I move that the Pier and Harbour Provisional Order Confirmation Bill, 1929, be read a Second Time.
Pier and Harbour Provisional Order Confirmation Bill, 1929. - Pier and Harbour Provisional Order Confirmation Bill, 1929—From the Seanad. Second Stage and Final Stages.
I welcome this Bill because it authorises the appointing of Commissioners for Buncrana Harbour in the County of Donegal, and vesting the pier and harbour in them, and for the construction of works and the improvement, maintenance and regulation of the harbour. As the Minister for Industry and Commerce is well aware, considerable delay has taken place in regard to the promotion of this Bill. As the Minister mentioned in the Seanad, there was a commitment entered into prior to 1914 whereby a sum of money should be given to the Buncrana Harbour from the Development Fund. It is only after fifteen years that this Bill is being promoted in the House, and it is only this year that we are asked to vote half the sum of £20,000 for the project. I hope that this Bill will be passed by this House and that no further procrastination will take place, and that the work in regard to the erection of the new harbour will be started as soon as possible. The Minister mentioned to-day that the Provisional Order was moved for by the Buncrana Urban District Council. That is true, but I would like to call the attention of the Minister to the fact that the Buncrana Urban District Council made certain suggestions which had not been followed in the Bill before the House now. This Bill or Order, as the Minister has pointed out, is along the lines of a model Bill. For instance, the Council were under the impression that instead of four of the Commissioners being appointed by the Government and three by the Urban District Council that there should be three on each side.
Another matter arises out of Section 10 which deals with the limits of the harbour. Under this Bill the limits of the harbour—within which the Commissioners shall have authority and within which the powers of the Commissioners may be exercised—"shall be the existing harbour, together with the works and lands authorised by or acquired under this Order, and a further area below high water mark lying within a distance of 330 yards measured from any part of the pier lands or works of the existing harbour and the works and lands authorised by or acquired under this Order." The suggestion of the Buncrana Urban District Council was that the limits of the harbour should extend not to a distance of 330 yards, but to a distance of 880 yards. The Council were under the impression that by extending it to 880 yards it would allow the Commissioners to collect the dues, etc., on cargo boats which break bulk outside the radius. The Minister knows very well that Scottish fishing boats are followed up by coal boats to a point outside the existing harbour, and here they receive their coal supplies. If the distance is limited to 330 yards, as set out in the Bill, the Commissioners will not be able to collect tolls from these cargo boats.
Under Section 16 the Commissioners will only have power to alter and improve on the present structures or new wharf. The works authorised are the reconstruction of the timber work on the existing pier and the construction of a new wharf north-east of the existing pier, together with the erection of sheds for storage purposes, the construction of stations for fishery purposes, and the erection of cranes for loading and unloading. Supposing that the Commissioners intended to develop the south side of the pier, or to continue the new wharf from the existing pier to bridge on Railway Road, that would mean that a further Order would have to be sought, and further expenditure would have to be incurred by the Commissioners or by the Buncrana Urban District Council. I understand that when these proposals were put to the Minister by the Urban District Council, he could not agree to them because he was following on the lines of the Act of 1861.
I do not oppose this Bill; in fact, I welcome it. I hope that the work will be started as soon as possible. I do not know whether the Board of Works will be carrying out this work. If the work is left to a private firm I trust that the contract will be given to a firm inside the Free State. I hope the Minister will take that suggestion into consideration when the contract is being placed, whether by his Department or by the Commissioners.
I welcome this Bill. I think it is long overdue. I desire to draw particular attention to the method of appointing the first Commissioners. I must diverge from my colleague's point of view in this direction. I think there are too many representatives from the urban district council. Urban district councillors, as a rule, are not very experienced in such matters as are involved in this Bill. I would like to know what are the qualifications of the four men who are proposed to be nominated by the Minister. There is no mention made in any part of the Bill of representation for the payers of dues, the merchants who use the harbour. If the Minister casts his eyes over many other schemes of this nature that run back over forty or fifty years, he will find that almost 50 per cent. of the harbour boards are elected by the people who have paid dues in the year previous to the election. That seems to be a fair method. I do not think that the Minister for Local Government, if he were asked, would give it as his opinion that the majority of urban councillors are fit and proper persons to be Harbour Commissioners.
We have a Labour council there; they are quite competent.
Perhaps in that case there might be some justification for electing them, but as a rule it is not an urban district councillor's job. They have no interest in the work, and I suggest to the Minister that some representation should be given to the men who actually use the harbour and whose interest it is to keep the harbour alive. I come now to the question of rates. I notice that the Minister has made use of the schedule of tolls supplied by the Donegal County Council. He diverged only on one or two minor points. He has, to my mind, put an undue tax on the principal export of Buncrana. He has taxed fish barrels at 2d. each. Herrings are practically the main support of this harbour, and I think 2d. is really too much. The Minister is taxing us at the rate of 1d. on each barrel coming in empty. This is going to be a great drawback to the trade, because the herring barrels come empty in ship loads. If 1d. has to be paid on each barrel it will really mean 2d., because half-barrels are used in the main; the majority of Donegal herrings are packed in half-barrels. The county council considered this question with men on the spot who were cognisant of the business in other parts of the country. They decided to include both the export of herrings and the import of empty barrels under Section 3 (c): "All other goods not particularly enumerated— heavy goods, per ton, 8d."
I would like the Minister to take another matter into consideration. There is a certain amount of trade done from Buncrana with various little ports and piers along Lough Swilly and with some of the islands, such as Tory Island. The Donegal County Council considered that matter. It would be a great hardship if the people on the islands and along the coast of Lough Swilly had to pay these tolls.
The point to which Deputy Myles referred, the question of rates, is the one which I will take first. It is quite impossible to change that particular item to which he objects, because the charges were drawn up according to plan and they were based upon goods that seemed likely to be brought in. The charges were fixed on these according to what was thought to be their importance. There were generally the variety of considerations that have to be brought in before charges are actually made. If the charge in respect of barrels were altered as suggested —and there was no great argument put up for it when the schedule was considered—it would mean modification elsewhere through the list. I will point out to the Deputy that if hereafter the charges seem to be hampering the development which the whole scheme sets out to encourage, then there is room under Section 32 to have it reconsidered and possibly revised. As to the qualifications of the first Commissioners, there are no qualifications laid down, and there is no obligation on me in that respect. Three nominees have already made their appearance from the county council; two are big merchants in and around Buncrana, and one is a railway clerk. So far as I am concerned, I would take very definitely into consideration the nature of the business in which a man is engaged in Buncrana, his reputation as a shipper, and the volume of trade he brings in. I could not leave out of consideration, in addition to that, that in the past, when the harbour was more or less in a chaotic condition, and when it had very little regard from anybody, there were certain local people who took a very deep interest in it. I would like to get these, at any rate, on the Board. Deputy Cassidy has referred to procrastination. There has been a lot of procrastination, mainly because the people of Buncrana were not able to carry out an important bargain which was made at the time when the moneys were to be advanced from the Development Fund. There was a definite charge of one-third to be levied all over the county. The county was not prepared to put up that amount of money. It is because, even at the moment, they are not prepared to put up as much as it would seem their duty reasonably to put up that the situation is as it is in regard to the appointment of Commissioners. I do not think that it is anything too harsh for the Government to demand the right to appoint four Commissioners out of seven when they are putting up three-fourths of the money for the development of the harbour. The contract will be carried out under the authority of the Office of Public Works.
In regard to Section 26, would the Minister say whether it is intended to convey power to the Commissioners to construct, for instance, a kippering station at the harbour?
Yes, if it is found necessary or desirable. The phrase is there for the Deputy to read. It says:
"The Commissioners may, subject to the provisions of this Order, purchase, lease, construct and maintain any houses, warehouses, offices, sheds, weighing machines, cranes and other works, buildings and conveniences which may be found necessary or desirable in connection with the harbour for the accommodation of vessels using the harbour and traffic landed at or embarked from the same and the convenient working thereof."
I suggest that it is not quite clear from that that they have the power. Since this Bill has been introduced to aid the fishing industry it is very desirable that it should be made clear that they have the power. When the re-organisation of the fisheries has taken place, I believe that it will be found necessary to have these kippering stations at all the important fishing centres. Failing the provision of such stations by private capital, it would be important that public authorities, such as Harbour Commissioners, should have that power. Perhaps the Minister would tell us whether this Bill has any relation to the Report of the Harbours Tribunal which has not yet been published.
No, the Report has not yet been received.
Question—"That the Bill be read a Second Time"—put and agreed to.
The Dáil went into Committee.
Bill passed through Committee without amendment.
The Dáil went out of Committee.
Bill reported without amendment and put through its Final Stages.