DAA chief told minister he had ‘no conflict of interest' to declare despite airline shares
chief executive
Kenny Jacobs
failed to declare his private airline investments to the Department of Transport when joining the board of the State company, despite then minister
Eamon Ryan
directly asking him to set out any potential conflicts.
Mr Jacobs, a former Ryanair executive, took command of DAA for a seven-year term in January 2023, joining its board as an ex officio director. He later told an Oireachtas committee of his shares in multiple airlines operating in Dublin Airport but said there was no conflict of interest.
Although Mr Ryan had asked Mr Jacobs to set out any potential conflicts when appointing him to the board, the department has now said he didn't disclose any: 'Mr Jacobs advised then minister for transport Eamon Ryan when accepting the position that he had no conflict of interest to declare.'
Mr Jacobs told an Oireachtas committee in June 2024 that he owned shares in 12 airlines with Dubin Airport operations but believed there was no conflict of interest.
READ MORE
'Given it's 12 different airlines who are all customers of Dublin Airport, I don't think it's a conflict,' he told the committee. 'I think owning 12 – not owning one or two in particular – I don't think is a conflict.'
Two days later, it emerged that Mr Jacobs owned shares in three big airline groups – Ryanair, IAG and Lufthansa – which own multiple subsidiary carriers operating in Dublin Airport. IAG subsidiaries include Aer Lingus.
The department was replying to questions from The Irish Times after releasing papers on Mr Jacobs's appointment to north Co Dublin campaigners against airport night flights and the new north runway. St Margaret's the Ward Residents' Association sought the files under the Freedom of Information Act.
[
'We're blasted out of it': Living under Dublin Airport's flight paths
Opens in new window
]
They include Mr Jacobs's letter of appointment to the DAA board from Mr Ryan, the leader of the Green Party and transport minister in the last government.
Mr Ryan asked Mr Jacobs to tell the department of 'any matter(s) that could potentially cause a conflict of interest for you in the role'.
The records suggested Mr Jacobs did not declare any conflict, prompting the residents' group to question the department. An official replied: 'There was no conflict of interest brought to the attention of the department by any director at DAA.'
[
Kenny Jacobs' €374,830 salary is a soft target; the problem lies elsewhere
Opens in new window
]
Liam O'Gradaigh, the residents' group spokesman who made the Freedom of Information application, said the lack of disclosure by Mr Jacobs was deeply concerning.
'It is quite clear that Mr Jacobs was obliged to bring to the attention of the Minister and his department any potential conflicts of interest,' Mr O'Gradaigh said.
'We know that Mr Jacobs has shareholdings in 12 airlines that operate out of Dublin Airport, yet he did not bring this to the attention of either the Minister or his department.'
Ryanair chief Michael O'Leary (left) in 2014 with Kenny Jacobs, then chief marketing officer with the airline. Photograph: Eric Luke
Mr Ryan had no comment for this piece when asked whether Mr Jacobs should have declared the shares.
Replying to questions, the department said incoming DAA directors were 'invited' to disclose any potential conflict of interest at the time of their appointment.
Referring to the
Standards in Public Office Commission (Sipo)
, the department said it was for individuals to make statements of interest under the Ethics in Public Office Act. 'It is a matter for the board of DAA to manage any potential conflict of interest with a director.'
[
More than 150 staff at airport operator Daa earned over €150,000 last year, with one receiving over €450,000
Opens in new window
]
DAA did not reply to questions about Mr Jacobs's failure to disclose his airline shares to the minister.
The company reissued a statement it put out in June 2024: 'Mr Jacobs holds legacy shareholdings in three airline groups that predate his joining DAA. These holdings, which remain unchanged, were fully disclosed by Mr Jacobs in all returns made to Sipo since taking up the CEO role.'
The company also reissued a statement made then by DAA chairman Basil Geoghegan saying Mr Jacobs 'has complied with the relevant corporate governance and state ethics disclosure requirements'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Extra.ie
an hour ago
- Extra.ie
Revealed: This is how much the DAA spent on failed planning applications
The Dublin Airport Authority (DAA) has been forced to admit that it has spent almost €7 million on planning applications that have become mired in controversy. Until this week, the semi-state body had repeatedly insisted that making this information public would jeopardise its commercial viability. However, the multi-million-euro costs were finally disclosed by the Dublin Airport Authority (DAA) following the intervention of the Office of the Commissioner for Environmental Information. The Dublin Airport Authority (DAA) has been forced to admit that it has spent almost €7 million on planning applications that have become mired in controversy. Pic: Getty Images first sought this information last January when – much to the embarrassment of officials at the State firm – Fingal County Council dismissed a planning application for the authority's most high-profile venture as invalid. The rebuff followed a series of refusals by the local authority to grant planning permission for several proposed projects, including the building of a 950-space staff car park and an observation platform for plane spotters, to replace the ad hoc lay-by along the side of the airport. In a scathing statement issued at the time, Fingal County Council officials said of the planning application to increase passenger numbers at the capital's airport: 'The Planning Authority has informed the DAA that their application to raise the capacity of Dublin Airport to 36million passengers per annum is invalid.' Fingal County Council dismissed a planning application for the authority's most high-profile venture as invalid. Pic: Shutterstock The application was said to have failed to comply with several articles of the Planning and Development regulations. It was also deemed invalid because the description of the development was 'inadequate and misleading.' The local authority noted: 'Pre-planning is available to assist applicants, but did not take place for this application.' This prompted a furious response from the DAA, whose chief executive, Kenny Jacobs, accused the local authority of 'flip-flopping'. Meanwhile, when asked at the time how much it had spent on planning and environmental consultants involved in planning applications, the State company told that this information could not be released for 'commercial reasons'. More recently, the DAA refused to release information about these payments when requested an internal review. Pic: Getty Images then sought details about these payments under the EU Access to Information on the Environment legislation. But the DAA again refused to release the data, claiming the 'disclosure of this information could significantly harm its competitive position'. More recently, the DAA refused to release information about these payments when an internal review was requested by It was only when lodged an appeal with the Office of the Commissioner for Environmental Information that the authority finally released the information. In a one-page document sent late on Wednesday, the DAA disclosed that between March 2023 and February of this year, the DAA made 43 payments totalling €6.7 million to planning and environmental consultants.
Irish Times
2 hours ago
- Irish Times
We need to face up to the fact that not all middle-earners are squeezed
While we have all been focusing endlessly on the latest Truth Social post from Donald Trump, the Coalition has been having backroom rows about its budget plans . Serious ones. A key document which sets the framework for the budget – the Summer Economic Statement – will be published next Tuesday. And alongside it will be the Government 's updated investment spending plans in the revised National Development Plan (NDP) . The game, in other words, is on. When you see the Independents who support the Government being filmed for the RTÉ News going to talk to senior ministers, you realise there is some good news coming and kudos to be sought for a new road or rail upgrade. But there will be tough calls, too. And it is no exaggeration to say that Tuesday will be a key moment for the Government as it signals a change of budgetary direction. The Coalition is going to go all in on State investment – energy, water and housing in particular. The catch is that to afford this, it is going to have to keep much tighter control on day-to-day spending and also end the once-off giveaways which have been a feature of the last few budgets. It will sell the message of restraint now allowing for investment for the future. Bread tomorrow is never an easy strategy to sell to voters – but that is what the Coalition is going to try to do. There will still be some extra cash in the budget for State services and welfare and – probably – a modest tax package. Talk of a 'tough budget' is nonsense – look at France where spending cuts, tax hikes and cutting two bank holidays were put on the table this week. But Irish voters have become accustomed to their budget day goodies – and there is going to be one heck of a political row when the penny drops that they are not going to feature this October. READ MORE Given the risks ahead and the State's reliance on tax payments from a few multinationals, the brakes do need to be put on. Spending has soared and Departmental targets set in the budget are regularly exceeded. Central Bank researchers estimated in June that permanent Government spending has risen by a hefty 37 per cent since 2021. Had the 'rule' to limit State spending growth to 5 per cent been adhered to, the increase would have been 16 per cent. There has simply been little culture of spending control and reinstating it is not going to be easy at a time when demands on public services are growing. Meanwhile, 'once-off payments' – repeated so often now that the term is an offence to the English language – have a serious budget price, costing more than €2 billion in the last package, which was a reduction on earlier years. The most expensive elements have been the universal payments to all households in areas like energy credits in the annual cost-of-living packages. Budget ministers Paschal Donohoe and Jack Chambers have been saying there will be no cost-of-living package this year ; for now, at least, it seems that the rest of the Cabinet are signed up to this. Ministers will spot the political dangers. Households have started to get used to the annual boost and will feel a bit less well-off. The Opposition will scream. But continuing to throw out the universal once-off payments would be a poor use of money, benefiting many for whom the cash is nice, but not necessary. Better to use what funds are available to build up permanent supports and improved services, focused on those who need them. The cost of living is high , for sure, but it is a farce to portray all households as 'hard-pressed', or everyone in the middle ground as 'squeezed'. Effective policy should help those who genuinely are – like many younger families – through better services in areas like childcare and health, rather than repeating the annual cash giveaways. [ Government 'feckless' with public money, Social Democrats claim in budget row Opens in new window ] Meanwhile, with the sums tightening considerably , the Coalition's 'solemn promise' – as Simon Harris put it – to cut the hospitality VAT rate back to 9 per cent is looking like a 'repent at leisure' moment. Even if this is restricted just to food businesses, it will cost €550 million a year. When other demands are being turned down and 'restraint' is the message , this is not going to be an easy sell for the Coalition. The all-in bet on State investment is driven by a view in Cabinet that housing, water and energy provision have all reached a crisis point – an argument being hammered home to them by big investors. Tariffs and Trump are the most discussed threat to future investment – and do indeed pose fundamental questions. But if Ireland does not put forward a plan to develop infrastructure, then investment is going to drift away, whatever happens in the White House. [ Focus in Budget 2026 has to be on transforming infrastructure, Martin says Opens in new window ] This will be mightily expensive. As well as controlling spending elsewhere, the Government will have to run down its annual budget surplus – and there are some risks here. However, it is still legally obliged – barring a downturn – to keep putting cash away in two funds designed to support future spending and investment. As well as finding the cash, the Coalition has to show it can actually deliver big projects – and more housing – an area where the previous administration performed poorly. And it needs to heed the warnings from the Central Bank and the Fiscal Council that if the State keeps pumping out cash across the board, then it will just add fuel to an economy already at full capacity, making it even harder to deliver on the infrastructure programme. Having had a stumbling and slow start, the Government is about to roll the dice for the rest of its term. Its more serious players will know that threats from across the Atlantic could damage the favourable economic position and budget outlook, and might require mid-flight adjustments in these plans. There will be some reassurance that there is €30 billion in cash and liquid assets down the back of the State couch, but also a realisation that if the trends change fundamentally this only goes so far. But sitting and doing nothing does not look like a clever strategy. Investment is the right direction for the Government to take. It will all come down to delivery. And to a bit of luck that Trump's policies, while inevitably damaging, do not upend things completely.
Irish Times
2 hours ago
- Irish Times
As abortions triple, when will we admit that reluctant repealers were profoundly wrong?
Strange, isn't it, how often this pattern repeats? We are assured in stentorian tones that not only is something never going to happen, but it is scaremongering and manipulative even to suggest that it will. Then we are told that it has happened, and furthermore, it is unequivocally a good thing. Before the repeal of the Eighth Amendment, we were assured that all that would happen was that a similar number to the 2,879 women who travelled to England and Wales in 2018 would no longer have to do so. Then-tánaiste Simon Coveney believed the argument, though he said 'removing the equal right to life of the unborn from our Constitution [was] not something I easily or immediately supported'. In an oped, he said any woman choosing abortion after a three-day waiting period and other safeguards 'is very likely to have travelled to the UK or accessed a pill online in the absence of such a system being available in Ireland'. He and other reluctant repealers were promised that numbers of abortions would not rise rapidly and inexorably. The latest abortion figures show 10,852 abortions in Ireland in 2024 . There were 54,062 live births in 2024 . For every five babies born alive, one was aborted. READ MORE Is there no number of abortions that would be unacceptable? If one in two pregnancies was ending in abortion, would that be too many? UK Department of Health figures show the number of women giving Irish addresses for abortions halved between 2001 and 2018, with a 5 per cent drop from 2017. Numbers were dropping before Repeal, in other words. Even allowing for the tiny number in 2018 of Irish-based women having abortions in the Netherlands and those using illegal abortion pills, the rise in numbers of abortions is shocking. Some 55,000 of them have taken place in Ireland since Repeal. The reality is that restrictions on abortion reduce abortion numbers. US advocacy group Secular Pro-life has a useful summary of the evidence. Many studies claiming restrictive abortion laws don't lower rates overlook socio-economic factors. Most countries with strict laws have low economic development, and poorer nations tend to have higher abortion rates. This important confounding factor is often ignored. As a relatively wealthy liberal democracy that banned abortion, our abortion rates were much lower. Abortion numbers can triple, and still Ireland refuses to acknowledge that the reluctant repealers were wrong, wrong, wrong. The Eighth was saving lives in the thousands. We collect statistics on where abortions happen in Ireland and under what part of the legislation, and virtually nothing else. We seem to have zero interest in the reasons why women have abortions – whether it is poverty, lack of support, or housing. Is that because we don't want to look too closely at anything that might undermine the idea that abortion is just another healthcare procedure? At some level, people know well that abortion is unlike any healthcare procedure. English singer Lily Allen recently sang a flippant parody of My Way about not knowing exactly how many abortions she had. It was probably five. Many pro-choice people were shocked. The comments on the BBC video of the podcast she hosts with Miquita Oliver, who has also had 'about five' abortions, showed the conflict people felt. Some pro-choice people felt that by saying the only justification needed for abortion is 'I don't want a f**king baby', she had handed ammunition to the anti-abortion advocates. [ Breda O'Brien: Ableist legislation shows lives of those with Down syndrome are less valuable Opens in new window ] Others disagreed, with comments such as: 'It's important to support any abortions for any reason. If you start putting restrictions on who can have them, how many they're allowed, and how they must act when they've had them ... well, you're not pro-choice.' I am not interested in dumping on Allen or Oliver. Allen has spoken about losing her virginity at 12, about a 19-year-old friend of her father's who bought her drinks and 'had sex with me' when she was 14, and about living through her teens to her 30s in a haze of drugs, alcohol and mental ill-health. (By the way, we have no idea how many women are coerced into abortion, even though domestic violence campaigners tell us it happens in Ireland, including one under 18-year-old who was locked in a room and forced to take abortion pills.) Allen and Oliver are not alone in joking about abortion. Irish comedian Katie Boyle has a comedy show about her experience of having an abortion aged 34 in the US, which caused the presenters of the Morning Show on Ireland AM to laugh. Nonetheless, most people still react with shock when abortion is treated as contraception – or a joke. It reminds me of debating in the past with people who were adamantly pro-choice, who visibly flinched when the number of babies with Down syndrome who are aborted was mentioned . Their humanitarian, pro-disability rights instincts conflicted with their other deeply held beliefs about the right to choose to end early human lives. The problem is that while bans and restrictions on abortion did decrease rates, those of us who consider ourselves pro-life depended on the legal ban while underestimating how the culture was changing. To keep abortion figures low in a well-off democracy, we needed to persuade people to build a woman-friendly society where pitting women's rights against the next generation's right to life became an unthinkable and completely outdated dilemma. The failure to do so really is no laughing matter.
