates uncertainty for airlines, regulators and international partners. Uncertainty that could disrupt operations, increase costs and undermine confidence in our aviation sector. Furthermore, serious concerns arise in relation to feasibility and implementation. The Bill purports to expand oversight and enforcement responsibilities, yet it is notably silent on practical means by which these responsibilities are to be discharged. I could take an analogy here. We could introduce a law on traffic law and give no guarantee to enforce it. What do you do? It means absolutely nothing. There are no clear provisions for the necessary resources, staffing or institutional capacity required to give effect to these measures. Legislative ambition without corresponding operational support inevitably results in provisions that are ineffective at best and counterproductive at worst. The imbalance placed an undue burden on regulatory authorities who are already tasked with maintaining the highest standards of safety and demanding a complex environment to extend their obligations without equipping them adequately risks diluting rather than strengthening the effectiveness of oversight. In addition, the potential economic implications cannot be overlooked. Aviation is a vital component of national connectivity, trade and tourism. Any policy framework that introduces regulatory uncertainty or operational friction creates consequences that extend far beyond the sector itself. The cumulative effect may be to weaken rather than to reinforce strategically important industry. There is also a broader institutional concern. The enactment of legislation that cannot effectively be implemented risks eroding public and stakeholder confidence in the legislative process. That's an important point. If you cannot effectively implement the legislation, what is the purpose behind it? What are we doing? Laws must not only be well-intentioned, they must also be credible and enforceable. It's important to acknowledge that the issues this bill seeks to address are legitimate in every way and I commend those who put the bill together. Safety, accountability and the protection of national interests are a matter of genuine importance. However, these objectives cannot be achieved through measures that prioritize visibility over viability. A more appropriate approach would involve thorough consultation with industry experts, close alignment with international regulatory frameworks and clearly articulated resource implementation strategy. Effective legislation in this domain must be grounded in technical expertise and operational realism. It is in its present form the bill falls short of those standards. It offers the appearance of decisive action but lacks the structural integrity required to deliver meaningful outcomes. For those reasons, I cannot support the Air Navigation Amendment Bill as it is currently drafted. I urge that it be reconsidered and substantially revised to ensure that any legislative change are both practical and effective and that they genuinely serve the long-term interests of our aviation system and the public it supports. Minister, there are two clear issues that have got to be looked at here. One is the Vienna Convention and the other is our obligations under the United Nations. I would suggest and would humbly suggest to my colleagues that they go back and look at the obligations under both of those and I thank you for your time and I regret not being able to support this. The talk of genocide etc that has taken place in the world, if we cannot see what's up there, if we cannot intercept what's traveling through our airspace, then we are merely providing wallpaper here to cover a crack and that's not the way to do legislation. Thank you.