I would wish to thank the Chair and the Minister for the opportunity to discuss the situation of Rosslare Harbour and the totally inadequate level of State funding to date for this harbour. I am motivated to raise this question by the growing concern and anger in County Wexford at the apparent abandonment of this national resource by this and by former Governments. It is my intention, a Leas-Chathaoirligh, this evening to be as constructive and positive as I can be in what I have to say. It is my ambition to underline the case for Rosslare as forcefully and as clearly as I can. As a preamble I might say that this Government came to power on a platform of honesty and integrity, to put an end to white elephants and political strokes; no more doling out, I thought, of scarce State resources to buy votes. Instead, every project was to be analysed and costed and investment made on the basis of sound economics having due regard, of course, to the social consequences. To this end I and the people of County Wexford were led to believe that the development of ports throughout this country was subject to the drafting of a national ports policy which I understood was in the process of being prepared at that moment.
This strategy was perfectly acceptable to all of us in County Wexford, confident as we were and are in the case for Rosslare. Let me at this stage put some concrete facts before the House to underline Rosslare Harbour's strategic importance. In the period 1973-81 the port of Rosslare advanced from fifth position to third position in terms of ship arrivals. This improvement occurred at a steady rate with a slight downturn in 1979. Only Waterford and Dún Laoghaire experienced growth in this period. The total through all ports fell significantly through this period. The performance therefore of Rosslare is particularly impressive. May I quote the relevant figures for the year 1973? The number of ship arrivals at Rosslare port was 808. In 1981 this figure had risen to 1,453. The implication is more clearly shown by growth in percentage terms in comparison with other ports. For Dublin there was a decrease over this period of 44.5 per cent. For Cork there was an increase of 1.5 per cent; for Dún Laoghaire an increase of 3.7 per cent, for Waterford, a decline of 23.2 per cent and for Rosslare Harbour an increase of 74.6 per cent. This again bears out the development in net registered tonnage for the same period 1973 to 1983. The figures for Rosslare are in 1973, 1,117,000 tons to 4,258,000 tons in 1983. The same increase is registered in passenger numbers from 237,389 in 1973 to 861,900 last year.
The comparison for growth in net tonnage is similar, a staggering increase of 239.3 per cent for the period 1973 to 1981 for Rosslare compared with a decline of 21.3 per cent for Dublin, a decline of 28.4 per cent for Cork, an increase of 59.7 per cent for Dún Laoghaire and a decline of 15.2 per cent for Waterford. Again, in terms of tourist traffic the numbers are equally impressive, an increase from 60,942 in 1973 to a 142,854 in 1983. The number of tourist cars passing through Irish ports has almost doubled in the period 1973 to 1981 and Rosslare's share has increased from 23 per cent of the total to 33 per cent of the total in that period. Again, in freight traffic in ro-ro units the number of units increased from the 1973 figure of 10,602 to a 1983 figure of 41,900. Because of its close proximity to Europe and the growth in roll-on, roll-off transport freight traffic through Rosslare Harbour we have seen a dramatic increase from the period 1973 to 1983. Ro-ro units have increased in fact, as I said, fourfold, while trade cars have increased almost threefold and Rosslare now accounts for more than 50 per cent of all trade cars imported into this country.
I have set out those facts to underline the success of Rosslare Harbour over the last decade, success, may I say, brought about because of its strategic position making it the terminal for the shortest continental crossing and consequently, in fuel terms, the cheapest. This success was brought about, may I add, despite the miserable response in development terms from central Government. In March 1978 the Rosslare Harbour Development Committee made a submission to the Minister for Transport and he authorised a development scheme for Rosslare Harbour to be undertaken by CIE as the harbour authority. This decision was made following protracted negotiations, planning and research. The development scheme incorporated the provision of a second berth to cater for the ever-increasing additional ferry services. The cost of the development scheme was estimated at that time to be £3.75 million and an Exchequer grant of £1.125 million, representing 30 per cent of the estimated cost, was allocated, the balance to be raised by the harbour authority itself. Six years have passed and the development scheme still remains incomplete. The second berth has been constructed but the essential ancilliary services vital to a port catering for passenger cars and roll-on, roll-off freight has not been provided.
The actual cost of the work undertaken is approximately £7 million and the harbour authority had been obliged to raise the additional finance required in excess of the additional estimate, with meagre Exchequer assistance. The stage has now been reached when the harbour authority is unable to complete the development scheme due to lack of capital finance. A ludicrous situation exists where the new second berth which is utilised by B&I Ferry Services has no gangway facilities whatsoever for its passengers; foot passengers have to enter and leave the vessel through stern doors in conjunction with cars and freight, which is a dreadful situation and highly dangerous. The provision of capital finance is urgently necessary to provide the essential support facilities required for the port of Rosslare.
The Minister is well aware that we have repeatedly requested that finance for this sound capital project which we know would produce great returns to the State be invested in this area. Earlier this year we put a submission to the Minister requesting £1 million from the 1984 public capital programme to be spent on — and I shall quote from our submission:
(1) the provision of a proper gangway at the second berth.
(2) the provision of a hydraulically operated gangway at the original berth to replace the existing fixed gangway which under certain tidal conditions becomes extremely steep and dangerous for passengers.
(3) the proper surfacing of the holding compound area in the centre of the port and the access road to the second berth.
(4) the replacement of the existent ancient bus with a modern type coach as befits a port of this size, together with shelters at pick-up points.
May I add this latter point has been acceded to in the last number of weeks.
(5) improvement at the original berth to cater for the throughput of passengers embarking and disembarking;
(6) provision of improved and additional accommodation for customs clearance and immigration services;
(7) completion of a storm wall to protect passengers in rough weather and
(8) improvement and extension of freight compound and marshalling areas.
— a modest, urgently-needed programme costing £1 million estimated. The State response was that £300,000 was given, a most inadequate and meagre response. We were told at that stage that that was all that could be allocated because the cupboard was bare. In the light of the subsequent allocation to Ringaskiddy the cupboard apparently is bare only as far as Rosslare Harbour is concerned. It was not my intention to put forward an argument that if they get it we must get it. On the contrary, I want to state emphatically that we should expend State funds in the interest of the State, for the benefit of the State, regardless of local lobbying and local pressuring and local political advantage. That, however, has not happened. We have repeatedly witnessed stroke politics and ad hoc measures to the detriment of good planning and sound investments. I think inevitably comparisons must be made. I would refer to the State grant for Ringaskiddy port in Cork. The original estimated cost for the development of Rosslare Harbour was £3.75 million for which the Exchequer grant was to be £1.125 million — these are 1978 estimates for the second berth — representing 30 per cent of the total. The actual cost is £7.025 million of which the State grant was £1.125 million, 16 per cent of the total cost; 16 per cent compared with Cork, where the overall cost of a harbour development scheme was £17.9 million and Exchequer grants represented £15.8 million or 88 per cent of the total cost. The cost of a new Cork ferry terminal was £8.25 million: the Exchequer grant to Cork £6.6 million, or 80 per cent of the total cost.
I come now to the most recent announcement, that is of a free port status for Ringaskiddy, a concept advanced for Rosslare Harbour two years ago. I quote from a letter sent to the chairman of the Rosslare Harbour Development Board by the Minister for Finance on 9 April 1984:
In relation to the idea of designating Rosslare Harbour as a free port the Minister has asked me to say that his initial reaction to this proposal is that he is not convinced that it would give rise to a significant benefit at Rosslare or anywhere else at this stage.
This was four weeks before an announcement was made designating Ringaskiddy a free port. The concluding paragraph of this letter, signed by the Minister's private secretary, says:
However, the Minister has asked me to inform you that a full review of the free port concept is being carried out by this Department and that a further letter will be sent to you on this subject as soon as that review is completed.
Four weeks before the announcement of a free port for Ringaskiddy was made the Minister for Finance stated that in his view no benefit would accrue to anywhere by being made a free port and that the whole matter was being reviewed in a national context. Four weeks later — no plan, no survey, no review, just more ad hoc measures and political adventurism.
In summary, I contend simply this: the case for the development of Rosslare Harbour is logical and undeniable. The people of Wexford and indeed of the whole South-East region will depend on it for the development of that region. The people of Ireland look to it as a resource to benefit this whole nation. We have asked simply for a planned and costed approach to port development in this country in which we believe Rosslare's case would be clearly made and would stand convincingly on its own merits. With respect, Minister, our logic has been trumped with political expediency and our patience answered with apparent contempt. The people of Wexford as a whole feel bitterly deprived by more stroke politics.
We have come to expect more from this Government. This Government were elected to put the affairs of this nation into good order. That was their paramount objective. The husbanding of the scarce resources of this State must rank high on that agenda. I beg you, Minister, and through you, the Minister for Communications and the Minister for Finance immediately to redress the situation with a capital allocation for Rosslare Harbour which would allow it to become the springboard for the resuscitation of a region which is economically on its knees. Contrary to reports, it is on the east coast of this country that the trend of unemployment is greatest.
People occasionally view an area like Wexford as being an industrialised area, not in need of the sort of support that goes to other regions. That is no longer the case. The unemployment situation in Wexford is among the blackest in the country, and the call from the public representatives and indeed the people of Wexford is not for charity, is not for hand-outs, is not for grants and dole; it is for a proper development programme, taking the whole island into the picture. What we ask, Minister, is what we were faithfully promised in the past — a coordinated approach to port planning which would allow all our natural resources to be utilised to their fullest potential for the benefit of all the people of this nation, and an end to the politics of the stroke and the politics of expediency.
