Dublin Airport Passenger Cap: Call for Government Transparency on Economic vs. Environmental Trade-offs

Paul O’Shea, representing Planet Before Profit CLG, has responded to Brendan McGill’s letter from June 23rd regarding the passenger cap at Dublin Airport, asserting that the public cannot adequately assess the situation due to a lack of crucial information.

O’Shea acknowledges that there may be valid economic justifications for lifting the cap, such as increased tourism, employment, and tax revenue. However, he also highlights the undeniable consequence of additional flights: a rise in greenhouse gas emissions. He argues that if the government believes the economic advantages outweigh the environmental costs, it must articulate this position transparently and provide a clear rationale.

The letter emphasizes the need for quantification, asking what specific level of additional emissions is deemed acceptable in exchange for a particular economic gain. For instance, O’Shea questions whether an additional 1,000 tonnes of carbon emissions generating €10 million in economic activity would be considered a worthwhile trade-off, and if so, why. He points out that citizens are consistently urged to reduce their personal emissions, and therefore, they are entitled to understand the value the government assigns to the increased emissions it is prepared to enable through public policy.

O’Shea concludes that the core issue is not whether difficult trade-offs are necessary, but rather whether these trade-offs are being quantified, explained, and justified both mathematically and morally. Until this information is provided, he states, it remains impossible for the public to "go figure" the true implications.