asked the Minister for Local Government whether he is aware that tenders have now been received by the consultant to the Youghal Urban Council from three Irish contractors for the reconstruction, without any interruption of traffic, of Youghal bridge; that the average of the three tenders is less than £250,000, which is less than half the cost estimated by the consultants to the Cork County Council and the advisers of his Department; and if, in view of the large saving which would accrue to the ratepayers and the taxpayers by the acceptance of one of these tenders, he will have the decision in the matter reviewed.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Youghal Bridge.
I am not aware that the Youghal Urban District Council has any statutory powers, functions or duties in relation to the construction or reconstruction of a bridge to improve road communications between the counties of Cork and Waterford at Youghal, including any power to appoint a consultant engineer to prepare plans and other documents for the purpose of inviting tenders for the reconstruction of the bridge. No such consultant has been appointed with my knowledge or consent. I have no information on the three tenders stated to have been received, save a note of the amounts and the names of three firms given to me by the Deputy. I have no knowledge of the documents upon which any such tenders may have been based, but they could not form the basis of a valid contract.
It was arranged by a joint committee of the county councils of Cork and Waterford, being the road authorities responsible for the road of which Youghal bridge forms part, that the Cork County Council would apply to the Minister for Local Government for a bridge Order for Youghal bridge. An application has been made accordingly by the Cork County Council. Any representations which the Deputy may wish to make on the matters raised in the question should be made to the Cork County Council and not to me.
Would the Minister not consider it advisable to refer any information he has in regard to these three tenders to the Cork County Council with the suggestion that they might consider the matter?
As the Deputy is aware, the Minister is endeavouring to denude himself of any dictatorial powers he may have under the various Acts. The Deputy who put down the question is a member of the Cork County Council and I have no doubt he will have the ear of the council and could make any representations to them much better than I could.
Arising further from the Minister's reply, would the Minister not consider that if there is any foundation for the statement contained in the question that a saving of possibly £150,000 would be effected by reconstructing the existing bridge it would be desirable if the existing bridge were reconstructed?
If the county council put any proposition to me for sanction whereby they would save £150,000 or any sum, provided my technical advisers so advised me, I certainly would consider the matter. But, so far, from the bridge authority, namely Cork County Council, the consultants and engineers they have consulted in the matter, and from the technical advice tendered to me by my Department, I am not at the moment in a position to accept what the Deputy says, namely, that there would or could be a saving of £150,000. If the bridge authorities submit any proposals to me, I will refrain from making a bridge Order pending personal consideration of the matter.
Can the Minister say, as a result of the representations made to him and of his own investigations in the matter, he does not consider there is certainly a question to be investigated?
As a result of my own observations, I had the matter re-examined by the technical advisers who see no reason to alter the original decision given by them.