Deputy Wyse is in possession and has five minutes remaining.
Private Members' Business. - B. & I. Cork-South Wales Service: Motion.
The following motion was moved by Deputy Gene Fitzgerald on 22 February 1983:
That Dáil Éireann calls on the Government, in view of the B & I Company's announced decision to abandon the Cork-Pembroke Service, to ensure that a full, regular and round the year service be provided as soon as possible between Cork and South Wales, such as operated satisfactorily for more than 10 years between Cork and Swansea, and pending this outcome to ensure that a service be provided immediately by the B & I Company for the remainder of 1983 in accordance with their contractual obligations.
Debate resumed on amendment No. 1:
To delete all words after "Dáil Éireann" and substitute:
notes the decision of the B & I Company to close the Cork-Pembroke Ferry Service as part of its plan to reverse its serious loss-making situation; notes also that since the decision was conveyed to the Government in October 1982, it was not found possible by successive Governments to recommend a reversal of this decision; and welcomes the initiative of the Minister for Transport, and his continuing efforts, to provide a Summer ferry service in 1983.
—(Minister of State at the Department of Transport.)
In my contribution last night I tried to establish the inefficiency and blunders of B & I which brought about their withdrawal from the Cork area. Cork is an industrial area which demands a proper shipping service. My colleagues as well as Corkmen on the opposite benches, will vouch for that fact. I would remind the Minister that almost all new industry setting up in the State is export-dependent and further industrial development in the Cork region will be greatly inhibited unless there is a regular roll-on roll-off service direct to the UK.
We will continue to highlight this demand as well as the blunders and lack of imagination of B & I.
I cannot accept the amendment which welcomes the Minister's continuing efforts to provide a summer ferry service in 1983. Our motion calls on the Government to ensure that a full, year-round service is provided as soon as possible between Cork and South Wales, similar to that which existed between Cork and Pembroke. We will continue to make this demand, joined by business and commercial interests, tourist concerns and everybody interested in the welfare of the region.
I was hoping that some constructive view would be expressed by the Minister in relation to the Cork area and we are hoping also to hear about his efforts to restore this all-important service. Unfortunately this has not happened and I hope before the debate ends that some information will be given to us providing some hope that Cork will have a proper and efficient shipping service.
Cork is suffering from very severe unemployment. Over 10,000 people are out of work there. It is sad that a State-sponsored body who are responsible for the investment of £70 million in the development of Cork harbour should be part of this effort to bring more unemployment in Cork.
I speak on this motion as a Deputy representing Cork North-Central, a constituency which has above average unemployment and which has suffered through the years because of the demise of some of our traditional labour-intensive industries. Unemployment is uppermost in our minds and I am very concerned about the continuation of some form of ferry service between Cork and the British mainland.
Along with a very representative delegation from the Cork and Kerry region, I have during recent months made three visits to different Ministers. We met the then Minister, Deputy John Wilson, on 19 October 1982 and the delegation put a very good case. The Minister was very well informed on the problem and was very polite and receptive to the ideas put by the delegation. We met the present Minister, Deputy Jim Mitchell, on 30 December last with the closure date of 7 January decided by B & I management hanging over our heads. The Minister treated us very cordially and listened to the submissions we made and we came away satisfied that we had made a very good case.
We met the Minister again, in accordance with an agreement with him, on 3 February, the date the closure was announced. The delegation put forward very good reasons for the maintenance of the Cork-Pembroke service because the Cork-Kerry region is a prime tourist area dependent on an efficient ferry service. The delegation were very conscious that the development of existing industry and the ability of the region to attract new industry is also dependent on an efficient sea link with the British mainland.
The majority of the delegation came to Dublin on each occasion convinced that a pull-out by B & I would seriously downgrade the region, with serious social and economic implications. The delegation opposed the withdrawal of the service from Cork on a number of major points. The point which was uppermost in our minds was the fact that if the closure took place there would be resultant redundancies in the B & I staff in Cork.
The second point was the adverse effect the withdrawal of the service would have on tourism and commercial interests in the Cork-Kerry region. I felt the delegation sought a meeting with the Minister because they felt that Cork was being used as a scapegoat for the serious financial situation B & I found itself in. That situation was brought about by unsound commercial decisions by management in recent years. We were conscious of the fact that the switch from Swansea to Pembroke in 1979 was to the detriment of the service and resulted in a longer land journey for those travelling from here to Britain. We are all familiar with the condition of the Welsh roads from Pembroke.
It was made known to the delegation by the workers in Cork that they had a grievance because of their agreement to a Rosslare-Pembroke run in 1980 and, subsequently, their agreement to a Rosslare-Cork to Pembroke service resulted in a diversion of traffic from the Cork area. In our dealings with the workers in Cork we learned that they were responsible people and conscious of the B & I situation. We also learned that they had facilitated management in every way they could in recent years. In fact, some of them made financial contributions to B & I coffers from their salaries.
The delegation was also conscious of the fact that the Ringaskiddy ferry terminal had been provided at a cost of about £8 million on the basis of assurances from B & I. We are now given to understand that that terminal will be under-utilised as a result of the threatened withdrawal from Cork by B & I. We met the Minister firm in our conviction that a fundamental lack of commitment existed by the B & I to Cork and that this has resulted in the present situation. What happened on 3 February is history. The decision was made then to close the Cork-Pembroke service. The withdrawal from Cork was a blow to us all because we knew many of the workers involved and some of us had relations there. We left the meeting with the Minister with a sense of personal loss. It is understandable that since then B & I staff in Cork have been critical of politicians and management. They see themselves as victims of commercial and political bungling down through the years.
We must give an account of our stewardship at election time but B & I management do not have to account for themselves. They should not be allowed to walk away from the Cork debacle and they must be made account for their mismanagement in recent years, in particular, their policy decisions in regard to Cork. I find it hard to accept some of the points made by the Minister in reply to the Opposition. I demand that the Government set up an inquiry into the decisions and activities of the B & I management in recent years. The decision to switch from Swansea to Pembroke was a disastrous one. The purchase of the jetfoil was a major mistake and it has dogged the financial position of B & I since. We must look at what I term the conspiracy by B & I to abandon Cork in recent years.
The Deputy should refer to recent times rather than recent years.
I did not interrupt any speakers last night and I do not need any help.
The Deputy will have an opportunity to contribute later.
As a result of the decision by B & I to leave Cork people from that area will have to travel to Rosslare to avail of the ferry service to the Welsh coast. There is no need to tell the House about the condition of the roads between Cork and Rosslare. The roads in Cork are not bad but once one leaves Waterford city one must travel on poor roads. I wonder what effect the B & I decision will have on the condition of those roads. What draw will there be on Exchequer funds to bring them to a standard suitable for carrying heavy freight traffic to Rosslare? The Exchequer will be forced to make a massive investment in infrastructure in that area because of the withdrawal from Cork.
I have been told that Rosslare is a limited port, suffers from silting and needs to be dredged from time to time. I am also given to understand that the landing berth at Rosslare causes problems from time to time. I have read press reports about delays because of tidal difficulties at Rosslare. In my view influential vested interests are involved in the decision to wind down the Cork operation. It is said in Cork that some of the board of management of B & I have vested interests in the Wexford area. For example, it has been said that the executive officer of B & I was formerly involved at senior management level in a Wexford company and that a director of B & I has widespread business interests in the Wexford area. I should like to know the input those people had into the decision to reduce the Cork operation and, eventually, withdraw from that city. The people of Cork and B & I workers are entitled to answers.
It has been established that Cork will have a new service operating from Ringaskiddy to Wales starting sometime in March. I am not aware of the extent of the service but at least there will be continuity between Cork and Wales. But I am not altogether happy about the position. I want more details on the type of service that will be provided. B & I must set up a summer service from Cork this year and I believe the Government will ensure that this service is established for the people in the region.
I must defend my party and our Government against some of the charges levelled against us recently by some Opposition speakers and their political allies in high positions in the southern Cork region. I must remind them that many of the decisions made by the B & I were made when the Opposition Party were in Government. These decisions ultimately decided the fate of the B & I in Cork and those in Opposition now were quite aware of what was happening and did very little to prevent the winding down of the Cork operation. It reduces the status of the House somewhat when Deputies, discussing a serious situation for Cork, attempt to make that situation into a political football.
The Government have been accused of abandoning the Cork and Kerry region and a good deal of play has been made about the £1 million taken from the Ringaskiddy area recently. The Chairman of the Cork Harbour Commissioners was very vocal and very critical of the decision not to go ahead temporarily with the Ringaskiddy deep water terminal. I would remind the House that it was during the term of office of the Coalition Government in 1976 that Cork development was initiated. That development originated back to 1970-71. It stayed on the shelf in the early seventies until the Coalition Government initiated the plan in 1976 and that was initiated when the country was going through one of the worst recessions ever.
The Cork Harbour Commissioners went ahead with the construction of a ferry terminal on the assumption that the B & I would come to Ringaskiddy. I have checked this out to the best of my ability from the records made at the time and I have yet to find any evidence that a signed agreement existed in this matter and I would like the Chairman of the Cork Harbour Commissioners, before he accuses my Government of adverse action against the Cork region, to examine the activities of his own board. I put it on record now that it has not been all doom and gloom in the Cork region in recent times. The impression is being created, but not by the Government or the parties in Government, that Cork is going downhill fast. This is not true. Murphy's Brewery was saved and over 200 jobs were assured. Secondly, industries were announced for the Kilbarrack Industrial Estate with an employment content of 220 jobs and the possibility of a third major company coming into the area. Thirdly, Schering Plough announced a major development in the Innishannon area which will have a labour content on completion of 160 jobs and, at the construction stage, will have 600 people working on the site. Fourthly, in the Ringaskiddy area £300,000 is being allocated for road development. Cork has suffered serious setbacks but it has not been abandoned, as some would have us believe, by the present administration.
The attitude of the Opposition in this debate has been very hypocritical. The Minister proved last night that Fianna Fáil, according to that party's policy document, The Way Forward, would not have acted any differently. Deputy Wilson will not, I am sure, deny that the inter-departmental report submitted to his Department recommended the winding down of the Cork operation and he did not overrule that recommendation.
I refused to implement it.
Deputy Wilson, as Minister, did not overrule it. He left the matter there for whoever would have to cope with the appalling situation that existed.
I do not want to interrupt. It was suggested that I discontinue the service and I refused. The Government took a decision on that.
My interpretation was that the situation was allowed to drift and no attempt was made to cope with it. The Opposition seem to have done a complete U-turn on this issue now. Some consideration will have to be given to the workers involved in the B & I, some of whom have up to 38 years' service. Mention was made last night of the Verolme contracts. The B & I have chosen to go to Britain to get their ships serviced. Our taxpayers have a financial input and interest in the company and we must be told how and why contracts are allowed to go out of the country. Now despite the impression given here that Cork Deputies are divided on most issues my experience has been quite the contrary. We have all learned to co-operate and put our heads together when faced with problems in the Cork area and I hope this co-operation will long continue. I am demanding a full inquiry here into the workings of the B & I.
In the light of what the Deputy has said I take it he will support this motion this evening.
To deal with the problem of B & I's abandonment of Cork one has to begin with the basic situation and say that there was a well established, nearly a century old established, Sealink route from Cork to Britain. It was an effective viable proposition. Why did that service suddenly become non-viable? I am sure part of the answer must be found in poor management, a lack of commitment by B & I to Cork, the determination of B & I to concentrate its activities in Dublin and one other port but Dublin in particular. All Cork people know that for many years the old Inishfallen left Penrose Quay on Monday, Wednesday and Friday evenings around 5.30. Regrettably we saw, in our younger days, the masses of people boarding that boat with the livestock and the commercial produce. We were glad to see from the middle sixties onwards a discontinuance of the emigration of people but commercial development and improvement in the Cork area warranted the existence of this link from the port of Cork to the British markets. The board of B & I changed their schedules. They moved to the car ferry terminal a little downstream to shorten the time of crossing and give manoeuvrability to the boats in the port. All that was allowed to happen because of mismanagement, because of a lack of commitment to the port of Cork.
We met three Ministers in recent months. There is no doubt, and I am sure the Ministers we met have no doubt about the validity of the case put forward by the constituent bodies of those delegations that the service was not only essential but was also viable if properly carried out. That point was stressed by each of the interests involved. Unemployment is one of the serious problems facing the country at present. Every public representative has this to say but unfortunately we have to say it even more strongly in the Cork area. It is beyond our comprehension why this Coalition Government allowed this to happen. Their attempt to downgrade Cork has been very significant. May I, with the permission of the Leas-Cheann Comhairle, introduce another copy of our bible, The Cork Examiner. On Tuesday, 15 February we saw a heading:
Yes, minister, but are we right?
That refers to an interview with the Minister for Transport when he condemned The Cork Examiner for being “hysterical and outrageous” in its accusations that the Government were downgrading the south-west. I quote:
But faced with the blunt question, "are you saying that what the Examiner has claimed is not accurate?” Mr. Mitchell refused to come up with an equally blunt answer...Asked again if what the Examiner has been saying was inaccurate, the Minister again sidestepped, “For the Examiner to blame us isn't fair or reasonable,” he said. Asked why he had refused to receive a deputation from Cork Harbour Board about the B & I pull out from Cork — a decision condemned by the Board's chairman, Mr. Denis Murphy, as “disgusting and insulting”. — Mr. Mitchell said he had not refused. He had been “inundated” with requests for deputations and his Department was refusing them to give him a chance to settle in.
And then, astonishingly, as our paper records, Mr. Mitchell revealed that he had not consulted with the IDA about the decision not to go ahead with the building of a deep water berth at Ringaskiddy.
I like to lay blame where it properly rests and the decision by the Government not to give the £1 million that was earmarked by our Government for the further development and completion of the Ringaskiddy deep water berth has to be seen in the light of the overall decisions being taken for the Cork area. If that £1 million had not been withdrawn by the Government we could have seen at least 200 direct jobs at Ringaskiddy and many more indirect jobs as a result of that part of the plan proceeding. What are some of the semi-State bodies at with regard to Cork? The worst aspect of it is that they have the support and collusion of the Coalition Government. We could also delve into the activities of Aer Lingus but we will have that another night.
It was said in the discussion tonight that the plan for the lower harbour development was initiated by the Coalition Government. People might like to believe that but we in Cork local authorities know well when the plan was formulated. We know when it was ready to become effective on the ground with the input of finance. We also know that during the period of the Coalition Government of 1981, they stopped £2 million for the development at Ringaskiddy. When we got back into Government for a short period we took it off the shelves. Lo and behold, the Coalition are only back a couple of weeks and they are shelving it again.
The Deputy would almost blame the Coalition Government for losing last year's All-Ireland.
I looked at the Deputy in the All-Ireland in 1965 and I was sad when the Minister of State's team beat Kerry. No amount of propaganda will ever distort the facts. As far as my colleagues and I are concerned there is absolutely no hypocrisy on our behalf regarding the supportive role we play with the many organisations from the Cork region. I would like to include in that the entire south-west region in our approach to the various Ministers in relation to the B & I. It is essential for the development of the south-west region, with Cork as its base, to have this direct link with Britain for trade, commerce and tourism.
Many of the tourists who come to the south-west are the mothers, fathers, sons and daughters who emigrated from the south-west to England in the fifties when they could not find work at home. These are the people we want to accommodate. These are the people who like to come home to their native heath for their holidays and encourage a few of their English colleagues to come with them. Statistics were given here last night on the number of people involved in the tourist industry and how seriously the withdrawal of that service is affecting so many people in our region.
Our motion asks that a full and regular round-the-year service be provided as soon as possible between Cork and South Wales, like that which operated satisfactorily for more than ten years between Cork and Swansea. That part of the motion is very relevant. My colleague, Deputy Fitzgerald, last night said that the crazy decision — there is no other way to describe it — by B & I and anybody else responsible to move from Swansea to Pembroke was the beginning of the end for that service.
Our motion goes on to say:
and pending this outcome to ensure that a service be provided immediately by the B & I Company for the remainder of 1983 in accordance with their contractual obligations.
B & I keep telling us that a service out of Cork is not viable. We thoroughly reject that suggestion by them. We want to emphasise that with a service, with the proper commitment given to it, with proper scheduling, with good service provided on the crossing, the people in Cork have no doubt whatever that it would be viable. I heard mention last night and again tonight in a critical way of The Way Forward, which our party introduced. I have looked through the section dealing with transport, particularly the area dealing with B & I and I do not see any variance in that from what the people are asking for at the moment. It is stated in that section of The Way Forward:
Timely and decisive action will be needed to ensure that all services will be operated on an economic basis and the Company's cost overheads significantly reduced.
That is the point which applies to Cork and is what I have been saying for the last five minutes. I have no doubt that my colleagues in Cork, irrespective of their political affiliations, know well from the many organisations in Cork that such a service, properly structured and properly run, would be a viable proposition.
Every effort has been made by the B & I to downgrade the operation out of Cork. In any development and in the creation of employment, which those of us in the Cork region are concerned about, it is not a fact that if we have not available to us the transport facilities to deliver and to export the product, we are doomed to certain failure before we begin? Have I not shown that over the years the ferry link from Penrose Quay, Tivoli and latterly Ringaskiddy was necessary for the development of commercial life in the area? It will not be possible for us to encourage industrialists into the area, to encourage entrepreneurs to go into commercial activity in the creation of employment if they are faced with the extra transport cost of sending containers by truck from the Cork region to Rosslare or to Dublin.
Those of us who drive occasionally on the Cork road pass many trucks and container traffic going with us and going against us on that road. If all this operation were properly managed and structured those containers could travel through the port of Cork. If my colleagues from the Cork and Kerry area who are in Government cannot, with our help, direct this Coalition Government away from their obvious bias against the Cork region I am afraid the outrageous suggestion by a Fine Gael backbencher last week that emigration is the alternative will be only too true. However, there is no place to emigrate to. There should be no need to emigrate if we had the proper will and commitment to develop a long-established industrially oriented people in the Cork region. All the efforts of the Government are directed to the enlargement of the employment problem. I believe it was a red herring, to say the least of it, for my colleague from Cork Central to come in here tonight and give an excuse or adopt a diversionary tactic in respect of the various problems in setting up an industry in the Cork area. He mentioned Brinny. There is nothing wrong with that. It is not too far from any of us but who does Deputy Allen think he is codding so far as Schering Plough is concerned? He would need to come up with something better than that to appease the people of Cork on the matter that is the subject of this motion. I am a member of the local authority who granted planning permission many months ago for the development of Schering Plough. Is the Deputy not aware that only last week there was an injunction granted against that development? No amount of propaganda will distort the fact that the Coalition have allowed the B & I to pull out of Cork.
A number of my Kerry colleagues have put their names to this motion. With the permission of the Chair, I am willing to give some of my time to Deputy Foley.
That is all right so far as the Chair is concerned.
I conclude by appealing again to the Government in this matter to ensure that there is provided from the port of Cork a service on the lines I have outlined. We must have a service that is run efficiently. I am confident of the viability of a properly-managed service there. Such a service would have the full support of all interests in the Cork and Kerry regions but there must be the proper commitment and proper scheduling and so on on the part of the B & I or of any other State body that might be charged with that responsibility.
I wish to add my voice to that of my colleagues from Cork in seeking the retention of the Cork-Pembroke service on a regular round-the-year basis such as the service that has been in operation for the past ten years. I ask that, pending a decision on those lines, a service be provided immediately by the B & I on this route for the remainder of this year.
The Cork-Kerry tourist region is the biggest within the Bord Fáilte area. It claims 33 per cent of all registered accommodation and this is made up of hotels, guesthouses, town and country homes and farm guesthouses. The region claims 29 per cent of the overall tourist business to the country. The direct value of this business to the region is approximately £117 million while indirect business by way of spin-off activities is estimated at about £100 million. There are 18,000 people employed directly in the tourist industry in this region with an additional 3,000 or 4,000 people engaged in spin-off activities. The alternative to the present service is by way of Rosslare but that would not be acceptable in any way to the people of Kerry because we could not hope that any more than about 10 per cent of visitors arriving at Rosslare would find their way to Kerry.
The costly promotions undertaken by the Cork-Kerry region down through the years, and which were based on the operation of the ferry service, are now to be proved a waste of time in the event of the service not being continued. Leading up to the general election both Fine Gael and Labour gave a commitment to this B & I service. I am asking the Government to honour this commitment because the loss of the service would be a major blow to the leading Cork-Kerry tourist region. From a Kerry viewpoint alone the loss of the service would be a major blow both from the tourist and industrial viewpoints, especially when taken in conjunction with the recent VAT increase from 18 to 23 per cent. The loss of the service could signal the downfall of the whole tourist business in Kerry. Many leading hotels in Kerry are closed at the moment and indications are that because of present circumstances they may not reopen. I appeal again to the Minister to consider seriously this motion in the interest of uplifting the seriously depressed tourist industry in Cork and Kerry.
When this motion was circulated I accepted it for what it was worth, having been considering this problem since 1981 when what was happening in the B & I was brought to my notice. Since then I have been a member of the various deputations to successive Ministers. I regarded this motion as a genuine effort to come to grips with the problem.
Deputy Gene Fitzgerald gave a very fair assessment of the situation and he did so without rancour and without trying to score political points. He expressed clearly his concern for the region, for the people concerned and for their jobs. I regret, though, that Deputy Wyse saw fit to introduce a note of rancour which did not add anything to this debate. To accuse the Minister of having had his speech prepared by an executive of B & I was most unfair. Deputies Lyons and Foley went a little further and implied that the whole closure of the B & I was a Coalition plot. Nothing could be further from the truth. I am asking the movers of the motion to accept the amendment as proposed.
(Interruptions.)
Order, please.
I did not interrupt the Deputies opposite. I am asking them to accept the amendment in the light of a note that was circulated to each member of the Cork Harbour Commissioners on 8 February last and which, referring to the recent decision of the Minister of Transport to allow the B & I line to terminate the Cork-Pembroke service, went on to say that a specially convened meeting of the commissioners decided unanimously to request the Minister to meet representatives of the commissioners and other local interests in order to press for the retention of the B & I Cork-Pembroke service until the end of the 1983 tourist season. This was the group of people who came to meet Deputy Cooney as Minister, who subsequently met Deputy Wilson more recently while he was in office and the present Minister. That is the appeal of the official Cork non-political line. The Minister is prepared to meet this group on 1 March, so I am asking the movers of the motion to give some cognisance to the representations of those who are led by the Cork Harbour Commissioners. The people on that side of the House know who is the present chairman of the Cork Harbour Commissioners.
There has been long association with the port of Cork, stretching back 130 years. As Deputy Lyons rightly said, during the late forties and fifties we witnessed a haemorrhage of our young people through the port of Cork but thankfully there was a turnabout; they came back as tourists. In 1965 the Government — a Fianna Fáil Government — acquired the City of Cork Steam-packet Company because the Government, under Mr. Lemass, were of the opinion that we did not have any passenger facilities on this corridor. Since then that company has played a vital role. The first action of the B & I company was to close the Cork-Liverpool service. We had two ships sailing from Cork, a weekly sailing with the SS Kenmare and the Innisfallen providing a passenger service. The Innisfallen has been a part of Cork folklore. Recent events have caused great concern to the people in the Cork area and other speakers have listed the likely effects of the withdrawal of this service. I regret to say Fianna Fáil have not come up with anything that would provide an alternative service. All they said is “Let us bring back the ship”.
We did not say that. Be factual.
I will be factual. During recent months there were proposals from the chairman of the B & I board, Mr. Boland, and a former chairman of the Cork Harbour Commissioners, Mr. Foley. Mr. Boland envisaged a privately run company taking over from B & I. Mr. Foley had a different proposal, that is, to set up the City of Cork Steampacket Company, a subsidiary of the B & I, which is still in existence and registered but not working at the moment. At present there is a ship tied up, the MV Munster, which could be put to a very good use on this route. He asks that this ship be given for a three year trial period. The suggestion was that the Innisfallen be chosen because of its traditional links with the port. This could be done as a subsidiary of the B & I as distinct from a separate commercial undertaking. That would prove worthwhile and I have no doubt that the people of Cork would support this venture. I will be suggesting this to the Minister and I would ask the Deputies who tabled this motion to reconsider their decision in the light of what has been said and in view of the fact that a deputation will be meeting the Minister. With other members of a deputation I met Deputy Wilson, then Minister, and he received us in a very courteous manner, as did other holders of that office, but nothing definite came from those meetings. Deputy Wilson said he had decided in May not to close the B & I but we did not get a decision to keep it open either. That was very important. This motion is having the effect the board of B & I wanted, that is, that it is divisive.
Deputy O'Sullivan should come with us and put his feet where his mouth is. His bluff is being called.
Deputy Fitzgerald was not interrupted when he spoke last night.
He is bluffing.
Be quiet. As an ex-Minister, you should give good example. We were talking recently about Dáil reform——
His bluff is being called.
What I am saying is here in black and white and the Deputy may check it if he wishes. The Deputies who put down this motion have succeeded in introducing politics into what has been a united front up to now and allowed the management of B & I to walk away from the monster they created.
(Interruptions.)
Deputy O'Sullivan without interruption.
This has driven a wedge between what has been a united front up to now representing all sections of the community in Cork — trade unions, commercial, tourist and so on. Deputy Wilson will bear that out because the case was presented in a very fair way, as he admitted at the time.
But without any success.
Deputy Wallace did not contribute much to it.
Deputy O'Sullivan is under pressure because his people are watching his vote.
There is no pressure. Deputy Fitzgerald is trying to tell me about the nautical life of Cork.
Deputy O'Sullivan is still wet behind the ears.
I would not like to see what is behind Deputy Fitzgerald's.
Deputy, you are wasting your time
At present we have Irish Shipping, Irish Continental Lines and the B & I with 12 ships flying the Irish flag. We have the Jetfoil tied up in Arklow; the ferryboat Munster tied up in Dublin. We have three companies and I did not suggest setting up a fourth company because I cannot see any reason why one company cannot deal with 12 ships and the business they generate. We have not had any positive suggestions from Fianna Fáil. They engaged in a knocking exercise and did not come forward with any practical solutions. I could speak for half an hour without interruption if I were allowed——
The Deputy does not like interruptions.
——but I have decided to give some of my time to Deputy Liam Burke who is a representative of Cork North Central.
Like other speakers I would like to put before the Oireachtas the serious problem of the deterioration of the transport services in the Cork area. These are recessionary times and one cannot expect the best of everything, but I seriously question the recent decision of the management of B & I. It is right that they should be questioned and the position investigated. They have squandered millions of pounds on a hovercraft which is lying idle in Arklow at a cost of £6 million and costing the ratepayers approximately £900,000 in interest. These decisions should be very seriously questioned.
One can imagine what this service meant to the Cork area, whose second largest industry is tourism. We are now abandoned, having no ferry service. No one can deny that the B & I line gave the tourist access to the most attractive regions of West Cork and Kerry. Without doubt, the losses suffered by the south-west region will be great when compared with the losses suffered already by B & I. I have been approached — and I am sure other Deputies in this area have, also — by the hoteliers in the Cork area whose businesses have suffered badly due to massive cancellations because of the abandoning of the ferry service.
I fully accept that cutbacks are needed, but are they to be aimed at only one region? Why are these cutbacks made in Cork?
Deputies
Hear, hear.
And at the same time extension of the services out of Dublin.
Deputies
Hear, hear.
I must put the blame on the B & I management who deliberately, it would seem, ran down the Cork service which, for a period from 1976, was not only a viable proposition, but actually made money. There are people travelling from Cork to Swansea every week, shoppers going from country to country. I am sure some Deputies use this route. There were good relations between the Welsh area and our south west region. The impact of that loss, socially and economically, cannot be sufficiently stressed. Deputations went to the present Minister, Deputy Mitchell, and to the previous Minister, Deputies Wilson and Cooney, confirming the truth of these claims.
When spending public money, our first priority must surely be ferry services, to generate economic activity in areas of greater need, such as the south-west region. Why tolerate the abandoning of this service which is so needed by an undeveloped area, when at the same time empty boats are going from Dublin and Rosslare ports on every second trip? This cannot be denied—the statistics are there to prove it. There is a serious regional bias in the B & I board. Even on the Rosslare-Pembroke service they are losing heavily but are prepared to compete against Sealink services, which is utterly crazy. We should not allow semi-State bodies to attempt to compete against existing services.
I know my time is short but I ask the Minister to have a full inquiry into B & I activities, to insist on the provision of a summer service for 1983 and to confirm this without delay.
Firstly, I want to let the House know that we are standing by the words of the motion which calls on the Government — not the B & I — to make sure that a service is provided between Cork and South Wales. We left it open for the port to be Swansea, Pembroke, Fishguard, or some other, but it must be Cork-South Wales, South Wales-Cork and that something must be done about the situation in 1983.
I want to put on record that we reject the amendment which has neither muscle nor guts. There is nothing in it and, therefore, we could not possibly accept it as a substitute for our substantive motion.
There is a reference to a serious loss-making situation and I will return to that in a moment. There is a welcome for the initiative of the Minister for Transport — such initiative was very carefully concealed until this motion came before the House; we did not know anything about it—and his continuing efforts, again efforts in the dark as far as the House was concerned until we put down this motion, for the provision of a ferry service in 1983.
There has been much pessimistic talk about the service. I want to point out that on 2 June last I put a Bill, now an Act, through this House which authorises the share capital of B & I to be increased from £35 million to £60 million and also increased by £25 million the maximum of the company's borrowings which the Minister for Finance would guarantee— from £15 million to £40 million. We were not writing off B & I. I want to point out that it is a horrific statistical fact that between 1979 and 1981 B & I lost, in industrial disputes, £5.9 million. Now, some of those industrial disputes had nothing to do with B & I and they had no responsibility for them. I say "some" deliberately. However, £5.9 million is a very considerable loss indeed, and I blame the Minister for giving global figures about B & I losses and no specific losses for the Cork-Pembroke route, a most important statistic which this House should have been given.
Deputies
Hear, hear.
It is all right if they are losing on the Dublin-Liverpool, Dublin-Holyhead, Rosslare-Pembroke runs — that has nothing to do with an argument for the retention of the service from Cork to Pembroke.
If my memory serves me right, before I left that Department the estimated loss for the Cork-Pembroke run was £1.2 million. The House will note from that that the losses from industrial disputes alone would make up the service losses on the route from Cork to Pembroke in five years. Five years is a very long time, in which we might expect an uplift in the tourist industry and a development of the industrial and commercial use of that link between Cork and Pembroke.
From the Government side of the House there has been a heavy attack on B & I itself. I have a suspicion that this is in order to slough off responsibility from the Government——
Deputies
Hear, hear.
——and concentrate the fire on the B & I. I say bluntly that the Government have the responsibility in this regard. If they would keep the statistics which I have mentioned before their minds, they might see a reason for the retention of this service and a possibility of its coming back into profit in the not too distant future. I know the Chairman of that board — who is a Cork man, incidentally — and he is an excellent Chairman, fully conscious of the need for efficiency in B & I, of his obligation to the State, the taxpayer and the company. I shall be putting some questions later about this. I also know that he had a scheme to tighten up the financial controls in the company on the Cork-Pembroke, as well as the Rosslare-Pembroke, Dublin-Holyhead and Dublin-Liverpool services. I am instancing that as another point which might indicate that it is premature to stop the Cork-Pembroke services. There will be benefit to the company when all these financial controls are brought into effect.
The dedication of the workers in that company has been mentioned already by several speakers on both sides of the House, and deservedly so. They have shown good example of dedication to the company and, as has been mentioned by some speaker one even invested his own money in the company to keep it viable. Another factor which would indicate that the Minister might have a good reason for having another look at the Cork-Pembroke route is the cost of fuel. The fare is only 20 per cent higher than on the Rosslare-Pembroke run, although the journey is twice as long. The cost of fuel on that service is, consequently very high. We all know, as of now, that the cost of fuel worldwide is dropping; I hope it drops and drops and drops. I hope this Government will give the benefit to the users of the greatest percentage of that drop although we have had warning from the Minister for Finance that that may not be so.
With the drop in the price of fuel, with the new arrangements for a tighter ship — if that is a suitable metaphor here; I am sure it is — the Dublin-Holyhead service, if it makes a profit, would also aid the company in general and help to sustain the Cork-Pembroke service.
The interdepartmental committee, as has been said in the course of this debate, made a number of recommendations, including the suspension of the Cork-Pembroke service in their report. The Fianna Fáil Government accepted all of their recommendations except the one to close the Cork-Pembroke service. I want to put that on the record.
Deputies
Hear, hear.
Not merely that, as well as the Bill I put through the House in early June 1982 the Fianna Fáil Government provided £9 million extra in equity for the B & I line which showed a commitment to the company and an appreciation of the work they were doing.
Various propositions have come into the Department of Transport with regard to this service. There was the idea that the B & I should have a sub-company, a Munster company, Munster members with a commitment to sell in the Munster region to industrial and commercial concerns, that an area should be delimited, that an area should be designated for the B & I, that other B & I operations should be excluded from that area, that there would be a possibility of this being a way of strengthening the commercial activities of the B & I. It is a possibility. What this side of the House is asking for is the continuation of the service to our second biggest city in the State. A £1.2 million loss over the whole year is not a big loss; I believe £1 million was made available by this Government to Arklow, just like that. There are some citizens who say it is the biggest qualitatively even though it is only the second quantitatively; I am not saying whether or not I agree with that. The big thing I want to castigate the Minister for is giving global losses and not being specific about the losses on the Pembroke service.
We should not forget Kerry. Deputy Foley has already made his case for Kerry. I shall not go over the arguments which were very well presented by Deputy Gene Fitzgerald, Deputy Wyse, Deputy Lyons and Deputy Foley and indeed by the Members who contributed from the Government side of the House.
One of the reasons given for the change from Swansea — and Deputy Gene Fitzgerald when speaking lauded Swansea and told of all the advantages Swansea had — was the M4, the route to Birmingham, the advantages of its being a city and so on. One of the reasons B & I gave for pulling out of it was that the silting was fairly extensive there, that the B & I themselves would be committed to a large expenditure to clear the silting, making the harbour available. I do not know what size boats use Swansea. I presume B & I were not the only company using Swansea; I do not know whether the B & I, when they did pull out, succeeded in having the job done for other boats, and whether it would not be possible to go back in there. I do not know about that, but it strikes me that we should have some information about that.
On the plus side again, because there has been so much said on the negative side, the Minister in his speech indicated that the total carryings increased in the years 1980 and 1981. In May when I was Minister, the Department and the Government decided not to discontinue the Cork-Pembroke service, we asked for monthly returns. Again, on the specific Cork-Pembroke service we should have had the monthly returns from the Minister, when speaking, so that a case would be made, or the best case he could make for discontinuation of the service. The Government, he said, reluctantly decided. It does not matter a tinker's curse whether one decides reluctantly or not, once one decides it is the decision that counts and Cork is without this service and that is that. There was no alternative, he said. I have mentioned several factors that are very important, in particular the price of fuel.
(Interruptions.)
It is a very mealy-mouthed kind of amendment that talks about the possibility of a summer service being investigated. The thing smells. There are words like "possibility" and "investigating" and "reporting back". When is the report coming back? When is the service likely to start?
It is like a device to catch one out——
(Interruptions.)
We have been told that something said on this side of the House in some way cuts across the principles we laid down in our National Economic Plan. I submit that there is no scintilla of evidence of this. I have been talking about a chairman who is efficient, who is conscious of his obligations to the taxpayers, conscious of his obligations to the company. I am talking about a situation in which fuel prices are dropping. I am talking about a situation in which five years' losses on this service could be paid for by the amount that was lost through industrial disputes between 1979 and 1981.
The people across did not go ahead with Knock Airport.
I do not think there should be any gospel of despair; we are adhering to every little bit of our philosophy in our plans for national development. I am saying that we are also maintaining that there is no excuse at all for the gospel of despair, of no hope, no sursum corda coming from the Government side in this debate.
Now we are facing the moment of truth as far as the commitment to the retention of the service or the development of the summer service even, is concerned, and Deputy O'Sullivan from Cork city, Deputy Allen, and all the Deputies who have spoken, I am not going to go through them as I have very little time — will have to vote on this motion.
If the Minister for Transport takes his little brief over from Kildare Street into the council chamber, to the Government meeting, he should have enough votes there to sustain him. He has Deputy Deasy, from Waterford, Minister for Agriculture, he has Deputy P. Barry, Minister for Foreign Affairs, he has the Tánaiste from Kerry, in Deputy Foley's constituency, to vote for him. Give it another try; that is what we are asking for. The circumstances are changing. Ask for a commitment from the people, from the people of Cork and, if they do not give it, then kill the service in the future but do not do it in 1983. We do not want any stunting. The industrial and commercial growth of Cork is dependent to a great extent on its ability to export. I visited Ringaskiddy, I was very impressed by it, and I had to argue to get money for the development. We got £1 million which is all the Cork Harbour Commissioners wanted for this year. The people on the far side of the House snatched that £1 million away from the Cork Harbour Commissioners. It is a very impressive place. The IDA have a magnificent and large site — admittedly one major industry only on it yet — right beside it. It was all linked up to the B & I and its activities in Cork.
I am appealing, with all the intensity I can command, to the people, particularly from Cork, particularly to the Labour Party because people will lose jobs when this vote comes in a couple of seconds' time, to come in, create a sensation, come into the lobby with us and try and help what is in fact the second city, as some say, the second quantitatively and the first city qualitatively.
Amendment put.
The Dáil divided: Tá, 76; Níl, 62.
Tá
- Allen, Bernard.
- Barnes, Monica.
- Barrett, Seán.
- Bell, Michael.
- Bermingham, Joe.
- Boland, John.
- Bruton, John.
- Bruton, Richard.
- Burke, Liam.
- Carey, Donal.
- Cluskey, Frank.
- Collins, Edward.
- Conlon, John F.
- Connaughton, Paul.
- Coogan, Fintan.
- Cooney, Patrick Mark.
- Cosgrave, Liam T.
- Cosgrave, Michael Joe.
- Coveney, Hugh.
- Creed, Donal.
- Crotty, Kieran.
- Crowley, Frank.
- D'Arcy, Michael.
- Deasy, Mark Austin.
- Desmond, Barry.
- Donnellan, John.
- Dowling, Dick.
- Doyle, Avril.
- Doyle, Joe.
- Dukes, Alan.
- Durkan, Bernard J.
- Enright, Thomas W.
- Farrelly, John V.
- Fennell, Nuala.
- FitzGerald, Garret.
- Flaherty, Mary.
- Flanagan, Oliver J.
- Glenn, Alice.
- Griffin, Brendan.
- Barry, Myra.
- Barry, Peter.
- Begley, Michael.
- Harte, Patrick D.
- Hegarty, Paddy.
- Hussey, Gemma.
- Kavanagh, Liam.
- Keating, Michael.
- Kelly, John.
- Kenny, Enda.
- L'Estrange, Gerry.
- McCartin, Joe.
- McGahon, Brendan.
- McGinley, Dinny.
- McLoughlin, Frank.
- Mitchell, Gay.
- Molony, David.
- Naughten, Liam.
- Nealon, Ted.
- Noonan, Michael.
- (Limerick East).
- O'Brien, Fergus.
- O'Brien, Willie.
- O'Leary, Michael.
- O'Sullivan, Toddy.
- O'Toole, Paddy.
- Owen, Nora.
- Pattison, Séamus.
- Prendergast, Frank.
- Quinn, Ruairí.
- Ryan, John.
- Sheehan, Patrick Joseph.
- Skelly, Liam.
- Spring, Dick.
- Taylor, Mervyn.
- Taylor-Quinn, Madeline.
- Timmins, Godfrey.
- Yates, Ivan.
Níl
- Ahern, Bertie.
- Ahern, Michael.
- Andrews, David.
- Andrews, Niall.
- Aylward, Liam.
- Barrett, Michael.
- Barrett, Sylvester.
- Brady, Gerard.
- Brady Vincent.
- Brennan, Mattie.
- Brennan, Séamus.
- Briscoe, Ben.
- Browne, John.
- Byrne, Hugh.
- Byrne, Seán.
- Calleary, Seán.
- Colley, George.
- Conaghan, Hugh.
- Connolly, Ger.
- Daly, Brendan.
- Fahey, Francis.
- Fahey, Jackie.
- Faulkner, Pádraig.
- Fitzgerald, Gene.
- Fitzgerald, Liam Joseph.
- Fitzsimons, Jim.
- Flynn, Pádraig.
- Foley, Denis.
- Reynolds, Albert.
- Treacy, Noel.
- Tunney, Jim.
- Wallace, Dan.
- Gallagher, Pat Cope.
- Gregory-Independent, Tony.
- Harney, Mary.
- Haughey, Charles J.
- Hilliard, Colm.
- Kitt, Michael P.
- Lemass, Eileen.
- Lenihan, Brian.
- Leyden, Terry.
- Lyons, Denis.
- McCarthy, Seán.
- McCreevy, Charlie.
- McEllistrim, Tom.
- MacSharry, Ray.
- Molloy, Robert.
- Morley, P.J.
- Moynihan, Donal.
- Nolan, M.J.
- Noonan, Michael J.
- (Limerick West)
- O'Dea, William.
- O'Hanlon, Rory.
- O'Kennedy, Michael.
- O'Leary, John.
- O'Malley, Desmond J.
- Ormonde, Donal.
- Power, Paddy.
- Walsh, Joe.
- Wilson, John P.
- Woods, Michael.
- Wyse, Pearse.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Barrett (Dún Laoghaire) and Taylor; Níl, Deputies B. Ahern and V. Brady.
Amendment declared carried.
Motion, as amended, agreed to.