Westminster committee welcomes Bombardier ruling
A major ruling in favour of Bombardier is welcome news following a "tough few years" for the company here, a Westminster committee has said.
Thousands of Bombardier workers in Northern Ireland breathed a sigh of relief when the US International Trade Commission ruled in its favour last week after a challenge by Boeing. The firm had been facing a 292% tariff on the sale of its part-Belfast made planes to the US.
Chairman of the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee, Dr Andrew Murrison MP, said: "After a tough few years for Bombardier in Northern Ireland this is welcome news.
"Throughout our inquiry we heard that no harm had been done to Boeing and the ruling from the US International Trade Commission has proved that to be the case.
"The ruling is absolutely correct and it is only to be regretted that the prolonged uncertainty caused by the looming threat of tariffs has had such a damaging effect.
"As the largest manufacturing employer in the region, providing many high skill jobs, we hope that this will allow Bombardier to thrive in the long term," he said.
In the ruling, the US International Trade Commission rejected claims by Boeing that Bombardier's C Series jet had or would threaten the rival's business. This week, Co Down industrialist and Airbus board member, Sir John Parker, said Bombardier's massive victory against Boeing in the US is "positive news" for the thousands of Belfast workers despite negative "rhetoric" which expected the giant to lose its case.
The case emanated from a Delta Airlines order for 75, and up to 125, of its C Series planes.
Speaking about the win for Bombardier, Northern Ireland Secretary Karen Bradley said it was "excellent news" and that the company would continue to play a "hugely important role" in the country's economy.
"I know Bombardier workers and their families have been waiting some time for this and I wish them well as we welcome this news together.
"The UK Government has been working tirelessly to safeguard Bombardier jobs and argued from the very start this case was wholly unjustified."