Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
Updated 9.50pm
AER LINGUS HAS been named as one of the best low-cost airlines in the world when it comes to safety.
That’s according to AirlineRatings.com, which said that Aer Lingus joined: Alaska Airlines, Icelandair, Jetblue, Jetstar, Kulula.com, Monarch Airlines, Thomas Cook, TUI Fly and Westjet in that category.
The site surveyed 449 airlines, and said that 149 of those have the top seven-star safety ranking, but almost 50 have just three stars or less.
It named Qantas as the world’s safest airline, saying:
Qantas was the lead airline with real time monitoring of its engines across its fleet using satellite communications, which has enabled the airline to detect problems before they become a major safety issue.
Aside from Qantas, the other top airlines for safety were named as: Air New Zealand, British Airways, Cathay Pacific Airways, Emirates, Etihad Airways, EVA Air, Finnair, Lufthansa and Singapore Airlines.
AirlineRatings.com uses its own rating system, which it says “takes into account a range of factors related to audits from aviation’s governing bodies such as the FAA and ICAO as well as government audits and the airline’s fatality record”. Meanwhile, its editorial team examine “each airline’s operational history, incident records and operational excellence”.
The site also described 2014 as “a bad year for airline safety, with some of the most tragic and bizarre incidents in modern history” taking place, but added “the numbers can be deceiving”.
It said that there were 21 fatal airline accidents this year, with 986 fatalities, but pointed out that 50 years ago, there 87 crashes, when airlines only carried 5% of this year’s 3.3billion passengers.
Record-breaking year
AER LINGUS HAS reported a record breaking 11 million passengers in 2014.
The figure is up over 3% on the previous year’s passenger numbers of 10.7 million.
The airline’s long haul passenger numbers rose by 20% while its short haul numbers dipped by 1%.
Aer Lingus said it flew a total of 705,000 passengers last month -that’s down 3.8% compared to the 733,000 it carried in December 2013.
The number of passengers taking short flights decreased but the number taking long haul flight rose during the month.
Short haul traffic was down 8.2% to 517,000 passengers compared to 563,000 in December of last year.
While long haul passengers numbers were up 20% to 102,000 – compared to 85,000 in the same month in 2013.
Shares in Aer Lingus have risen since the airline rejected a takeover from the owner of British Airways last month.
- Additional reporting Aoife Barry
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Government has pulled the teeth of the councils since then, vesting all the power in unaccountable city and county managers. They might come to regret that.
Why do you think they did it?
Sligo would be the best example of that
FG/Labour get the message the people will not stand for water charges in any form and rightly so. One question I do have is simply this, the €100 allowence that we’re going to be given out of the social welfare budget, who is going to lose out as a result of this? Are they gonna cut services to handicapped kids or stop their medical cards? Maybe take the fuel allowance off the elderly? Actually I’ve more questions? Like how much are they gonna reduce motor tax by if the can successfully bring water charges? Because as stated in this piece we pay a proportion of our car tax to pay for water. Also wasn’t there mention of a raise in vat? And maybe income tax. How much are both of these taxes going to be reduced by?
No prizes for guessing correctly that none of these taxes that apparently now help pay for water will be reduced.
The reality is that FG want to reduce the % of Total taxes that their voters pay, a 2% cut in taxes on someone earning 100,000 + per year will leave that person 2,000 better off, after a 500 euro water tax bill – they will still be 1,500 euro better off, meanwhile Joe soap on the minimum wage will be 500 euro less well off – Transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich is what this is ! How can Labour support this ???
It also means those who use more pay more same as electricity or gas don’t hear you complaining about those. In addition where a your figures from as they haven’t been announced
No it doesn’t Sean, if this sham is allowed to continue the price of water will increase if we don’t use enough,
Let’s not try to mislead people under the banner of water conservation
Not entirely Seán.
While it is possible to **squander** water there are few example of how you can be **extravagant** with water.
For example, you might be very rich and have 8 toilets in your house. But if there’s only two of you you’re still only going to flush them as often as a couple who have only one between them.
On the other hand, you can be extravagant with electricity. You can have a bigger TV, lots of lights, large house to heat, etc.
So while electricity usage rises with wealth, everyone tends to use a similar amount of water, no matter your ability to pay.
Additionally, you have choice over electricity. If electric heating is too expensive, you can use gas, or wood, oil, or wear more clothes. If you can’t afford electricity, you can decide to watch less TV, go to bed when it gets dark, or just go without it entirely. It is entirely possible to live your life without electricity (or with a minimal). Believe it or not people did so for millions of years.
But no matter what, you need water. The UN say that a human being needs 50 litres of water per day in order to prepare meals and to have enough for personal hygiene. There is no other substitute. It’s water. Or you die of dehydration or disease.
Now, that’s no reason why you may not have to pay for water. But it is a good reason why water should not be compared to other commodities. Especially something a recent as electricity.
Water charges will also be scrapped again very soon. I’m paying 2/3 times for the same thing.
I like most reason minded people belive these charges are finished in their current for, the danger being that Fine Gael being the arrogant,stubborn, ignorant shower that they are will realise that it’s too late to save themselves and say “feck it” we won’t be elected either way so we may as well force them through, then we’re left with the problem of what to do when they are voted out..
Double taxation as these are still in place and will never be reduced
Broadcasting Tax is one to watch out for, also. The Government is refusing to address the rampant tax avoidance by corporations here. If a minimum of 12.5% corporation tax was charged, people wouldn’t be clobbered with indirect taxes.
Nice to see Joan Burton getting woman of the year ,
Suppose Enda Kenny will be man at the rear now??
They will divide and conquer with two tier charges. That’s worrying
Aras awaits the winner wink wink
Enid is rear of the year. As in assh*le!
Every water meter fitted is a vote against F.F. and F.G. and Labour -
Would fg ff or labour have the neck to go to people’s homes looking for votes roll onn elections
Jerry buttimer at my doorstep tonight and said we need to pay for water and when I mentioned about the 90′s and car tax and vat increase , he said, on my doorstep that was not true…ie I am a liar .Where is the paperwork about this so I can show to the next gombeen.
Also I mentioned how I wasn’t giving a labour a vote , and there was a huge silence , Jerry said nada ,FG are going to sell them down the swannee and blame them for all the unpopular taxes etc..Just like the green s and FF and the libdems in the UK Scapegoat r us
Nice article there NR.
It was beat b4 and will be beat again irish water is a scam ill never sign up to or pay into time for the government to scrap it or we the people will scrap the government roll on the 10th of December
10-12-14
Power to the people
Good man Larry
Consistent as always
Larry is rock solid – my favourite poster !
“Proinsias de Rossa of Democratic Left, Fine Gael Leader John Burton, and Dick Spring of Labour, who presided over the final years of water charges.”
Is this John Burton character a relative of Joan?
John Bruton not Burton. He’s a brother of Richard Bruton the current Minister for Jobs and he is infamous for attempting to put VAT on children’s shoes, an act that brought down the government of the day but that of course was when Labour had some pretence of representing the working class.
I’m well aware who John Bruton is, Martin. I’m asking about the John Burton mentioned in the article.
You really need to be clear when you’re being sarcastic, some of us would recognise the people in the photo without needing to read the caption.
(In my Michael Noonan voice!)
ahhh yeeas aren’t they the three cowboys that were in government when all these new dossier claims were going on – lucky them getting out and two of them working in the banking sector now – bruty and springy – great bankers , great bankers ……
NO WAY WE WONT PAY
Bertie – this is not a site that demands back taxes ….. l.o.l.
Speak for yourself, I will pay.
If you use below a certain amount of electricity you end up paying a higher rate per unit – I’m speaking from experience & am currently being penalised for conserving electricity via a range of different systems in my house…so much for polluter pays principle -would bet my life the same will occur with water charges in time to come. Conservation is not the real reason behind these charges…
To this say in it was paid for twice how was it paid for before motor tax was increased
It was paid for from household rates the forerunner of LPT for which you get F.A. services. FF used rates as a vote catcher in the 1977 GE and increased VAT and motor tax to take up the slack.
VAT was not increased in 1977. It went from 20% to 25% in 1980 and even higher a few years later.
VAT was increased to 35% during that period.
Great article. Referendum poll please journal. Do what the other media outlets are too biased to do
Fianna Fail lackey’s want a €1,000 a year ‘site value tax’ imposed on households in addition to a €400 water tax. Don’t vote these clowns back in during 2016. They haven’t committed to re-abolishing these stupid indirect taxes.
’1997 came and the charges were dropped. Now, a decade later, ….’
mmmmm did I just wake up in the wrong year????
We’re oft to blame and this is too much proved, that with devotion’s visage and pious action we do sugar o’er the devil himself
have your say