Listen up! It’s O’Leary that Aer Lingus needs to heed
EVER since Ryanair’s Michael O’Leary morphed into Mary Poppins the high flyer has been spouting nothing but common sense. This week he rowed into the inflated Aer Lingus debate where enough guff, nonsense and hot air has been generated to fly a fleet of Richard Branson’s balloons. Take this statement on the proposed sale of the Government’s 25% stake in Aer Lingus this week: ‘Direct air links to Heathrow are a prerequisite for investment, tourism and business. We would urge any potential buyer and everyone involved in the sale to provide legal assurances that existing air links will not be impacted.’
This is not the Dublin, Cork or Shannon chambers of commerce pleading – it’s Peter Robinson, the First Minister of Northern Ireland, and British to the core.
What Robinson omitted to say was that the Aer Lingus Belfast-to-Heathrow slots previously used to operate out of Shannon until Aer Lingus decided they could make more money by moving them to another jurisdiction. The last time I looked, whether people like it or not, the taxes generated in Belfast airport go into Her Majesty’s treasury.
So O’Leary is bang on the money when he says that the Heathrow ‘slots’ row has been completely overblown.
The fact is, so many people simply wrapped the green protectionist flag around them the moment they heard about the attempt to buy Aer Lingus without bothering to find out the plans of the bidder.
Immediately, the knee-jerk reaction was to ‘protect jobs’, not realising that there is no such thing anymore. Any company that doesn’t grow will die.
Remember, a recent CEO of Aer Lingus gloated that they had made more money out of fewer flights. And passenger numbers for Aer Lingus in January were actually down by 5.7%. Indeed, we should listen to O’Leary. His airline carried ten passengers for every single Aer Lingus boarding card, and he is always looking for new ideas.
I see the same O’Leary, who has created countless thousands of jobs in Ireland, was the object of some ire because of the salary he earns. Last year he clocked up €1.75m with the usual cry that he should pay more income tax as ‘inequality’ was so bad in Ireland. But in its current incarnation the inequality debate is meaningless.
Look at the O’Leary example. Firstly, he is without doubt one of the biggest taxpayers in Ireland with over 50% of his salary going to the exchequer. He has stated that he would simply leave the country if the income tax rate goes any higher.
Ironically, if he were to leave Ireland, inequality would decrease, even though tax receipts would drop too. Inequality is not a condition, it’s a measurement. People don’t suffer from ‘inequality’, they suffer from poverty, or the lack of a job, or education.
They also suffer because the powers that be lack the imagination and ability to take on vested interests, something O’Leary has in spades. He should be listened to.