Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 4 Apr 1979

Vol. 313 No. 7

Local Government (Toll Roads) Bill, 1978: Committee Stage (Resumed).

Question again proposed: "That section 9 stand part of the Bill."

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan-Monaghan): As I had been saying before reporting progress, we are dealing with this Committee Stage in a piecemeal manner which does not make it easier to have a useful debate.

Subsection (2) says:

Without prejudice to the generality of subsection (1) of this section, an agreement under this section may—

(a) provide for the application of the proceeds of tolls, systems of accounting...

(b) provide for its duration and for its termination...

(c) provide for the giving of such security as may be specified therein.

On the last occasion we debated this the Minister and I differed on the question of whether or not the Bill imposed an obligation on the road authority to write into the type of agreement about which we are speaking a clause providing for its termination. I thought it did not; the Minister thought it did. We are now both agreed that it does not but that it merely enables the road authority to write into the agreement a clause providing for its termination. I maintain that the agreement should have such a clause written into it, that it should not be an optional matter for the road authority or for the Minister, that this House should exercise that much control over any such agreement, should specify that any such agreement must provide a clause for its termination when the other party, who is the private contractor, has been recompensed adequately for the money expended by him in constructing a road or bridge.

The Minister concedes that, as far as his present knowledge goes, such inquiries as have been received in his Department are for projects in Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Waterford and the Naas by-pass. The Minister concedes also that each of those five projects would be a profitable enterprise. I go further and say that some of them are in the golden egg category and none of them could possibly show a loss. For that reason I am very strongly of the opinion that this House should retain control over such agreements to the extent that it will be written into this Bill that they must provide machinery for their termination. I am against giving blank cheques of this nature. That is the main point I make on subsection (2). It deals really with paragraph (b) of that subsection.

I should like the Minister to deal also with paragraph (a) which says that the agreement may:

Provide for the application of the proceeds of tolls, systems of accounting for tolls collected and the methods and times of payment of proceeds of tolls to the persons to whom they are to be paid under the terms of the agreement,

Perhaps the Minister would inform us what thought has been put into that and exactly what is involved in that paragraph. I should like to know if the Minister and his Department have considered what arrangements are likely to be made. We know that the Minister's Department make regulations fairly quickly and probably at present have them in draft form. I do not mean to be funny when I say that sometimes they make the regulations before a Bill is enacted. That would suggest to me that the Minister has considerable information at his disposal as to the type of regulation that would be made.

Paragraph (c) also provides for the giving by the person concerned of security for their observance of the contract. What type of security has the Minister in mind? Will it be security given by a private individual or will it be the more formal type of security such as an insurance company bond or a bank bond?

Minister for the Environment (Mr. Barrett)

The question of the substitution of the word "shall" for "may" is the main point the Deputy is debating. The word "may" gives greater flexibility and the Minister of the day can impose a terminal date if he decides it is in the interest of the proposal or it can be reached by agreement between the local authority and the promoter in question. The flexibility is there whereby if a date is set at 20 years a clause can be inserted that this would be reviewed every five or ten years. That is a very reasonable approach. If the word "shall" was substituted it could cause greater difficulties than the word "may". For example, there are many uncertainties in the world money markets, interest rates, oil shortages and so on, and these are all factors which govern the volume of traffic and how successful or viable a particular bridge tunnel or road might be from the point of view of the people involved in it. The word "may" offers greater flexibility where any proposal is concerned. It does not prevent the two parties concerned agreeing on a date duration clause or inhibit the Minister insisting on such a clause which could be subject to review every so often in the light of experience with the scheme concerned.

If we were to insist on a definite date duration clause of ten or 15 years without the experience of how viable a scheme is we might inhibit the question of cross-subsidisation, which Deputy Quinn mentioned before. It might prove better and more beneficial to a road authority in a county if there were profits accruing from a scheme that they could be directed towards further schemes by regulation of the Minister. The word "shall" would create problems while the "may" would safeguard the public interest. The interests of all concerned can be safeguarded by agreement with the local authorities or by direction from the Minister concerned, who could insist on such a clause if he thought it in the best interests of road users and the people. He could also have this subjected to a periodic review and change it subject to that review and the outcome of such a review. In my view the word "may" is the best one and I cannot accept the substitution of "shall".

Mr. Quinn

Firstly, I should like to know, if it is the Minister's intention to clear Committee Stage today?

Mr. Barrett

Only by agreement.

Mr. Quinn

If that is the case certain questions can be answered across the floor of the House. I do not see why we cannot clear it today because we have talked the Committee Stage out as long as it can reasonably go.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I agree with the Deputy that we spent hours on this section.

Mr. Quinn

One of the problems of being in the Chair is that the occupant must listen to Members like me who speak at length.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

At times it can be pleasant.

Mr. Quinn

This is an important section. The Minister told us that this was a piece of legislation enabling the private sector to become involved in our roads system. As introduced this could be turned on its head and we could be told that this is legislation enabling the public sector to get money from the private sector which it otherwise would not get if it could not by-pass the Minister for Finance. I raised the question of how the Minister would view an approach by any public sector agencies, a road authority, into the commercial money market to get money. I asked if that would be interpreted as an additional load on our public sector borrowing. I appreciate that that is not a matter that can be readily answered and I do not know if the Minister has had an opportunity to inquire about it. The Labour Party would be eased in our concern about the enabling legislation if we felt it was enabling in both directions and that a road authority could go on to the international money market, the EMS money market through the EIB or the domestic money market, to raise funds. I am talking about funds of the order of £30 to £50 million because I am talking about funding the existing road programme as distinct from funding a short-cut bridge.

Subsection (3) states that a road authority may, with the consent of the Minister, enter into an agreement with the party or parties with whom it has entered into a previous agreement. Unless the private sector is coming up with a new road proposal, as distinct from wanting to participate in an existing road programme, I do not see any role the private sector has to play in this area other than providing capital. Looking realistically at the volume of capital involved for any serious road programme, unless we made more money out of CAP than any farmer wants to admit, that kind of capital is not around. If it is around I am sure the Minister for Finance would like to know where it is. The only people with that sort of money are the banks or financial institutions. Therefore, the role of the private sector would be to act as a sort of broker, agents for money. Why can a county manager, with the authority of his councillors, not approach the banks directly and attempt to raise money on the market?

There is no mention of the role of the Minister for Finance and from that I assume it is suggested that the money that would come into this sector would be private money which otherwise would not find its way into the public sector. I should like to know in fiscal and financial terms the definition of money so raised by a local authority. If it is public sector borrowing will it be subject to the budgetary constraints as a percentage of GNP? That major question determines who is being enabled to do what in the legislation. It is possible that had the legislation being presented in a different manner we would have spent less time on it. If there is a satisfactory answer to that matter we can deal with it now and perhaps take the remaining Stages today.

With regard to what Deputy Fitzpatrick said in relation to the termination clause, am I right in assuming that whatever agreement is reached it has to be reached formally between the local authority and the other party involved and that the Minister has to consent to it before it comes up as the reserve function decision of the local authority? Am I right in assuming that?

Mr. Barrett

No.

Mr. Quinn

If the local authority under their reserve function powers are the group which will decide whether or not there is a termination clause we will be quite happy to leave that judgment to the local public representatives. If they are not responsible enough to decide what they want to do in regard to the termination of the contract, we are all out of business. I differ with Deputy Fitzpatrick in regard to this. If the agreement has to be agreed by the local representatives before it goes to the Custom House for approval and if the local representatives decide they do not want a termination clause, then the logic of the Minister's argument stands: the word "may" gives greater flexibility than the word "shall".

I should like to know what the interpretation of public sector borrowing is in relation to section 9. If any local authority want to move in the morning on the assumption of my interpretation of section 9 that they can have the facility to go directly to the banks, are the regulations in draft form? How quickly would the Minister give guidelines in relation to the ratio of tolls as a percentage of a capital re-employed, the period of time and all the rest of it? How prepared are the Department to respond to an initiative from a local authority? Can the Minister now indicate to the House what volume of capital has been put forward as being available from the private sector if the necessary legislation is passed?

I am sure the Minister will agree that this Bill is an open door to the private sector, because it is very liberally interpreted. There are very few constraints placed on them. They only have to give free passage to State vehicles. They do not have to accommodate the wheelchaired and disabled Deputy Fitzpatrick referred to. This House, subject to the normal commercial constraints, is entitled to get some indication from the Minister of the amount of capital from private sources which he and his officals have been told will possibly be available, subject to the legislative framework being adequate, to participate in toll bridges and roads.

Is the capital likely to be provided by the private sector part of the public sector borrowing? Does the Minister for Finance have any role in it? Can that be defined in section 9? If a local authority want to proceed on the basis that this legislation will be passed in the near future, is there a Government policy on toll roads readily available so that a local authority can get off the ground? What volume of money are we talking about that is available from the private sector?

Mr. Barrett

With regard to the borrowing situation, where a local authority are concerned any borrowing they do is subject to sanction by the Minister under the 1960 Local Government Act. It is not a question of regulations. As far as the local authority are concerned, any borrowing has to be sanctioned. The Deputy mentioned the commercial banks in relation to the private sector. The existing controls would be exercised by the Central Bank, not specifically by any Minister. There is nothing to prevent the private sector borrowing if it is within the control of the Central Bank at the particular time. It is possible they might borrow outside the country, perhaps from the EIB or some other place. This would be subject to the existing controls of the Central Bank.

With regard to the volume of capital, there is no way we could assess this at the moment, as I have said on more than one occasion. A lot of interest was expressed in this matter. There was specific interest in one particular proposal, as everybody knows because of the publicity it got. I would not attempt to assess what capital would be available, whether it is available to them already or whether they would borrow at this stage without further discussion with the particular local authority concerned. There is nothing in this Bill that would prevent any person or company from having discussions with me or my Department beforehand in relation to those matters. We are only trying to get into a position to enable such hard discussions to take place. I would not attempt to access the volume of capital which might be available. I hope it will be quite sizeable.

With regard to the duration clause raised by Deputy Quinn and who would have the power to insist on this at local authority level, it is the elected representatives who would insist on that. All through the Bill the powers are with the elected representatives. It depends very much on the wisdom of these elected representatives to assess the decisions during the discussions before the matter comes to the Minister for approval.

Mr. Quinn

With regard to the 1960 Local Government Act, to which the Minister referred, is it the Minister for Finance he was referring to in that case?

Mr. Barrett

The Minister for Local Government.

Mr. Quinn

I am talking now about capital sums of £30 million and £40 million. If a local authority go to a group of banks to borrow £X million for a toll scheme and they are told by the Minister for the Environment that the Minister for Finance says that this would unduly increase the public sector borrowing and the local authority then go to a broker and ask him to organise this borrowing on the private market, would that money be subject to the same scrutiny and control as money which the local authority directly negotiate for?

Mr. Barrett

Yes, if it is borrowed by the local authority directly.

Mr. Quinn

If it is borrowed directly by the local authority it falls within the public sector borrowing. Is that correct?

Mr. Barrett

Yes.

Mr. Quinn

If the local authority say they will not borrow it directly, that they will not sign with the AIB, for example, but instead will sign with some financial brokers and if those people, in turn, raise the money on the legal value of the contract with the local authority, one borrowing requirement will not be subject to public sector definition but the other borrowing requirement will be so subject. If a local authority wanted they could circumvent the Minister for Finance by doing that and they would have to pay the broker a percentage, but a percentage of £20 million is a lot of money in order to get around the situation.

Given the right circumstances many local authorities would like to get into the money market. As a result of the EMS and other factors there is a lot of long-term capital around that might be available for this kind of project. We know that the by-pass at Naas is giltedged in terms of security and so on. If such ventures by the local authority will be subject to the constraints of the Minister for Finance—which have nothing to do with the Custom House—the enabling aspect of this legislation will be handicapped. I should like some clarification from the Minister on this point although I accept that it may take some time.

Mr. Barrett

The Deputy has raised the question of whether a local authority borrow directly or through a broker. Whichever way they borrow the money, the matter will be subject to scrutiny and sanction by the Minister. Even if they go through an agent, which is all a broker would be, it would still be the local authority who are borrowing the money and the matter would be subject to the same scrutiny and sanction. The fact that they use an agent would not make any difference. Personally I do not see the point in a local authority working through a broker if they have to pay commission. They will be subject to the same sanction.

Mr. Quinn

I am grateful to the Minister for clarifying that matter. I am not a financial expert and I should like to clarify some other points. Is it possible that a formal agreement could be drafted between a group of banks and a local authority to enter into the joint financing of a particular scheme which would not be perceived as the local authority borrowing money in the traditional way?

Mr. Barrett

Any borrowing by a local authority is subject to sanction and any agreement entered into is subject to sanction.

Mr. Quinn

Some banks—I am thinking of merchant banks—by way of financing certain projects take out equity as distinct from personal securities or guarantees. If a local authority with a group of merchant banks set up a project in which the banks take out equity as distinct from debentures or securities of one kind or another, would that qualify as borrowing? Will a local authority be able to go directly to the money market or will they have to get sanction every time they move from the Minister and also from the Department of Finance or will the banks simply provide the money? I do not see that the private sector has any contribution to make to a local authority who want to carry out their own road programme. The local authority have their own design staff and maintenance crews and they have their own road programme. The only way the private sector can come in is where they are adding to the road programmes by way of a bridge and so on. The only thing a local authority need from outside their own resources is finance. If their access to finance will not be enabled by this legislation, then I do not think this can be described as enabling legislation.

I am trying to find out if there is some formula of equity ownership or equity participation between a bank or a group of banks and the local authority which could be so legally framed as to qualify to meet the provisions of this Bill and, at the same time, that would not be seen as direct borrowing in the traditional sense and, therefore, would not come under the scrutiny of the 1960 Act or any other provisions that govern local authority borrowing?

Mr. Barrett

If a situation should arise where the merchant banks would get involved in the equity it would be the equivalent of any company in the private sector reaching agreement with a local authority. The merchant bank or banks would be the second party to an agreement for a proposal for a toll scheme. It would be a matter for agreement between them and the local authority. Any borrowing by the local authority has to be sanctioned. If a bank wants to put up a certain percentage of the total cost they would enter into an agreement similar to what we spoke about on various Stages of the Bill: they would not just remain a sleeping partner, merely putting up the money. Merchant banks being what they are, I should imagine they would want an agreement. They would play the same role as any company or person that would be involved.

Mr. Quinn

Such a proposal suitably worded would qualify within the provisions of section 9?

Mr. Barrett

Yes.

Mr. Quinn

Subject to all the constraints as laid out. It would not be seen as a local authority going directly to a bank to borrow money?

Mr. Barrett

Unless they borrow money it would not have to be sanctioned. It depends on the kind of agreement they would come to.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan-Monaghan): I should like to tidy up two points and to raise another matter. First, I wish to raise the question of the amount of the toll in the light of an agreement under section 9. It is clear that section 9 does not provide for the fixing of what I would call individual tolls or a charge for crossing a bridge or using a road. There are three steps.

Section 3 provides for the making of a toll scheme, and that must be approved by the Minister. Section 4 has provision for the entering of objections and so forth. At that stage the toll scheme has been fixed. Section 5 provides for bye-laws which fix the charge that a vehicle owner will pay for use of the bridge or road. What is the position in regard to the agreement? Will the terms be fixed before the agreement has been entered into? I would imagine they would have to be because you could not expect a private individual to invest a considerable amount of money if he did not know what the toll charges would be.

It is anticipated then that the bye-laws would be changed for each new scheme, or that from the beginning if a bridge is to be subject to tolls it will be known that it will be operated by the private sector, that the scheme will be made in the ordinary way and that the contractor will be involved in the making of the bye-laws in order to satisfy himself that it will be worth his while to construct the bridge? The agreement apparent does not provide for the individual toll.

I hope I am making myself clear. There are three stages: there is the scheme under section 3, the bye-laws under section 5 and the agreement under section 9. The agreement does not provide for the fixing of a toll per journey, and any contractor would be interested in that. Therefore, I assume the contractor must be in at the making of the bye-laws. The next question is whether the Minister can alter an agreement under section 9. Is not his only control that he may refuse to approve, that he may say he will not approve of a scheme but that if so and so were done he would approve of it, and then the scheme would go back to the road authorities for amendment? Finally, I should like to say a word, purely from a legal viewpoint, on subsection (5) of section 9 which reads:

The parties to an agreement under this section shall carry out the agreement in accordance with its terms and conditions and a road authority shall have all such powers as may be necessary for that purpose.

With all due respect to the draftsman and his advisers, I suggest that is superfluous. Subsection (1) confers on a road authority the right to enter into such an agreement, and presumably if a person legally enters into an agreement he is bound by its terms. Perhaps there is some good explanation in the Minister's brief in regard to what subsection (5) adds to the section. The parties to any agreement which they are competent to enter into and if it is not contrary to law, are bound by the agreement, and each would have all his legal rights to enforce it. It is generally accepted that it is not good drafting to write superfluous clauses into legislation.

Mr. Barrett

First of all, there is the agreement between the local authority and the proposers. That scheme may not be effected for two or three years. The tolls would be fixed under section 5 when the scheme is about to become operational. The amount of the charge could not therefore be fixed at the time of the agreement because the financial situation might change.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan-Monaghan): Does that mean the contractor must be in on the bye-laws? If he is not is he not buying a pig in a poke?

Mr. Barrett

The bye-law would not be in conflict with the contents of the original agreement. Subsection (5) is included to make it clear that there will be an obligation in law to comply with the terms and conditions of agreement under this section. This is essential to cover the possibility of any grievances in regard to non-compliance with the agreement, and road authorities will not be devoid of powers considered necessary for the purpose of carrying out an agreement to the full. If an agreement were framed in the form of a contract, the first item I have just mentioned would be covered, but the road authorities would still be subject to the ultra vires rule. The Deputy's second question covers the matter of the competence in law of road authorities in relation to an agreement under this section.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan-Monaghan): The Minister agrees with me that there are three stages. If an agreement with a private individual were not involved there would be only two, the toll scheme under section 3 and the bye-laws under section 5. That would be the situation if the road authorities were operating the toll themselves. The inclusion of a private individual brings the question of an agreement into the picture.

As the Minister has said, the road authorities would enter into an agreement with the contractor to construct a toll bridge or road. I agree with the Minister that it might be two or three years before the toll bridge or road would be ready for use. In his last statement the Minister said that at that stage the bye-laws would have been made. Is the contractor to have any right in regard to the making of the bye-laws? Can we say, for instance, that inflation has gone up and as a result he would be entitled to a more substantial toll? How will the contractor be protected? How is he to have a say three years after he has entered into an agreement in regard to the fixing of a toll?

Mr. Barrett

In the financial statement which would be submitted with the agreement there would be an indication of the range of toll envisaged and at the appropriate time the toll charge would be fixed by bye-laws.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan-Monaghan): If a man were to spend £1 million or may be £3 million on a stretch of road he would not like to be relying on an estimate given three years earlier. The agreement entered into will not fix the tolls. We go back to the bye-laws. Perhaps the explanation is that the contractor is a shrewd man—he must be if he has control of that much money. He will have to have control over the bye-laws because if he has not he cannot control his revenue and he cannot ensure he will get a reasonable return from the amount of money he spent on the bridge or road.

Mr. Barrett

The contractor would have safeguarded himself in the agreement. Otherwise, he would hardly have signed it.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan-Monaghan): I would expect so but this means that by reason of section 5, in an ordinary public sector toll scheme the tolls will be fixed by bye-laws drawn up by the local authority and approved by the Minister. But where we bring in the private individual there must be something else written into section 5 to give the contractor necessary control to ensure that the tolls would be adequate to provide him with a fair return on his money. This question must be considered. I consider subsection (5) of section 9 to be a lot of waffle. Subsection (1) of that section provides that:

Where a toll scheme is approved of by the Minister, a road authority may, with the consent of the Minister, enter into an agreement with another person under which, upon such terms and conditions as may be specified in the agreement...

In my opinion that is binding on the parties to the agreement, on the private contractor and on the road authority, each of whom has certain rights and obligations by reason of the agreement. Therefore, subsection (5) is totally unnecessary unless it is for the purpose of copperfastening something. Regarding my question as to whether the Minister can amend an agreement, I do not think he can do this but he can refuse to approve an agreement and to continue to send it back to the road authority until such time as he might approve of it.

Mr. Barrett

That is correct. The Minister would not be a party to the agreement. His function would be either to approve or reject it.

Mr. Quinn

Would it be reasonable to assume from what the Minister has just said and from the points raised by Deputy Fitzpatrick that on the passing of this legislation the regulations will be published without delay? The Minister, in common with Deputy Fitzpatrick and I, knows local government rather well. He must know that a city or county manager will not begin drafting an agreement merely on the basis of section 9 unless he is given some indication from the Custom House as to what is likely to be given consent. We know how our system of government works. Perhaps the Minister would give some indication as to whether the regulations will outline a draft form of agreement. I am not trying to ascertain what is likely to be the situation because I know the Minister cannot commit himself to that extent but he might let us know whether the regulations will contain either a series of models or a model form of agreement for the benefit of local authorities, containing specific reference to the question of termination.

Mr. Barrett

There will not be any such model but we would welcome any discussion that might be necessary in regard to enlightening local authority managers or elected representatives at any time. The Deputy appreciates that a model can vary from one proposal to another but there is no reason for precluding discussion at any time.

Mr. Quinn

Presumably any toll scheme would concern the national primary route system. There will hardly be toll schemes in operation on minor roads or on by-passes. By virtue of being responsible for roads the Minister must have some national responsibility in this context. Consequently, may we not expect some lead from him on this question? On the basis of this enabling legislation might we not expect the Minister to inform some local authorities that there will be money available in, say, the next five years or that, alternatively, they should talk about possible toll schemes. What may we expect to come from the Custom House as a result of this legislation? I would suggest to the Minister that, in the event of the Department not taking some initiative, most local authorities would not act on the basis of this enabling legislation.

The Minister told us that he has spent a year having the legislation drafted. He has told us, too, that the private sector have expressed considerable interest in the toll roads scheme and we have clarified that a local authority have the right by way of equity participation to formalise an agreement directly with a group of finance companies, including a merchant bank. If the Minister really wishes to give substance to this legislation something more must be given to county managers. Basically the only additions that can be made in this regard are in terms of section 8 which deals with regulations. We have almost completed this Bill so far as this House is concerned and it is only reasonable at this point to ask the Minister to give some indication of initiatives of any kind that may be on the agenda. I am not seeking specific commitments but for some indication as to what role, if any, the Minister envisages for the Department other than the statutory role as outlined.

Mr. Barrett

We will be sending a circular to each county manager or local authority. For their information this circular will set out the provisions of the Bill and what these provisions permit them to do.

Mr. Quinn

Is it envisaged that the circular would offer technical assistance in regard to the drafting of an agreement and in computing and calculating the returns necessary to ensure that the tolls would pay for all the items referred to in section 9?

The areas in which there are to be the most likely toll schemes in terms of the road programme as distinct from estuary crosses are medium-sized local authorities with limited scales of managerial resources. We are not talking basically of places like Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Waterford or Galway but of places such as Laois, Offaly and Tipperary. While I have the greatest respect for the personnel in the local authorities in those areas their degree of experience and skill is limited. In terms of the Minister getting a response to the legislation I am interested in hearing whether the Department will be prepared to offer their professional expertise as distinct from supplying simple information by way of circular. The people concerned in the local authorities could probably ascertain from the Official Report the outline of the legislation but the Minister may intend offering something more than this in the circular he proposes framing.

Mr. Barrett

We will be of assistance to any local authority but not in the technical sense to which the Deputy refers because the Minister must approve finally of any scheme. I would envisage a situation in which local authorities would have their own consultants for any major scheme and I expect that in regard to the private sector and the local authority both being involved in any scheme they would have consultants either jointly or separately. Apart from technical assistance, any other type of assistance that might be required would be available from the Department.

Mr. Quinn

The consultants that I am referring to would be fiscal or managerial consultants. In most cases the county manager would ask the treasurer to come up with some programme of financing that would end with a toll charge over a number of years. If a local authority goes into partnership with a private organisation, the members of the local authority whose function is to finally agree the agreement will not be able to get an objective assessment. Would a local authority have the power to hire independent financial consultants without the Minister's consent?

Mr. Barrett

That is correct.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan-Monaghan): We should not confuse the regulations with the agreement. Section 8 provides for the making of regulations by the Minister for enabling the Act and any scheme under section 3, or any agreement under section 9, to have full effect. Has the Minister given any thought to the type of regulation that would be introduced in regard to section 9? I can clearly visualise the type of regulation that would be necessary under section 3. We should be clear in our minds that an agreement under section 9 would be an assessment between the road authority and the contractor with the approval of the Minister. It will be a private document between the road authority and the contractor and will only reflect itself in the toll charged. Perhaps the Minister could advise us of the type of regulation necessary under section 8 for section 9.

Mr. Barrett

Under section 8 (1) (a) in regard to matters of toll schemes under section 3 and agreements with private persons under section 9, it may be desirable that the Minister should make regulations in regard to the publication and public display of a toll scheme.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan-Monaghan): That relates to section 3.

Mr. Barrett

It is section 8.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan-Monaghan): The Minister is now dealing with section 3.

Mr. Barrett

Because this is a new field for local authorities, the intention is that the need for making regulations under this paragraph will be left open for consideration in the light of actual experience in the application of the provisions of this Bill.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan-Monaghan): I think the Minister is dealing with regulations made under section 8 for section 3. I was wondering if the Minister had any idea of the type of regulations necessary under section 9.

Mr. Barrett

I said "matters of toll schemes under section 3 and agreements with private persons under section 9."

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan-Monaghan): Has the Minister any idea what they would be like?

Mr. Barrett

Because it is a new field for local authorities, the intention is that the need for making regulations will be left open for consideration in the light of actual experience under the Bill.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan-Monaghan): Perhaps the Minister would tell us on Report Stage how the other party to the agreement will exercise any influence or control under the by-laws. He would be an idiot to enter into such an agreement if he had not some control under the by-laws.

Mr. Barrett

The by-laws would not be in conflict with the agreement.

Question put and agreed to.

Sections 10 to 12, inclusive, agreed to.

Title agreed to.

Bill reported without amendment.

Report Stage ordered for first sitting day after the Easter recess.