I move that the Bill be received for final consideration.
Lough Corrib Navigation Bill, 1945— Fourth and Fifth Stages.
I should like to have it recorded that I am in complete disagreement with the Bill as it stands. It saddles County Mayo with responsibility for certain payments, although Mayo has derived no advantage from this Lough Corrib navigation and never will. Navigation is out of the question there and I want to be recorded as in thorough disagreement with the measure.
Are you going to vote against it?
Deputy Blowick might use his influence to get Mayo County Council to pay its contributions to this board of trustees and not put the other contributing bodies—Galway County Council and Galway Corporation—in the position of having to take legal proceedings against them.
I watch the activities of the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste with fascinated admiration. The dexterity with which they proceed to split Parties is excellent. Is it conceivable that they have now split the Farmers' Party?
They are the only happy family in existence.
I am greatly tempted to call for a division. I should be most interested to see into which lobby Deputy Blowick and Deputy Donnellan would go.
Question put and agreed to.
Question proposed: "That the Bill do now pass".
I should like if the Minister would state whether, as a result of the passing of this Bill, anything will be done to repair the bridges on the old canal at Ballinrobe, connecting Lough Mask and Lough Corrib. Those bridges were built about 100 years ago. They are mostly steel and they are in a rotten condition and dangerous to the public. Already, the life of a boy has been sacrificed as a result of their condition. So far as I know, the maintenance of those bridges was the responsibility of the old Drainage Board. I take it that this Bill provides for the transfer of the responsibilities of the old Drainage Board and I should like to know if anything will be done about those bridges. If they cannot be reconstructed, it would be in the public interest that they should be pulled down. While they are there, people will use them and, on some occasion, there will be an additional loss of life. That applies, particularly, to a footbridge. I took up this matter a couple of years ago with three different Departments—the Department of Defence, the Department of Finance and the Department of Local Government—and they all denied responsibility. I should like to know from the Minister, who is responsible in this connection or who will be responsible in future or if anything will be done about this matter?
I have listened often with close attention and respect to the contemptuous references made by members of Clann na Talmhan to mere politicians. They have dwelt often on the shameful expedients to which people who deal in politics, as distinct from farmers, resorted. Now we understand from Deputy Blowick that he is not in favour of this Bill and Deputy Donnellan is in favour of it.
Who told you?
I shall be interested to find out what people who are not politicians do in that embarrassing situation. I shall call a division and I expect Deputy Blowick will stand out and support me in that division because he is opposed to the Bill. We shall then have the intriguing spectacle of a group of gentlemen who belong to Clann na Talmhan—none of them politicians—functioning in the rarefied atmosphere of a purely agricultural situation.
In reply to Deputy Walsh, I may say that if the bridge he refers to is part of the Lough Corrib navigation then its demolition would be regarded as the responsibility of the Board of Trustees. The Lough Corrib navigation is administered by a board of trustees and their powers are not interfered with by this Bill. The constitution of the board is changed and the basis of contribution to the board's funds by the contributing parties is also changed. The Bill, further, makes provision which did not before exist for the abandonment of any part of the works or for their transfer to the local authority. If there is reason to require the demolition of the bridges to which the Deputy refers and they are part of the Lough Corrib navigation works, then that can be done presumably by the board of trustees or can be transferred by them to the county council, who can carry out the demolition. If the Deputy would give me further details of the bridges and their location and history I shall be very glad to look into the matter.
Are we to understand that certain works which the board of trustees no longer desire to maintain can be transferred by order to the Mayo County Council and a mandatory duty put on that body to maintain them out of the rates?
No.
Certain other boards have had that power. They could transfer certain of their property to the local authority and the local authority has to maintain them. There is no such provision here.
Whatever arrangements are agreed to can be made to transfer part of the works to the local authority or to permit of their being abandoned.
The local body has disclaimed any responsibility. There is one bridge on the main road which has to be reconstructed and it will cost a considerable sum. It will have to be reconstructed by somebody.
Provision is made in this Bill for that purpose—that is, the reconstruction of the bridges which require to be kept up, a different type to the bridges originally constructed. In that case we are taking power to divide the cost of the new bridge between the local authority and the board of trustees. That provision has been made to deal with the bridges in Galway City. If a similar situation exists in Mayo then that proviso will apply there also.
Is it clear now that immediately on the passage of the Bill, the Mayo County Council, if they see fit, can apply to the Minister to readjust the scale of charges as between Galway and Mayo, and if they make a reasonable case or a case the Minister can accept, that the Minister has power to cut out Mayo altogether if he thinks fit on the case made?
Power is taken in the Bill to adjust further the proportions in which the requirements of the board are to be met by the contributing authorities. As I mentioned yesterday, the influence of the Mayo County Council on the Minister for Industry and Commerce will increase very considerably if they pay the arrears of contributions now due by them.
As far as we are concerned this Bill is not one bit of advantage to us. It is a Bill intended to change the trustees, which is very necessary.
Question put.
The Dáil divided: Tá, 59; Níl, 19.
Tá
- Aiken, Frank.
- Bartley, Gerald.
- Beegan, Patrick.
- Blaney, Neal.
- Boland, Gerald.
- Bourke, Dan.
- Brady, Brian.
- Brady, Seán.
- Breen, Daniel.
- Brennan, Thomas.
- Breslin, Cormac.
- Briscoe, Robert.
- Buckley, Seán.
- Burke, Patrick (Co. Dublin).
- Butler, Bernard.
- Childers, Erskine H.
- Colbert, Michael.
- Colley, Harry.
- Daly, Francis J.
- Davin, William.
- Derrig, Thomas.
- De Valera, Eamon.
- Donnellan, Michael.
- Everett, James.
- Flynn, Stephen.
- Fogarty, Andrew.
- Fogarty, Patrick J.
- Furlong, Walter.
- Harris, Thomas.
- Healy, John B.
- Hilliard, Michael.
- Kennedy, Michael J.
- Kilroy, James.
- Kissane, Eamon.
- Lemass, Seán F.
- Little, Patrick J.
- Loughman, Frank.
- Lydon, Michael F.
- Lynch, James B.
- McAuliffe, Patrick.
- McCann, John.
- McEllistrim, Thomas.
- Mongan, Joseph W.
- Moylan, Seán.
- Norton, William.
- O Briain, Donnchadh.
- O'Grady, Seán.
- O'Leary, John.
- O'Reilly, Matthew.
- Pattison, James P.
- Rice, Bridget M.
- Ryan, Mary B.
- Ryan, Robert.
- Sheridan, Michael.
- Skinner, Leo B.
- Smith, Patrick.
- Ua Donnchadha, Dómhnall.
- Walsh, Richard.
- Ward, Conn.
Níl
- Anthony, Richard S.
- Blowick, Joseph.
- Cogan, Patrick.
- Coogan, Eamonn.
- Cosgrave, Liam.
- Dillon, James M.
- Dockrell, Henry M.
- Dockrell, Maurice E.
- Fagan, Charles.
- Flanagan, Oliver J.
- Giles, Patrick.
- Hughes, James.
- MacEoin, Seán.
- McFadden, Michael Og.
- Mulcahy, Richard.
- O'Higgins, Thomas F.
- Redmond, Bridget M.
- Roddy, Martin.
- Rogers, Patrick J.
Tellers:—Tá: Deputies O Ciosáin and Kennedy; Níl: Deputies Dillon and Flanagan.
Question declared carried.