Aer Lingus has suggested that it could operate and finance the new terminal at Dublin airport rather than simply leaving it to the Dublin Airport Authority (DAA).
Aer Lingus is the only company offering short and long-haul services from Dublin and its latest proposal is believed to have gained some support with key aviation figures. The DAA yesterday refused to comment on the idea but it is believed to be open to alternative funding proposals.
Aer Lingus, which gets a new chief executive, Dermot Mannion, in early August, has passed the idea to the aviation regulator, Bill Prasifka. In the submission to his office, Aer Lingus says the Dublin Airport Authority should "consider alternative funding options for Terminal 2".
The State-owned airline suggests that itself, or Ryanair, should discuss with the DAA an exclusive long-term occupancy agreement for the new terminal.
In such a scenario, the airline says it would not only control the fitting out and equipping of the new terminal but might also construct the building and arrange the finance. It says the building could then revert back to the DAA after what it calls a "reasonable period", possibly 20 years.
It is not clear if such an idea would have Government support. At this stage, the Government has simply said the DAA should own and build the facility, while its operation is put out to tender.
The latest proposals from Aer Lingus could mean that, when the operational contract is put out to tender, Aer Lingus or Ryanair might apply.
The general tone of the Aer Lingus submission to the regulator is that it would rather see another company operating the terminal than the DAA.
"Aer Lingus disagrees with the DAA's concept of Terminal 2 as being an asset owned and operated in its entirety by DAA. We do not believe that this model is conducive to the efficient operation of Terminal 2 or to the efficient financing of this investment," it states.
"In our view, the terminal as a whole or many elements of the terminal infrastructure can and should be provided by third parties as independent and self financing projects," it adds.
Meanwhile the International Air Transport Association, which represents all airlines globally, said it did not support the notion of terminals for individual airlines.
"Passenger terminal facilities should not be designed specifically to suit the needs of one particular type of traffic or airline - as the airline business is continually changing and carriers are regularly going out of business (Sabena, Swiss Air)," it said.
Separately, the airport authority has reiterated that, if Mr Prasifka does not agree a proper airport charging regime for Dublin, the break-up of the three airports formerly controlled by Aer Rianta might not happen.
It warns that if Mr Prasifka does not allow "full cost recovery" at Dublin Airport, implementation of Government policy could become very difficult.
