asked the Minister for Transport and Power if he will outline the proposals for the financing of Cork Harbour development; and if he will make a statement on the up-to-date position indicating whether the postponing of the Du Pont plans for development will have any delaying effect on the harbour development.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Cork Harbour Development.
2.
The Cork Harbour Commissioners have been seeking a grant of the full cost, now estimated at over £9 million, of development works in the lower harbour. This application has been under consideration in conjunction with the other elements in the overall development plan including the industrial complex at Ringaskiddy.
A final decision in relation to the scope and financing of the harbour works has not yet been taken but the Government did undertake that necessary infrastructural facilities would be made available in time for the proposed Du Pont plant to go on stream. The deferment of the Du Pont plant is a consideration that falls to be taken into account in arriving at final decisions about the harbour works but need not necessarily mean a delay in the completion of whatever final development scheme may be approved.
Might I ask the Minister what proportion of the estimated cost of £9 million it is hoped the Government will contribute towards that development, or are the Government aware of the urgent need for the development of Cork Harbour, in view of possible off-shore developments? Further, would the Minister take immediate steps to pressure the Government for a final decision on this irrespective of the delay on the Du Pont development there?
As I said, the Cork Harbour Commissioners have requested a grant for the full amount. No decision has yet been taken as to whether the full amount, or any proportion of it, will be given. I am fully aware of the urgency in this regard and the Government share that view. What was the last supplementary asked by the Deputy?
If the Minister would put pressure on the Government for a decision, or if the decision is to be his own, when we might expect such a decision from him?
The Deputy will understand that there is no question of my putting pressure on the Government. The Government make a decision collectively. I could not say when a decision might be taken; I hope as quickly as possible. I do appreciate the urgency involved.
The Minister says there is no question of putting pressure on the Government. If it is within the Minister's Department, is it not his responsibility to ensure that adequate finance is provided for this development at the first possible opportunity?
No, not necessarily. The policy in regard to grants for harbours has been that where a specific industry goes to a harbour and the resources of that harbour would not be sufficient to provide facilities, grants are made available. But this is a different case and will involve a new policy because, since Du Pont pulled out, there is no specific industry for which the facilities would be made available.
Could the Minister say whether the further examination of the harbour development proposal depends on whether or not the Du Pont development scheme goes ahead?
I did not say that. I said now that the Du Pont development has pulled out it is being re-examined in the light of no specific industry being there for the facilities proposed.
Would the Minister not agree there is need for an immediate and urgent investment with a view to offshore oil exploration because, if we have not this type of investment to provide the services required, would the Minister not agree that it will be Milford Haven which will benefit from our exploration off the coast?
This is an enlargement of the question.
Surely there should be an immediate investment for this purpose without investing in anything else if we are to benefit from the exploration?
I am sure the Deputy knows that exploration for oil has been going on off the south coast, for oil and gas, for a number of years now without investment. I could not agree with the Deputy at all that if we do not provide finance, servicing of the exploration will go to Milford Haven. From my experience on the spot I know—and I am sure the Deputy will have read about, if not seen for himself—that the people in the Cork Harbour region are well capable of catering for—and there are facilities there to cater for— existing and any future exploration that may go on.
Question No. 3. I must pass on from this question. I have been generous in the amount of supplementaries I have allowed.
Would the Minister not agree that these are services the oil people want laid on when they advance further with exploration works? They merely take up a telephone and ask for this kind of service; they do not wait until the Government make up their minds to invest in Cork Harbour.
I am not sure what the Deputy is talking about. The services for existing explorations are there already and they are being catered for in the Cork region.
Did I understand the Minister to say that present and future developments were adequately catered for in Cork Harbour?
Sorry, Deputy, for "exploration", not for "exploitation". There are two different things there, Deputy.
Is the Minister saying that Cork Harbour, as it is at present, is adequate for the hoped-for off-shore developments that exist in the area?
Question No. 3, please.
For exploration. There is a difference between "exploration" and "exploitation".
Has it been considered whether or not funds could be made available from the EEC——
The Deputy is raising separate questions.
——either by way of finance from the regional fund or, alternatively, assistance from the Coal and Steel Community Fund? Has this been investigated?
There could not be a grant made available for oil exploration through the Coal and Steel Community Fund because that would be geared specifically to harbours for steel only and could not be used for gas or oil exploration.
Further arising out of the Minister's reply——
I have called the next question, No. 3 please.
But surely the fact——
If the Deputy will not listen to my answer he cannot learn the position.
This is leading to an argument.
Any assistance provided could relate only to a steel factory there. It could not provide for oil and gas exploration.
Question No. 3.