Ireland’s War on Disinformation Must Start With Its Own State Agencies
Last week, the Irish Government launched its national strategy to counter disinformation — a vital and overdue initiative in an era where public trust is under strain. The strategy pledges to fight false narratives, promote transparency, and build confidence in state institutions.
But while Ministers decry “fake news,” one of their own state-controlled companies — the Dublin Airport Authority (daa) — is running what many believe to be a government-backed campaign of institutional disinformation.
And it’s operating outside the public’s right to know.
170,000 Complaints. One Scripted Response. No Accountability.
Over the past two years, residents across Meath, North Dublin, and surrounding areas have submitted more than 170,000 noise complaints due to altered flight paths from Dublin Airport’s North Runway. These complaints almost universally receive identical, templated responses from daa.
The language is always the same:
– “The aircraft remained within the Noise Preferential Route (NPR).”
– “There was no infringement of track procedures.”
– “Routing is the responsibility of AirNav Ireland.”
– And, when non-compliance is acknowledged: “The aircraft was vectored for safety reasons.”
But the fundamental premise is flawed. The only lawful Noise Preferential Route is the one detailed in daa’s 2007 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) — the document that formed the basis of their planning permission.
That legally binding route prohibited early turns over communities like Ratoath and East Meath, stipulating no turn before 5 nautical miles west of the runway. What’s being flown today is not that route. It is a self-designed deviation never subject to environmental assessment, never approved by An Bord Pleanála, and never disclosed transparently to the public.
daa is referencing a fictional NPR — and dismissing thousands of legitimate complaints with circular reasoning and generic disclaimers about “safety reasons.”
And Now Add This: daa Is Immune to Freedom of Information
Unlike most public bodies, daa is exempt from the Freedom of Information Act. This means:
– Citizens cannot request internal emails or decision records.
– There’s no transparency on who writes the templated responses.
– The public cannot examine how “safety reasons” are determined — or if they’re being used to cover for operational convenience.
This is a state-owned company, funded and overseen by government, operating critical national infrastructure — yet shielded from public scrutiny.
“Safety Reasons” as a Blanket Justification
In the few cases where daa does acknowledge a deviation from the NPR, it attributes the change to “safety reasons” — without further explanation or independent corroboration.
This tactic raises deep concerns:
– There’s no transparency about what safety protocols were invoked.
– No public accountability for systemic patterns of deviation.
– And no evidence that these safety justifications couldn’t be avoided by simply reverting to the legally approved route — which was, in fact safer by design.
In short, “safety” has become a catch-all excuse, not a reasoned response grounded in law or planning compliance.
This Directly Contradicts the Government’s Strategy
Minister Patrick O’Donovan rightly said:
“Disinformation is a danger to democracy.”
Yet here we have a state agency:
– Making misleading public statements about compliance.
– Deflecting lawful objections by invoking “safety” without transparency.
– Refusing to acknowledge it abandoned its legally approved route.
– All while exempt from FOI — and completely unaccountable to those it affects most.
What Needs to Happen
If the Government truly wants to fight disinformation, it must start by cleaning its own house. That means:
1. Including daa and others in the remit of the Counter Disinformation Oversight Group.
2. Mandating transparency and auditability for public-facing claims.
3. Reinstating public oversight of daa through FOI.
4. Reviewing all noise complaint responses for factual accuracy and legal compliance.
5. Requiring daa to revert to the flight paths approved in the 2007 planning permission.
Conclusion: Disinformation Starts — or Ends — With the State
This is more than a local noise issue. It’s a democratic integrity issue. The Government cannot credibly fight disinformation while allowing its own agencies to mislead the public, deflect scrutiny, and invoke “safety” as a shield for non-compliance.
If the State is serious about restoring trust, it must begin not with those easiest to regulate, but with those hardest to hold accountable.
Now forget this is daa and the flight paths. How many other State bodies behave in a similar way when anyone dreams of expecting them simply to fulfill their mission: HSE, Aircorp (Chemical Brothers), HSE, Tusla, Department of Health, Gardai (Sergeant Maurice McCabe), Revenue Commissioner (Ansbacher), OPW … and of course the HSE.
We must ensure that striving for transparency and truth is applied to the organs of the State, rather than used by them as a weapon against criticism and accountability.
Anything less is not a disinformation strategy — it’s a communications strategy.