I think it is agreed even by Deputy Corry that the protection of our coastline is a very desirable objective, but if the principle of the Bill is sound, it is rendered unsound if the financial provisions are not such as would make it workable.
As far as I know the principal scheme for which this Bill is introduced is concerned with County Wexford where I am sure a very large sum of money would be needed to repair the damage and prevent further coast erosion. In that case, I think on Section 19 of the Bill, we would be entitled to put forward arguments which I hope will convince the Minister that he should, instead of having a definite percentage named, have an elastic section which would enable him if a case is made to him-as I am sure it could be made-that 50 per cent. on the local ratepayers of a county would be far too great a burden, he could, even if it went to 80 per cent. or 90 per cent., use his discretion and make that sum available.
There are, perhaps, a number of minor schemes all round the coast where local authorities could put up 50 per cent. or something near it, but in my opinion it would be better to leave out the stipulated percentage altogether and leave it to the discretion of the Minister. But we want assurances from the Minister on Section 19 of the Bill that on Report Stage, when he listens to the arguments on that section, he will be prepared to bring in amendments to meet our point of view.
We know what the position of arterial drainage was over a number of years and of the series of attempts that were made to solve it. There was never any real attempt made to satisfy the people generally until the 1945 Arterial Drainage Act came, under which the State undertook to pay the full amount. I am not going to go as far as that because I believe this is somewhat different, but I think there should be elasticity in that section so that when a good case is made to the Minister proving, perhaps, that if erosion is allowed to go on, areas close to the sea will be obliterated and, perhaps, if allowed to go further, it would endanger the position of the capital town in the county and its population, he can meet it. I think that in that case, the Minister or any Minister for Finance in any Government should be prepared to listen to reason and should also be prepared to place themselves in the position where they could use discretion to accept what would be the expert advice put forward by the local authorities.
As Deputy Corry pointed out, I fear that in its present form and with the financial provisions that are being out lined in the Bill, even a local authority could not take it on themselves to promote a scheme because they would know very well, where a very large sum of money would be involved, it would be only a waste of time. They may do it in the hope that there would be a change of attitude on the part of the existing Government or some future Government, but that is the only incentive they have, to go to the trouble of promoting a scheme at all.
That is the attitude I would like to take on this Bill. I think it is a fairly reasonable attitude and I am sure the Minister knows very well from all that has been put to him by members of various Parties from various constituencies where this problem is very acute, that if he does not do something like that, it would be just as well, as Deputy Corry said, not to introduce the Bill at all. I think we could let the Money Resolution go through and argue particularly on Section 19 of the Bill.