Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 16 Apr 2024

Vol. 1052 No. 4

Saincheisteanna Tráthúla - Topical Issue Debate

Land Issues

Deputy Steven Matthews

I want to discuss the issue of public rights of way in the country. I expect this is a matter for the Department of Justice but I nonetheless want to thank the Minister of State, Deputy Butler, for being here tonight to take this issue.

The background to me raising this, apart from having some experience in dealing with rights of way issues where we have tried to include them in county development plans over the years, is that a case was brought to my attention recently of two hillwalkers in Enniskerry, two elderly, retired and absolute gentlemen, who loved nothing more than walking through many of the walkways and hills of Wicklow. They became involved in a situation where an alleged right of way had been blocked by the landowner. This evolved into a very complex and long court case situation. The case has been decided and has been publicly documented. The two gentlemen will not mind me mentioning their names, which are Mr. Lenoach and Mr. Barry. These are two highly regarded stalwarts of the community in Enniskerry.

They have ended up in a situation where they owe somewhere in the region of €40,000 as a result of this fine. This is a very bizarre case, extremely interesting for any of us who are reading it from the outside, but obviously very harrowing and stressful for the two gentlemen involved. They are not men of means by any manner and this is a huge debt for them to incur at this stage in their lives. I have met with both of them and have discussed the issues around rights of way. It is a very complex part of Irish law, land use law and our Constitution in which we enshrine private land ownership and the rights which go with that. We also know that we are a nation that appreciates and loves our countryside and we have had these walkways in place which people have used for many years such as Mass paths, access to graveyards, and across old country coach roads, etc.

Currently, under our Irish law, we have not really enacted laws to allow us to progress this and to establish rights of way and how we deal with those contested rights of way. We rely much of the time on old English laws. We have judges trying to interpret old maps, precedent law and the common law system. It is very complex and convoluted.

Our county councils are obliged - we are going through the planning Bill at the moment - to include rights of way in county development plans. I have been at meetings where we tried to put what we thought were rights of way into county development plans, but landowners have come along and said that they have allowed people access to them but they are not rights of way.

We have a situation where we have a very limited number of rights of way going into our county development plans. I hope the Minister of State, Deputy Butler, can take this back to the Minister for Justice, Deputy McEntee, and the Department of Justice. I really feel we need to start a process where we can simplify this, or perhaps oversimplify it because it is such a complex area. We need to start to establish what needs to be in place to prove something is a right of way. We have to protect landowners' rights, because it is not just a matter of people just being able to walk all over people's land, although some people would advocate that. I believe we should uphold the rights of landowners but accommodate these old rights of way. We must try to find a solution to the problem. Hopefully, we can start the process here tonight.

Minister of State at the Department of Health (Deputy Mary Butler)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Leas-Cheann Comhairle agus leis an Teachta. I convey the apologies of my colleague, the Minister for Justice, Deputy Helen McEntee, who regrets she cannot be here for this issue. On behalf of the Minister, I thank Deputy Steven Matthews for raising this important issue and for giving me the opportunity, hopefully, to provide clarity on it.

Deputy Matthews summed it up very well when he said it was a very complex issue. As the Deputy may be aware, responsibility for the legislation for public rights of way sits with the Minister, Deputy Darragh O’Brien, in the Department of Housing, Local Government, and Heritage. However, inquiries with this Department were made and we have been provided with some information on the matters raised.

The Planning and Development Act 2000, as amended, legislates that it is a matter for the relevant planning authority to consider where there is a need for a public right of way. The relevant planning authority may enter into discussion with the relevant landowners under section 206 of the Act in order to achieve the creation of a public right of way by agreement. If an agreement cannot be reached, where it appears to the planning authority that there is need for a public right of way over any land, the planning authority may, by resolution, make an order creating a public right of way over the land in accordance with section 207 of the Act. The planning authority must follow the process prescribed under section 207 of the Act.

The process under section 207 of the Act is a reserved function of the elected members of the relevant planning authority and a process in which the Minister for Justice has no function. The decision to create a compulsory right of way by a planning authority may be appealed to An Bord Pleanála in accordance with section 207(5) of the Act within four weeks of being notified of an order under section 207(4) of the Act. It is then a matter for An Bord Pleanála to consider any appeal.

In addition, the Act places responsibility for the maintenance of public rights of way directly with local authorities, by requiring them to preserve existing public rights of way through mapping and listing them as part of their development plans.

Section 10(2)(o) of the Act requires that all development plans include objectives for:

... the preservation of public rights of way which give access to seashore, mountain, lakeshore, riverbank or other places of natural beauty or recreational utility, which public rights of way shall be identified both by marking them on at least one of the maps forming part of the development plan and by indicating their location on a list appended to the development plan, ...

The "permissive access mechanism" described in Circular Letter PL 5/2015 can complement the statutory development plan objective and can deliver an integrated approach to combining agreed ways and trails with public rights of way statutorily defined in the plan. The overall combined approach, providing an inventory of permissive access routes in addition to rights of way, represents a best practice approach.

I have been further informed that there are no substantive changes to provisions in the draft Planning and Development Bill 2023 pertaining to public rights of way compared to the provisions in the current Planning and Development Act 2000, as amended, which I referred to. As the Deputy knows, that other Bill is currently on Committee Stage.

Deputy Steven Matthews

I thank the Minister of State for the response. Having spent nine weeks and 126 hours so far in the basement dealing with the new Planning and Developing Bill, I believe that many of those sections referred to by the Minister of State will no longer be relevant because of the new section numbers of the Bill. I take the Minister of State's point on this. I have been through county development plan meetings where we had what we thought were rights of way but these are contested. It is when the landowner comes back that there is the issue.

I accept what the Minister of State said about the development plan and that the local authority has the responsibility for setting out in the development plan where the public rights of way are but we need to go a step back before that. The issue is where these are contested. This probably comes under the Department of Justice, and this concerns my suggestion as well. The ones that are not contested go into the county development plan. There is that whole process of appeals. One can appeal to the board, etc., and the members pass the resolution. However, it goes back to before that.

I have suggestions I would like to put to the Minister. These are to bring in primary Irish legislation to define and protect public rights of way so councils have a clear definition of what constitutes a public right of way. The legislation needs to provide for disputed routes to be referred probably for arbitration. I am thinking of something like a commission with a judge to chair it, where we look at contested rights of way around the country and where, once and for all, we can finally define a public right of way and prove it is a public right of way.

In the case of Mr. Lenoach and Mr. Barry in Enniskerry, they provided a map, dating back to the 1700s, of an old coach road.

Bizarrely, that case never concluded that it was a public right of way. What the judge decided was that the two gentlemen could no longer walk it but the Minister of State or I could. That just highlights the complexity of this. We need to put something in place to deal with these contested rights of way.

Deputy Mary Butler

The Deputy has made a very important point in talking about disputed routes. Two weeks ago, I was in Cashel to launch the St. Declan's Way walk. It is another part of the strategic plan. It is the most fantastic walk between Cashel and Ardmore. What struck me on that walk was the number of landowners who were present, who had engaged and who had made the walk the success it was. There was funding from the Department of the Minister, Deputy Humphreys, the LEADER programme, the local authorities, loads of volunteers and a committee set up, but it could never have happened without the landowners engaging. This was an old traditional, religious walk that was there many years ago, passing through Mount Melleray, in Waterford, that the monks used to walk. More than 4,000 people walked it last year.

To add to the Deputy's point, when we talk about disputed routes, I think that is the only time we hear any issues around it. People love walking. They love getting out. We have greenways now throughout the country, which is fantastic to see.

I reiterate the fact the local authorities have sufficient powers under planning legislation for the creation of rights of way. Sometimes, however, when these particular rights of way are forced, it can end up with neighbours falling out with neighbours, and that is the last thing you want. I will certainly take on board the points the Deputy made about the possibility of some form of arbitration. He is speaking specifically about disputed routes. I am sorry those two gentlemen he met had that negative experience.

Road Projects

Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire

This has been a saga for the people of Lehenaghmore and Lehenagh Beg. To give the Minister of State some context, since she might not be familiar with the locality, this is an area just south of the link road in Cork city. Hundreds upon hundreds of houses have been built there in recent years but, effectively, it is an island. It is within walking distance of Ballyphehane and Togher but, because there are no footpaths, you would be taking your life into your hands going out onto the road. There is inadequate public lighting there as well, but the lack of infrastructure there reflects the worst excesses of Celtic tiger planning. All the houses went up and none of the infrastructure went in. So many people would love to be able to walk down to the shops. There are children who would like to be able to walk down to their friends. There are people who might like to cycle there. It is an absolute disaster. It is challenging for motorists as well. Fundamentally, at the minute, it is unsafe.

It is a large enough community at this stage but, unfortunately, they have seen an awful lot of frustration in recent years. This is fundamentally about footpaths, and while there is a substantial scheme, because of the way in which the road is congested, it is difficult to put in footpaths, much as I might like that to be possible. The scheme was first promised in 2008 or 2009 to the residents living there and it has gone on and on, and each deadline seems to be missed. That is causing huge frustration among residents. I recall that even after this had gone to planning - the initial application has cleared planning for three years now - I was given a timeline of quarter 1 of 2022 for publication of the CPO, quarter 2 of 2022 for the tender for construction contract and quarter 3 of 2022 for commencement of construction. We are a long way beyond that.

The CPO was appealed to An Bord Pleanála. I understand that while it has not been heard by An Bord Pleanála, the council has progressed with dealing with the individual property owners and hope to wrap that up to be in a position to proceed without the CPO. Where central government comes in, because a lot of this happens at the local authority level, is that, this year, €450,000, as I understand it, was allocated under the NTA's travel funding. Two years ago, €1.9 million was allocated for the same scheme. Obviously, that could not be spent because of the difficulties with CPO, An Bord Pleanála and all the rest of it, but there was an awful lot more committed at that stage. My concern is that if it is possible that the council is in a position to proceed without an An Bord Pleanála hearing, and I hope it will be, the funding that is allocated this year will not be sufficient to deliver a large amount of progress this year.

This is a shovel-ready project once the go-ahead is given. The design and all the rest of it are ready to go. The need is profound and urgent. It is in the interests of everyone, as I said, including motorists, cyclists and pedestrians. It is about allowing this community to link in with its neighbours, and that is not a lot to ask. It is very much about safety.

I hope the Minister of State can give me an update. I also hope she will take back to the Minister my request that if an additional application for funding comes forth, it will be considered.

Deputy Mary Butler

The Department of Transport has responsibility for the provision of funding and setting of policy on transport issues, including active travel. The National Transport Authority has responsibility for the allocation of funding to projects at local authority level and works with the local authorities to ensure delivery of same.

The Deputy will be aware that a significant increase in funding has been allocated to walking and cycling infrastructure projects in recent years, following a commitment of approximately €360 million per annum in the programme for Government across this Government's lifetime. The NTA's active travel programme receives most of this funding each year, with around €290 million allocated through that agency across all local authorities in 2024. The years 2022 and 2023 saw full allocation spend by local authorities, with €310 million and €340 million, respectively, invested in active travel. This was only made possible through the increase in the capacity of local authorities through the provision of funding for dedicated active travel staffing by the Department of Transport.

A consequence of the recent success of the programme is that there is a huge pipeline of projects to be funded, including a significant number reaching the aforementioned high-cost construction stage. As such, the programme is moving into a so-called project prioritisation stage, whereby funding will be allocated to projects which should see the greatest impact in terms of modal shift away from private car use. The process of identifying such projects is undertaken by the NTA in collaboration with the relevant local authorities.

Walking and cycling projects are funded across the Cork City Council area through allocations from the NTA's active travel infrastructure programme. As with all local authorities, funding allocation is based on demand, user need and project phase. Typically, projects at an early stage in development, such as concept development, will have a lower allocation need than projects that are at or approaching construction phase.

To get down to the nub of the Deputy's question, Cork City Council has received funding allocation of just over €29 million this year, of which €950,000 has been allocated to the Lehenaghmore improvement scheme. Cork City Council plans to carry out a road widening and enhancement project to serve the needs of residents and businesses in the Lehenaghmore and Togher area of Cork city. The project aims to upgrade the L2455 and L2454 roads. The scheme will provide road enhancements consistent with the urban nature of the area and the evolving transport demands of its residents and employment centres. The Lehenaghmore Road active travel improvement scheme overall is approximately 2.6 km in length. The proposed works will include road realignment, road widening, signalisation of the Forge Hill junction, a new mini roundabout at Barrett's junction, with associated pedestrian crossing, public transport shelters and bays, new footpath construction, new cycle facility construction, road reconstruction and resurfacing, services diversions, a new surface water drainage system, new road lighting, new boundary treatments, retaining walls, embankments, accommodation works, new hard and soft landscaping, new road signage and street furniture. It is quite a big project.

A 4 m-wide pedestrian and cycle bridge is proposed on the outbound-eastern side of the old Bandon railway bridge.

The new bridge will run parallel to the existing stone bridge, but it will not impact on the existing bridge. In addition, the proposed development has been screened to determine whether an environmental impact assessment is required, and it has been concluded that there will be no real likelihood of significant effects on the environment arising from the proposed development and an environmental impact assessment is not required. Cork City Council accepts these findings.

Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire

I thank the Minister of State. It is a substantial scheme; there is no question about that. The Minister of State can imagine the situation for a resident who, fundamentally, just wanted footpaths and to be able to walk to the shops and to Togher or Ballyphehane. They would have liked progress to be made an awful lot more quickly. As good as the scheme may eventually be, this still impacts their day-to-day quality of life and will continue to do so until it is developed.

I note the response states €950,000 has been allocated. That is a bit different from a parliamentary question I saw on the Dáil website but perhaps it is under two schemes or something like that. It is a bit more than I had realised. I welcome that. It is still only about half of what was allocated in 2022. I am still a bit concerned. I hope that the Minister of State might take back that this is very shovel-ready. If there are other projects under these travel funds throughout the State that are ready to go further, faster, that funding should be reallocated. This project has been waiting long enough.

I note it is potentially holding up access to public transport as well. The bus travels up most of the Lehenaghbeg side of the hill. It is a kind of horseshoe-shaped road. It cannot go past the junction and down Lehenaghmore. The NTA told me in correspondence, referring to the road scheme, that when the scheme is complete, it will be possible to extend bus services to operate along at least part of the L2454, which is the Lehenaghmore side of the road. One option, which the Minister of State discussed, was to include the planned route 4 onto Togher Road, which is broadly the route of the 203 currently. It is something the NTA is actively looking at, which is important to people who currently do not have access to a bus route. A bus cannot currently get past the junction. That is also being held up by this issue. I appreciate the update. I hope it can be progressed soon enough. Will the Minister of State please take on board the point on additional funding?

Deputy Mary Butler

I think the rest of this response will answer some of the Deputy's questions. I thank him for his views on this matter, which is obviously a very important issue to the residents of Lehenaghmore Road and the wider community. The safety of road users, especially vulnerable road users such as cyclists and pedestrians, is paramount to the Department of the Minister, Deputy Ryan.

The Lehenaghmore improvement scheme is currently at detailed design and land acquisition stage. Cork City Council deemed it necessary to seek a compulsory purchase order to secure the required lands for the scheme as acquisition of these lands through agreement was not possible. An Bord Pleanála has set 22 May as the date for the compulsory purchase order oral hearing. The detailed design stage cannot be concluded without first securing the required lands. If the CPO is approved, the detailed design stage will be finalised and the proposed works will proceed to the construction tender and award stage. Construction is anticipated to commence thereafter. The 2024 funding provision for the Lehenaghmore Road improvement scheme aims to cater for all costs arising in 2024, with subsequent funding to be provided in subsequent years. That may answer the Deputy's question on funding. An Bord Pleanála has set 22 May as the oral hearing for the compulsory purchase order. I hope that will now get movement on that scheme and people will be able to walk in safety, especially older and young people, when trying to access the various roads in that particular area.

Museum Projects

Deputy Pat Buckley

I thank the Minister of State for taking the question. There seems to bit of a Cork contingent here tonight, for a change. I wish to read into the record a statement from the Sinn Féin spokesperson on Gaeilge, the Gaeltacht, arts, culture and heritage, Deputy Ó Snodaigh. It is to do with the scrapping of the LÉ Eithne. It states:

Opting to scrap the vessel without even doing a cost-benefit analysis into the alternative of using it as a museum is bad policy-making. Even worse is the fact that this wasn't even discussed with the Minister responsible for our cultural heritage and museums.

It will cost a significant sum of money to scrap the vessel, a cost that would be better put towards developing it as a tourist attraction that could recoup money by drawing tourists from far and wide, generating investment and creating jobs locally. This could form a must-see draw in Cork's tourist offering, similar to Naval museums in other countries, while also complementing the other maritime museums/exhibits across Ireland such as in Dún Laoghaire, Belfast, etc.

Other cities spend millions building replicas of ships to showcase their maritime history. We don't have to start from scratch, we have a stellar example of Irish shipbuilding and naval excellence in our hands, ready to be used to tell our island nation's naval story, if we would only take the chance.

It would be a disappointing waste to dispose of the LÉ Eithne for good.

My uncle served as chief petty officer on the LÉ Deirdre. I also have cousins in the navy, as well as cousins who are retired from it. I wanted to raise this issue because of the potential for tourism. We have always said that 0.1 of an investment gets fourfold back. The vessel is there. We have the harbour. We are trying to promote tourism. Spike Island is down there and liners come in at Cobh. This would be an amazing testament to the shipbuilders because this ship was built in Verolme dockyard. The amount of history there is a testament to our shipbuilders and the crews who sailed on the ship. As mentioned in the statement, on top of that is the possibility of jobs. We are also promoting our proud history. It would be an amazing testament to mark that for the people who were involved throughout the history of the ship.

I know it costs a lot of money to scrap these ships. When the Naval Service has to buy a ship, it is extortionate money. The latest information is that nearly €16,000 has been spent on just moving the ship from Haulbowline. That is money that could be invested better. The LÉ Aisling was sold at public auction in 2017 for €110,000. It was not a good investment to let a ship like that go. That is why I wanted to raise the matter, even just to go back and do a cost-benefit analysis, balancing whether it is worth scrapping this ship and towing it away or making it a museum and having it showcased in Cork, where we are very proud to have that naval base and its history and that of shipbuilding in Cobh. It is a no-brainer to promote that. We already have plenty of liners coming in and we will take many more. We also have the history of the Titanic and the Titanic Experience Cobh. This would be one of the best, no-brainer complements to the history of Cork. I am interested to hear what the Minister of State's response will be, even to see the cost-benefit of this in tourism and jobs.

Deputy Mary Butler

I am taking this Topical Issue matter on behalf of the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence. I thank the Deputy for his statement and interest. In July 2022, the then Minister for Defence accepted the recommendation of the joint civil military working group on decommissioning that the decommissioning and disposal of three Naval Service ships, namely, the LÉ Eithne, LÉ Orla and LÉ Ciara, should be progressed as soon as practicable. In effect, these three ships had reached the end of their working lives and were not in a condition for continued operations.

As the Deputy is aware, LÉ Eithne was originally constructed in Verolme Dockyard in Cork and was completed in 1984 as a helicopter patrol vessel. She was the last ship of the Irish Naval Service to have been built in Ireland and, as such, occupies a significant place in Irish maritime history. As flagship of the Naval Service, LÉ Eithne was the first Irish Naval Service vessel to cross the Atlantic Ocean to North America when, in 1986, she sailed to the United States, visiting Hamilton, New York and Boston. She has since gone on to cross the Atlantic several times. In 2006, she travelled to Argentina, marking the first deployment of an Irish Naval Service vessel to the southern hemisphere. The ship participated in events in Buenos Aires to commemorate the 150th anniversary of the death of Admiral William Brown, considered the father of the Argentine navy. In addition to her diplomatic missions, in May 2015, LÉ Eithne was the first Irish ship to deploy on Operation Pontus, a humanitarian rescue operation in the Mediterranean Sea.

LÉ Eithne was involved in 22 rescue operations, rescuing in the region of 3,376 migrants during this operation. LÉ Eithne was also used to assist in our national response to the Covid-19 pandemic when she was deployed to Cork city in 2020 in support of Operation Fortitude acting as a forward logistics base and training platform in support of the HSE. The primary day-to-day task of the LÉ Eithne was to provide a fishery protection service in accordance with the State's obligations as a member of the European Union. She undertook thousands of fisheries patrol days over the course of her service. Like all Naval Service vessels, LÉ Eithne was multi-tasked and also had the ability to undertake general surveillance, search and rescue, diving operations, drugs interdiction and other duties while conducting her primary day-to-day task of providing a fishery protection service.

A number of disposal options were considered for LÉ Eithne, including the possible donation of the former flagship as a museum piece or tourist attraction; the disposal by recycling at an EU approved ship recycling facility; or disposal by way of sale at public auction. A number of organisations, including Dublin Port and the local authorities in Cork and Limerick indicated their interest in taking LÉ Eithne as a museum piece or tourist attraction following her decommissioning in 2022. Officials from the Department of Defence and the Naval Service engaged extensively with these interested parties but following, in some cases lengthy, discussions and inspections, all these parties withdrew their interest in taking the ship. Dublin Port commissioned two reports in addition to a ship survey looking at the feasibility of taking LÉ Eithne as a historic museum ship in Dublin Port. However, Dublin Port subsequently withdrew its interest in taking the vessel.

When, despite the best efforts of all involved, it was not possible to identify an alternative use for LÉ Eithne post-decommissioning, the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence decided that the vessel should be disposed of by recycling it in an environmentally sound manner, along with two other decommissioned Naval Service vessels, LÉ Ciara and LÉ Orla. Recycling the ships gives certainty on the ultimate destination of the vessels and deals with them finally in an environmental manner in line with Government and EU policy.

Deputy Pat Buckley

It is interesting. Listening to the first half of the Minister of State's response, I thought it was brilliant that she outlined the whole history of the LÉ Eithne for me. We will lose all of that. I am disappointed by the fact that the contracts have been signed, but contracts can be pulled. I will go to both Ministers who are responsible because, as I said, the amount of history attached to this boat and the harbours can be seen in the first half of the Minister of State's response. I cannot believe that the councils were not interested. There must have been money involved, but surely a State agency, such as the Defence Forces or Naval Service could do something. It is an absolute travesty that we will lose such an historic part of our culture and our proud peacekeeping missions. The Minister of State named so many places, that it was the first ship to sale across X, Y and Z and spoke about all the humanitarian stuff. I am stumped for words and I am not stumped very often.

The second half of the Minister of State's reply states that the likes of Dublin Port and others were not interested. I still make the assumption that the Irish Government should invest money in this. It belongs to the Irish people. The history belongs to the Irish people. It is a massive mistake when you have so much potential in the story, the history and the location it is in, that this resource would just be signed off under a contract, towed away to Belgium and scrapped and that should be the end of it. Perhaps in another 100 years when the centenary of the scrapping of the ships comes, we will read about it. I thank the Minister of State for the answer. We do not always get the proper answer. I will still follow up with the Tánaiste and Minister to see whether there is any way of reversing this because it would be a wonderful asset.

Deputy Mary Butler

To reiterate, a number of organisations, including Dublin Port and the local authorities in Cork and Limerick indicated their interest in taking the LÉ Eithne as a museum piece or a tourist attraction, following her decommissioning in 2022. However, despite extensive engagements and lengthy discussions and inspections all these parties withdrew. Dublin Port commissioned two reports in addition to a ship survey. A decision has been made that the ship will be decommissioned.

Earlier in 2024, following a competitive process, officials from the Department of Defence signed a contract with a Belgian company, Galloo, to recycle the three ships. This company is contracted to remove the ships from Cork harbour and tow them to the ship breakdown yard in Ghent, Belgium for recycling in line with the EU ship recycling regulation. The company is on the EU list of approved ship recycling facilities so we can be confident that it will deal with the ships appropriately in an environmentally friendly manner. Preparatory work has been done on the ships in Doyle Shipping Group's dockyard in Cork in advance of recycling. Final preparations are under way and it is planned that the ships will be towed to Belgium in the coming weeks, weather permitting.

I understand the Deputy's disappointment. My understanding is that every effort was made was to try to find a lasting home for the LÉ Eithne. As the Deputy stated correctly, the LÉ Eithne has a proud history. I am here to respond to the Topical Issue on behalf of the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence and that is the answer that is set out in front of me.

(Interruptions).

Deputy Mary Butler

However, I will relay the Deputy's disappointment.

Customs and Excise

Deputy David Stanton

I thank the office of the Leas-Cheann Comhairle for selecting this Topical Issue and the Minister of State for being here this evening.

The Port of Cork plays a key strategic role in the economic life and development of the south and south-west regions. It is recognised as a port of national significance, tier 1. It is the Government's position that these ports are considered to be of national significance and must be capable of the type of port capacity required to ensure continued access to both regional and global markets for the trading economy. Indecon estimated the overall value of trade handled by the Port of Cork, based on modelling for 2012, 2023 and 2033 at €13.9 billion in 2012, growing to almost €28.7 billion in 2033. This supports 170,000 full time equivalent jobs, which will be doubled by 2033.

A border control post, BCP, is a designated entry point to the European Union market through which consignments of food, food contact materials, animals, feed and plants that are subject to increased import controls must enter the European Union. These import controls are carried out to protect animal and public health and animal welfare. These requirements include additional documentation and prior notification before arrival of the food to Ireland. They must enter Ireland through a specific entry point which is the border control post. All such products must be accompanied by a health certificate issued at origin and supported by a common veterinary entry document. There is a range currently of LoLo services operating between the European Union, the UK trans-shipment ports and the Port of Cork. Containers currently transiting through Dublin, therefore, could use feeder routings to Cork. A BCP in Cork could be an alternative, contingency and overflow facility should congestion arise at Dublin Port or Rosslare.

The construction of a new direct container service between Cork and the United States by Independent Container Line, ICL, would increase the number of boxes that would benefit from a control post in Cork. More than 2,000 containers have the potential to be examined at the Port of Cork and discussions with ICL support this estimate. New businesses that require BCP support face increased costs in trying to establish in Cork.

I am sure the Minister of State will be interested in the following point. More than 166 tonnes of pollutant emissions could be avoided if a BCP in Cork handled 2,000 diverted containers annually. Under current conditions, cargos of melons for instance coming to Cork from the Americas cannot be unloaded in the Port of Cork as they need to be checked at a designated BCP. As a result, the same cargo must go to Southampton, before being transferred onto another ship bound for Dublin. These are perishable goods so time is of the essence to get them off ships and onto the shelves. The reduction in the cost and time in delivering containers to companies now results in an additional cost of approximately €4,000 per container. Higher shipping costs have a negative impact on the consumer with higher end-user or purchasing prices. I ask the Minister of State in the short term to agree to the Port of Cork's request for a temporary derogation to be granted to customers upon application to the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. The derogation should last for a specific period of three to six months to allow the import of goods without disruption as many goods requiring BCP inspection are essential.

A temporary derogation would offer the Port of Cork increased flexibility that would encourage importers to use Cork. Therefore, the goods would land in Cork, be transported to Dublin in the interim and be inspected there.

In the long-term, the Port of Cork sees the construction of a permanent fixed border control post situated at the Ringaskiddy base as the ultimate solution. I am interested in the Minister of State's response to this. It is good for business, the country and the consumer. It is good for emissions and pollution. It saves time and ensures that the product that is perishable lands in a timely fashion.

Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine (Deputy Senator Pippa Hackett)

I thank Deputy Stanton for the opportunity to discuss the border control post designation at the Port of Cork. I am taking this on behalf of my ministerial colleague, the Minister, Deputy McConalogue.

Currently, Cork Port is a designated border control post for container shipments of wood and wood products only. Inspections of these products take place at the Tivoli container terminal near Cork city. I am advised that it is not possible at present to use this port as an entry point of regulated food products. I understand, however, that my Department has been assessing the feasibility of a limited derogation for certain seasonal low-risk commodities where there is legislative scope to enter outside of a border control post. A temporary derogation to use Cork Port for the import of melons for the 2024 season has been approved by my Department, with communication to stakeholders of the requirements and procedures issued recently. This will hopefully act as a much-needed trade facilitation measure for industry, helping to reduce freight costs and improve the shelf life of produce. However, it should be noted that outside of this temporary derogation, the physical infrastructure required for handling bulk wood products and that required for handling food products is very different.

Between 2015 and 2018, a number of meetings took place between my Department and the Port of Cork. I understand that in December 2018, the port authority advised that it did not intend to pursue the building of a border control post at that time, although it would consider doing so as a second phase of the development. The port authority has since submitted a business case for the building of a border control post that is capable of handling food product. Under the Union customs code, a border control post must be located in a customs-controlled area, necessitating consideration of any business case in this regard to be conducted in consultation with the Revenue Commissioners.

In recent years, following the Brexit referendum and the consequent increased volume of sanitary and phytosanitary official controls, my Department has managed a substantial expansion of our border control infrastructure to meet this demand. This involved a very considerable expansion of border control post infrastructure at Dublin Port, as well as the building of an interim facility at Rosslare Port. Construction of a permanent facility at Rosslare Europort is under way. Border control posts must also be developed, approved and operated in adherence with European regulations. Any change in the designation of Cork Port would ultimately require the endorsement of the Commission.

In determining if a location is viable for the establishment of a border control post, broad consideration and analysis must take place, including an assessment of both the need and the projected economic benefits of same. Consideration must be given to the costs of the establishment of the border control post as well as the longer-term running costs. Further regard must be given to the potential impact on our existing border control posts. A full border control post would also require close collaboration and co-ordination between my Department, Revenue and the HSE. The issue of whether an additional border control post might be required in the Port of Cork remains under consideration. Officials from my Department continue to analyse the requirements for this facility.

Deputy David Stanton

I thank the Minister of State for a very positive response. I welcome the fact that the derogation has been granted temporarily in recent days for the import of melons, which I also mentioned in my presentation earlier. I also welcome the fact that it remains under consideration. I urge the Minister of State to deepen that consideration and make it viable.

I understand that the cost of building a customs inspection facility is approximately €1 million and the cost of kitting it out is approximately €500,000. The total budget comes to roughly €3.5 million, which is not huge in the overall context when we bear in mind the actual benefits to the country as a whole. Cork has a catchment area that represents a large and strategically important part of the State's population and economic base. Almost two thirds of the port's customers are located in Cork while more than 70% are in the south-west region and 92% are in Munster. This has important implications in terms of the requirements of the port capacity to serve this catchment area.

Gross output in the manufacturing industry located in Cork city and county represents more than one third of output across the State as a whole. Cork Port is, therefore, already a very important economic facility for our country. If it had this border control post, it could add to the services provided. As I said, the emissions would be reduced. Cork itself would become more attractive. Even though we have extensions and expansions in Dublin and Rosslare - I understand there is also work going on in Belfast - very often we may see congestion there. Having a border control post in Cork would actually help as well in that regard. There are, therefore, considerable strong arguments for examining this presentation further.

I welcome the fact that the Minister said both now and last January when I first raised this matter that it remains under consideration. However, I ask the Minister of State this evening to ensure that it goes beyond consideration and that people roll up their sleeves and continue the good work they are doing to ensure a border control post is put in position in Cork.

Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine (Deputy Senator Pippa Hackett)

I thank the Deputy for those comments. I accept what he is saying. It is not a terribly large cost if it is €3.5 million. Again, however, that business case has been submitted. I am not sure of the status of that. I can certainly bring that back to the Minister, Deputy McConalogue.

As the Deputy said, Cork Port is an incredibly busy and strategically important port for Ireland and for trade. I do not know, but there may be further opportunities for other temporary derogations in the meantime. Certainly, however, there is continued interaction between my Department and the Port of Cork. Taking into account of those considerations in terms of the impacts on other border control posts and the cost implications, etc., those engagements need to continue. It would be good to come to some sort of answer sooner rather than later. I have been informed that officials from my Department will gladly receive any new information that the Port of Cork may well have gathered that might feed into that business case consideration. I thank the Deputy for raising this important issue.

Cuireadh an Dáil ar athló ar 11.07 p.m. go dtí 9.10 a.m., Dé Céadaoin, an 17 Aibreán 2024.

The Dáil adjourned at 11.07 p.m. until 9.10 a.m. on Wednesday, 17 April 2024.