In June 2024 daa’s chief executive told an Oireachtas committee he hoped to have a view on a better flight path by the end of the year. End of the year, then? “Yes.”
A minute later, the managing director of Dublin Airport. He was “engaged with other airports that have run similar processes in the past”. “We do not have a definitive timeframe but we are committed to try to scope that out, get the team on board, engage with communities and other interested parties, including airlines and users, and then come back with a proposal”.
The end of the year came and went.
The other airports came through. Airservices, Australia’s air navigation provider, briefed daa on the new parallel runway at Brisbane, in Queensland: a review after opening, its terms “developed in consultation with community and industry stakeholders”, an independent consultant, 450 written submissions from the public, a noise action plan with 82 actions. It sent daa its standard for engaging communities on flight path changes, and the terms of a review for another new runway, on the Sunshine Coast.
We know because we asked daa, under the information law, for its own next steps. It refused the one record it had, a presentation of “preliminary thinking”, and sent us Queensland’s instead, “In the interest of transparency”. We asked again. It let us see the presentation, redacted: a February 2025 “Dublin Airport CEO Briefing”, “Initial 4 Options”. Two of them went “straight out”.
That briefing was step one of getting ready to hold a review. Then it stopped.
Meanwhile, the noise regulator wanted data. In March 2024 Fingal, acting as the noise regulator, directed daa to hand over 47 items of noise data. A direction, not an invitation to negotiate. The law says daa “shall comply … as soon as is practicable”.
Eight months later, daa wrote back with a menu. About half by early 2025, the rest “following receipt of the final NRRA decision”. Or all of it now. Or all of it, worked out with and without. “We are happy to be led by you as to your preference.”
The NRRA is the North Runway Relevant Action, daa’s application to change the night-time rules. And in the paragraph before, daa said the application the data was for was “not dependent on the NRRA”.
So the data didn’t depend on the Relevant Action. It could just wait for it. It arrived in November 2025, twenty months after it was asked for.
Remember the Relevant Action. It comes back.
In September 2025 the Minister wrote to daa: how’s that flight-path review going? daa’s chief executive replied. With the processes “that will set the baseline” still under way, “it would be inappropriate to embark on a flightpath review at this time”. And anyway, the outcome of any future review “may not be significantly different from the current airspace design”. But he had a fair idea of the answer already!
It would be robust, he promised, and “involve all stakeholders, including air safety regulators, airspace designers, airlines and, most importantly, local communities”.
Most importantly. daa reports to Fingal’s noise regulator, and in 2024 its report set out the “Main Stakeholders” for each part of managing aircraft noise. Aircraft manufacturers. ICAO. Airlines and pilots. Air traffic control and the Aviation Authority. Local government. The noise regulator. daa. There is a row for “Community Engagement”, it has one stakeholder, and it’s daa.
It wasn’t always so. Until 2015, the group where residents sat down with daa was called the Dublin Airport Stakeholder Forum. Then it was renamed. It’s the Environmental Working Group now.
If you make money from the airport, you’re a stakeholder. If you pay the price, you’re to be engaged with by a stakeholder.
In March 2026 the managing director put it plainly. The review hadn’t moved “because we need a baseline of north runway relevant action”.
There it is. No review until daa’s own night-flights application is finally decided.
Then, in June 2026, the Minister stood up in the Dáil. Flight paths had been raised, he said, and that was valid. “I am committing here that we will carry out an independent assessment of flight paths.” Residents had seen flight paths that weren’t flown as approved. “That is not acceptable.” A retention application had gone in on that, he said. A week later, he committed again.
No conditions. No timing. We checked the full record of both days. “Appropriate time” isn’t in it. Neither is “relevant action”.
On 3 July a private secretary wrote to a member of the public. The Minister, the letter said, “has also committed to ensuring that an independent assessment of flight paths at Dublin Airport will be undertaken at the appropriate time”. The most suitable point would most likely be “when a final decision is made regarding the North Runway Relevant Action”.
daa’s condition. In the Minister’s name.
Five days later the same paragraph turned up as an answer to a Dáil question, almost word for word, with a new bit at the front: he had committed “at the recent second stage debate” to an assessment “at the appropriate time”. He’d committed. The appropriate time, he hadn’t said. The caveats from the letter slid comfortably into the record, as if they’d been there all along.
The same day, in the Seanad, the Minister finally got on message. “I will undertake that at the appropriate time.” Then: “I have said that in the Dáil. I am happy to say it again in the Seanad.”
At the end of July: “For the avoidance of doubt, there is no retention application relating to the flight paths at Dublin Airport.” No application, then. And the flight paths not flown as approved? Still not flown as approved.
And who decided that flight paths aren’t part of the planning permission? A TD asked the Minister to name the person, office or body, in what capacity, and when. His answer: “As the Deputy will be aware, flight paths are not a condition of planning at Dublin Airport.” No person. No office. No date.
Now, that Relevant Action. It’s about night-time hours. It proposes no routes. So the assessment of the flight paths is waiting for a decision on an application with no flight paths in it. And it could yet unravel. Its assessment starts from the routes flown, the ones nobody ever assessed, and the planning board’s approval of July 2025 is still before the courts.
But there’s another review: the noise regulator’s, by CAA International, secret terms and all (story 5 has that one).
That review, says the Minister, “will help inform” future planning for the airport. Asked whether the law requires it, he answered: “There is no specific statutory provision requiring that its outcome determine or direct future planning policy”.
So, here’s where we’ve landed. daa was shown how other airports review a new runway, was briefed on four options, and stopped. Directed by its regulator to hand over the data, it offered a menu, and answered on its own timetable. It told the Minister it wouldn’t review its flight paths until the Relevant Action set the baseline, and that the outcome may not be significantly different anyway. Local communities come “most importantly”, but the only stakeholder in community engagement is daa.
The Minister promised the Dáil an independent assessment, no strings. Within a fortnight the string was back: “the appropriate time”, meaning the Relevant Action, meaning daa’s condition, now in the Minister’s mouth and credited to a debate where he never said it. The noise regulator’s review is secret and doesn’t have to count. Asked who decided that flight paths aren’t part of the planning permission, the Minister named no person, no office, no date.
And the Relevant Action proposes no flight paths but could still fall apart as a result of them!
It’s nice to see a regulated company offering its regulator a menu for its data, and the State that owns it may look at its flight paths, but only once the Relevant Action is safe from whatever it finds.
Sources
- Joint Committee on Transport and Communications, meeting of 19 June 2024, “Summer Plans for Dublin and Cork Airports: DAA”, official report (daa’s chief executive on a view on a better flight path by the end of the year, and “Yes” to the end-of-year timeline; the managing director of Dublin Airport: “We do not have a definitive timeframe”). oireachtas.ie: https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/joint_committee_on_transport_and_communications/2024-06-19/
- Fingal County Council, Aircraft Noise Competent Authority, Direction to Provide Information ref. ANCA/DI-IA 01/2024, to daa plc on planning application F23A/0781, 1 March 2024, with Appendix A listing 47 items. Released to NRTG under AIE request AIE/2026/012 (Fingal County Council), 6 May 2026.
- Aircraft Noise (Dublin Airport) Regulation Act 2019 (No. 12 of 2019), section 9(10)(b): the airport authority “shall comply … as soon as is practicable”. Irish Statute Book: https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2019/act/12/enacted/en/html
- daa plc, letter to the Aircraft Noise Competent Authority in reply to Direction ANCA/DI-IA 01/2024, 29 November 2024 (the three options; “following receipt of the final NRRA decision”; “not dependent on the NRRA”; “We are happy to be led by you as to your preference”), and the Authority’s reply of 20 December 2024. Released to NRTG under AIE request AIE/2026/012 (Fingal County Council), 6 May 2026.
- An Coimisiún Pleanála, case ABP-314485-22 (Fingal reg. ref. F20A/0668), the North Runway Relevant Action: daa’s application to change the North Runway’s night-time operating conditions, decided 16 July 2025. Case page: https://www.pleanala.ie/en-ie/case/314485
- Dáil Éireann, written answer to Parliamentary Question 250 [31824/26], Minister for Transport, 30 April 2026 (the direction issued in March 2024; the data provided to the Aircraft Noise Competent Authority in November 2025). oireachtas.ie: https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/question/2026-04-30/250/
- Minister for Transport, letter to the chief executive of daa, “daa Review of Flight Paths at Dublin Airport”, 5 September 2025, and the chief executive’s reply of 3 October 2025 (the processes “that will set the baseline”; “it would be inappropriate to embark on a flightpath review at this time”; a review “may not be significantly different from the current airspace design”). Released by the Department of Transport under FOI request 2026-0119, 10 June 2026 (Records 5 and 6). NRTG holds a copy.
- Joint Committee on Transport, meeting of 24 March 2026, “General Scheme of the Dublin Airport (Passenger Capacity) Bill 2026: Discussion (Resumed)”, evidence of the managing director of Dublin Airport (“because we need a baseline of the North Runway relevant action”; the official report and the Oireachtas TV recording differ slightly in wording). oireachtas.ie: https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/joint_committee_on_transport/2026-03-24/
- Dáil Éireann, 23 June 2026, Dublin Airport (Passenger Capacity) Bill 2026: Second Stage, official report (the Minister for Transport: “I am committing here that we will carry out an independent assessment of flight paths”; “That is not acceptable”; “A retention application went in on that”). oireachtas.ie: https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/dail/2026-06-23/
- Dáil Éireann, 30 June 2026, Dublin Airport (Passenger Capacity) Bill 2026: Committee and Remaining Stages, official report (the Minister’s commitment repeated; neither day’s record contains “appropriate time” or “relevant action”). oireachtas.ie: https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/dail/2026-06-30/
- Private Secretary to the Minister for Transport, letter to a member of the public, ref. TTAS-MO-03406-2026, 3 July 2026 (“at the appropriate time”; “when a final decision is made regarding the North Runway Relevant Action”). NRTG holds a copy.
- Dáil Éireann, written answer to Parliamentary Question 50 [52104/26], Minister for Transport, 8 July 2026 (the commitment made “at the recent second stage debate” to an assessment “at the appropriate time”). oireachtas.ie: https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/question/2026-07-08/50/
- Seanad Éireann, 8 July 2026, Dublin Airport (Passenger Capacity) Bill 2026: Committee and Remaining Stages, official report (the Minister: “I will undertake that at the appropriate time”; “I have said that in the Dáil. I am happy to say it again in the Seanad”). oireachtas.ie: https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/seanad/2026-07-08/
- Dáil Éireann, written answers to Parliamentary Questions 392, 393, 397 and 398 [55499/26, 55500/26, 55551/26, 55552/26], Minister for Transport, 28 July 2026, answered together (“For the avoidance of doubt, there is no retention application relating to the flight paths at Dublin Airport”). oireachtas.ie: https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/question/2026-07-28/392/
- Dáil Éireann, written answer to Parliamentary Question 271 [68418/26], Minister for Transport, 29 September 2026 (the review contract with CAA International Ltd; the terms of reference “are not being made publicly available”; “It is not currently intended to publish the report”). oireachtas.ie: https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/question/2026-09-29/271/
- Dáil Éireann, written answer to Parliamentary Question 276 [68420/26], Minister for Transport, 29 September 2026 (the review of the Aircraft Noise Competent Authority “will help inform”; “there is no specific statutory provision requiring that its outcome determine or direct future planning policy”). oireachtas.ie: https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/question/2026-09-29/276/
- Dáil Éireann, written answer to Parliamentary Question 269 [68427/26], Minister for Transport, 29 September 2026 (asked who determined that flight paths are not part of the planning permission: “flight paths are not a condition of planning at Dublin Airport”; the assessment “at the appropriate time”). oireachtas.ie: https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/question/2026-09-29/269/