asked the Minister for Local Government and Public Health whether he is aware of the serious and increasing loss to the town of Youghal by reason of the condition of the bridge over the Blackwater River at Youghal, and if he will take steps to ensure that the preliminary work of preparing plans for the erection of a new bridge is put in hands at once, and whether meantime, in order to facilitate vehicular and cattle traffic to and from the town of Youghal, he will direct that the obstructions erected on the bridge be removed while maintaining the present speed and weight limits for vehicular traffic across the bridge.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Condition of Youghal Bridge.
I would refer the Deputy to the reply given to a similar question on the 10th December, 1942, in which it was stated that the existing bridge carried a normal traffic up to a limit of 3½ tons, and if there has been any restriction of business transactions between Youghal and County Waterford I do not think it can be attributed to the condition of the bridge. The cost of reconstruction of the bridge, including the cost of preparation of plans, will be a charge on the councils concerned subject to whatever grant may be allocated from the Road Fund. In the present condition of the Fund there is no possibility of making any such grant. On the understanding, therefore, that the Road Fund is not in any way committed, I would be willing to consider proposals for the preparation of plans for the erection of a new bridge. It would be necessary, however, that a definite assurance be given by the councils concerned that they will be prepared to bear the cost incidental to the making of preliminary surveys and the preparation of plans, which would probably amount to over £10,000.
As regards the latter part of the question, I understand that the obstructions referred to are barriers erected with the object of preventing drivers of vehicles from exceeding the speed limit which the local authorities found it necessary to impose on vehicles for the protection of the existing bridge. In the circumstances I would not be prepared to suggest the removal of these barriers.
Is the Minister aware of the fact that, while the local authorities agree that there is a necessity for a restriction of the speed limit over the bridge, they do not agree that it is necessary to erect approximately 35 barriers in a zig-zag fashion, the effect of which is that owners will not attempt to take cattle and horses across the bridge because of the manner in which the barriers are constructed and the colours in which they are painted? Will the Minister, therefore, consider sympathetically the question of removing or substantially reducing the number of barriers so as to permit the flow into the town of Youghal of trade which formerly was proper to that town, but which is now diverted elsewhere because owners of cattle and horses will not take the risk of trying to drive the animals across the bridge on account of the obstructions?
I think the Deputy must be really misinformed as to the attitude of the local authorities in regard to these barriers. The first thing that the officer of the local authorities concerned reported was:
"For checking speeds—and this is of vital importance—either Guards on continuous duty must be employed, or the roadway of the bridge must be so obstructed by barriers that speeding will be impossible."
The commissioner for County Waterford subsequently passed a resolution:
"That the county surveyor be authorised to erect the necessary weighing machine and such barriers or gates as may be necessary for the protection of the existing bridge, and the regulation of traffic, and the checking of weights and speeds."
The County Council of Cork passed the following resolution:
"That we, the Cork County Council, approve of the recommendation made by the county surveyor for the restriction of weights and speeds of vehicles passing over Youghal bridge, as detailed in his report."
I have no reason to think that the barriers erected are not in accordance with the recommendations of the responsible, county council officials.
As the Minister will see if he reads the question, my object is to maintain the present limits of speed and weight across the bridge, but the maintenance of the present limits of speed and weight does not at all render necessary the maintenance of the present 33 or 35 obstructions on the bridge. The Urban Council of Youghal —the body vitally affected in the matter—are perfectly satisfied that they can maintain the speed and weight limits if the barriers are removed or substantially reduced. I had an opportunity of inspecting the bridge, and I know what I am talking about. The Minister did not inspect it. Even if he did, he would know no more than be knows now. Apart from that, will the Minister kindly look into the matter with a view to abolishing these obstructions or substantially reducing them, so that the town of Youghal, which is suffering very materially from the maintenance of these obstructions, will be permitted to carry on fairs in the town which were formerly carried on, and which provided a substantial source of revenue to people who are now completely deprived of that revenue?
Whatever may be the Deputy's opinion of his capacity to determine this matter, I as a layman am not going to assume—I am sure the laymen who are members of the Youghal Urban Council will not assume either—that the council are in a better position to determine what precautions ought to be taken to protect this bridge than are the professional advisers of the county council.
Will the Minister consult the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs, who represents the constituency and who, judging by the representations which he has already made, is apparently in entire agreement with my point of view?
While the Deputy may think that he knows better than the council's engineers, I am certain the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs would not put himself in that position.
The Deputy is aware that asking one Minister to consult another is not permitted at Question Time.
I know it is out of order with this Government.
It has never been permitted.