Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 19 May 1993

Vol. 431 No. 1

Harbour Development.

Mr. Byrne

I am sure I will be entitled to some injury time because of the altercations between Dublin Deputies.

The background to my requesting this debate is the discrimination long suffered by the east and south east in regard to harbour development and of coastal erosion protection works. West of Helvic Head, which is in Waterford, local authority harbours enjoy 75 per cent grant aid from the Exchequer whereas, in the east and south east, grant aid of 50 per cent must suffice.

The economic overview in the south east is this: Wexford suffers from the second highest rate of unemployment in any county. Within this economic black hole the highest levels of deprivation are concentrated on the port and harbour towns of New Ross, Duncannon and Kilmore Quay. These communities are afflicted by unemployment and depopulation on an appalling scale. Such is the depth of the crisis that both a combat poverty programme and a Programme for Economic and Social Progress partnership programme are in operation there. The key to economic recovery lies in the area's ports and harbours. I have a very simple question to post to the Minister this evening: will he develop the ports of Wexford or allow them to die? Incisive and urgent action versus irreversible stagnation is the stark choice.

New Ross harbour is the key to industrial development for south west Wexford. My representations in relation to nrcessary works to the Barrow Bridge and other developments are well known to the Minister. This debate has been called to focus attention on the fishing ports of Kilmore Quay and Duncannon. I might add that the Minister for the Marine, Deputy Andrews, gave me a personal commitment to visit these parts with me. The people of south west Wexford, to whom he represents their last and best hope, are still waiting.

I ask the Minister of State at the Department of the Marine, Deputy Gerry O'Sullivan, to renew the promise this evening. After all, these people deserve and desperately need to have their case examined from the bottom up rather than from the top down. The Minister of State has shown a genuine interest in the people's plight.

In reply to a parliamentary question tabled by Deputy Doyle on 5 May there was a promise given that major works would begin at Kilmore Quay this year. I have it on good authority that, to date, no consultations have been appointed. Should this be true the stated timetable must be in grave doubt. Will the Minister of State put on the record this evening the exact position regarding the promised works for Kilmore Quay?

The ongoing development of our harbours, in addition to the vital work of protecting our coasts, is chronically hindered by having to pay a 25 per cent premium above what must be paid for such development in the west. This means an impossible burden is placed on a local authority whose rate base has already been decimated. Present policy puts Wexford into a vicious, downward spiral.

I have been representing Wexford in this House for 12 years. I have yet to hear any justification for the preferential grant rates given west of Helvic Head. This affair is an example of pork barrel politics at its worst. Duncannon is an example of what could be done where most desperately needed. It was the only harbour not damaged in the south-east in the 1990 hurricane. Furthermore, it is located very close to the shipping lanes into Waterford and New Ross, which fact underlines its development potential. It is a harbour providing good shelter with access to deep water. Indeed, frequently vessels from Dunmore East and Kilmore Quay take shelter there. For all its natural advantages, Duncannon is a harbour whose potential has been stifled. Extra berthage is needed urgently there and its landing facilities bear no relation to its real potential.

In Wexford we are not looking for preferential treatment; rather we are seeking equal treatment. I challenge the Minister to treat all parts of Wexford in the same way as other regions.

Minister of State at the Department of the Marine (Mr. G. O'Sulivan)

Without being flippant, at the outset may I say that I hope we will get equal treatment on Saturday next.

Mr. Byrne

There will be 25 per cent for Cork and 75 per cent for Wexford.

Mr. G. O'Sullivan

I welcome Deputy Byrne raising this important issue.

Under a long standing policy the maximum grant-aid provided to non-State-owned harbours for development works in the fisheries interest has been 50 per cent or 75 per cent depending on geographic location. All development projects undertaken to the east of a line drawn from Lough Foyle to the Old Head of Kinsale receive a maximum of 50 per cent grant-aid and those to the west receive a maximum of 75 per cent grant-aid.

The situation with regard to grant-aid for coastal protection projects is that there is no fixed aid level applied to the east or west of the Old Head of Kinsale. Aid levels are determined by the nature and cost of a particular project and the availability of funds for such works. However, section 7 (e) of the Coast Protection Act, 1963, does stipulate that the level of State assistance shall not exceed 80 per cent.

In recent years difficulties have been encountered in the carrying out of development projects, identified by the Department of the Marine following consultation with maritime local authorities, as local authorities have experienced severe problems in financial their contribution to development project costs.

I realist that the local contribution requirement can create difficulties for many local authorities, especially in areas where the maximum grant-aid is 50 per cent. For this reason the matter is being received with a view to, perhaps, standardising the aid rate, for all areas at a reasonable level. These rates of contribution were introduced at a time when the internal revenue base of local authorities was substantially stronger than it is today and prior to the introduction of the European Regional Development Fund-financing. Given the present financing structure of local authorities their ability to raise the present level of contribution from own resources is significantly less than in the past.

Strong representations have been received from many local authorities on this matter. As part of the review, discussions have already taken place at official level between the Departments of the Marine, Environment and Finance. I would hope to be in a position to bring forward proposals very shortly for a revised system of contributions.

In so far as commercial harbours are concerned, Government policy is that each harbour authority should be financially self-supporting. State grants are given in exceptional circumstances only where improvements are essential to meet well-defined needs. The level of grant-aid given in these cases depends on the circumstances of the relevant harbour authority.

I recently addressed the Irish Planning Institute's national planning conference whose theme this year was the planning of coastal areas and inland waterways. In the course of my address I made a number of references to emerging policythinking in relation to management of the coastline. A Cheann-Comhairle, perhaps you will allow me to elaborate on what I said on that occasion.

Coastal erosion is a serious and growing problem. The Department of the Marine is currently reviewing its approaches to this problem. In this regard the way to proceed in the future is to took beyond individual projects and embrace the concept of coastal zone management which gives a comprehensive overview. I am glad of this opportunity to record in the House that there is close co-operation between the Department of the Marine and maritime local authorities, who have primary responsibility for coastal protection. This interplay and co-operation is essential in the planning of all coastal protection works. Indeed, this close co-operation is important to the planning and management of all aspects of the coastal zone.

Close co-operation with maritime local authorities is also a feature of the planning system for the State foreshore. Present practice involves extensive consultation with the planning authorities who have an interest in any foreshore development which will impart on their services and infrastructure and on the quality of that part of our environmental heritage under their control.

In summary I would like to assure the Deputy that I am not unaware of the problems of local authority funding of coastal projects, I will do all in my power to rationalise the system and to ease the burden on local charges within the principle of having beneficiaries make a fair contribution to funding or for all local projects. I can assure deputy Byrne I will take Kilmore Quay into consideration in doing so.