Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Friday, 6 Dec 1929

Vol. 32 No. 15

Private Deputies' Business. - New Bridge Over the Foyle at Derry.

Mr. Blaney

I gave notice that I would raise on the motion for the adjournment what I regard as the unsatisfactory reply of the Minister to the question I addressed to him yesterday on this subject. The question was in the following terms:—

"To ask the Minister for Industry and Commerce whether any steps were taken by him in connection with the Bill introduced in the Parliament of Northern Ireland to make a new fixed bridge over the Foyle at Derry; and if he will state the result of such steps or action in the matter."

The reply I received was as follows:—"The Bill referred to by the Deputy is a Private Bill, and it was open to persons affected by its proposals to lodge objections against it if they so desired.

"The provision of a movable span adds considerably to the cost of erection of a bridge, and the intention to replace the existing bridge which contains such a span by a fixed bridge was doubtless dictated by this consideration.

"As the bridge is wholly within the territory of Northern Ireland, the matter is of interest to this State only in so far as the replacement may have an adverse effect upon the interests of our citizens. I have, as the Deputy knows, had this aspect of the matter examined, and I have been informed that no practical use of the opening span in the present bridge has been made for over 20 years. I have been unable to obtain any evidence that in the present conditions the proposed replacement will impose hardships on citizens of the Irish Free State —of such an extent, at any rate, as to justify a demand for the largely increased expenditure which a movable span would involve. Nevertheless, in view of what in present circumstances seems to be a rather remote possibility, that developments might occur which would at some date in the future render the provision of an opening span desirable, representations have been made to the Government of Northern Ireland that they should undertake, in the event of such a possibility arising,, that the necessary steps would then be taken. The matter rests there for the moment."

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

took the Chair.

Mr. Blaney

In so far as the construction of this bridge is concerned when, in its initial stages it came before the Londonderry Corporation for discussion, the Donegal County Council at a very early date took the matter up. They saw that the construction of a bridge across the Foyle at Derry would, without provision being made for an opening span, be detrimental to the free passage of seafaring vessels to that part of Donegal known as Carrigans, St. Johnston, and Porthall. The county council passed a resolution which they forwarded to the Minister for Industry and Commerce demanding that he would take the necessary steps to prevent the construction of such a bridge. I do not know that at the time the Minister troubled himself very much about that resolution.

Later on, when the proposed Bill was going through the Northern Parliament a letter dated 4th March, 1929, from the Department of the President was read at a meeting of the Donegal County Council held on 26th March. That letter stated that if the council decided to take legal action in the matter of the proposed Londonderry Corporation Bridge Bill introduced in the Northern Parliament no specific authorisation from the Executive Council was necessary for the purpose. At that meeting of the county council, on the motion of Councillor Scott, seconded by Councillor Hamilton, it was unanimously decided to forward to the Executive Council an emphatic protest against their attitude in the matter, and calling on them to take such steps at once as would protect the rights of county Donegal and the Saorstát in the matter.

So far as I understand very little steps have been taken except to the extent that they made representations that if at some future date developments, which they do not now see, arose in Donegal, provision would be made for the free passage of seafaring vessels. The question rests there at the moment. The bridge is estimated to cost £325,000. If the Bill is to go through the Northern Parliament without such a provision being put into it now, it would to my mind be useless, after the bridge had been constructed at that cost to seek to have it demolished for the purpose of making a provision for an opening span. Again might I point out to the Minister and the House the importance of preserving the rights of the people in this part of Donegal to the territorial waters and the free passage of seafaring vessels. The bridge in question is at present an open span bridge. It is the third of three such bridges. The first, a wooden bridge, was erected in 1794. The second one was reconstructed in 1814. The third bridge, an iron one, which is the present structure, was erected about 1837. All three were provided with an open span for the free passage on the river Foyle above Carlisle Bridge.

The Foyle is a wide, navigable and lordly river, and laps our shores from Greencastle to Lifford. Nature never surely intended that it should be "cribbed and cabined" by the construction of a fixed bridge at Derry. At Carrigans it is 22 feet deep and half a mile wide. If you look at a map of Donegal and draw a line from Malin Head to Ballyshannon, 75 miles, and another from Glencolumbkille to Carrigans, 60 miles, the point of intersection is half way between Convoy and Oldtown. The centre of the county is there, and Carrigans is only 17 miles away, while Fahan is 20 miles, Donegal 20 miles, Buncrana 25 miles, Burtonport 25 miles, Ballyshannon and Killybegs 35 miles each, and Moville 40 miles.

Carrigans would be the nearest and principal part to the centre of the county from the east. It is only four and a half miles above Derry, and entered through (as far as the Carlisle Bridge) one of the best lighted and buoyed loughs in Great Britain or Ireland. I need hardly add that the further inland sea-borne traffic is taken the cheaper the freight. A good part of the traffic from Donegal would be made up of agricultural produce, such as oats, potatoes, etc. At Carrigans up to a few years ago there was a flourishing corn-mill. It got accidentally burnt down, but as there was no rebuilding clause in the insurance claim, it has not been so far rebuilt, but could at any time.

That is one of the points with regard to the importance of leaving a free passage for seafaring boats, so far as Donegal is concerned. These are some of the principal reasons why the people of Donegal are interested in the matter. An important point in connection with the question is that the Executive Government have the right to protect their citizens in so far as any rights they held before the Treaty, which was signed in 1921, are concerned. The right of a free passage to the boats has always been there. Provision was made in the three bridges erected for that. We hold it is the right of the Executive to take the necessary steps to preserve our right-of-way in territorial waters. It is for that reason that the Donegal County Council have taken up the attitude they have in the matter. I feel it my duty to raise the question here, and to urge upon the Minister that it is his duty to see that our rights are not interfered with. The Minister, in his reply yesterday, said:—

"I have been unable to obtain any evidence that in the present conditions the proposed replacement will impose hardships on citizens of the Irish Free State."

He further said:

"As the bridge is wholly within the territory of Northern Ireland, the matter is of interest to this State only in so far as the replacement may have an adverse effect upon the interests of our citizens. I have, as the Deputy knows, had this aspect of the matter examined, and I have been informed that no practical use of the opening span in the present bridge has been made for over 20 years."

I have information to the effect that the Carlisle Bridge was opened in 1887 to permit the passage of a schooner, "The Swift," with a cargo of sixty tons of slates for Strabane, and in 1889 for the schooner "Lily," from Maryport, with 100 tons of coal for Strabane. Both were to the order of S. O'Donnell & Co., Strabane. Later in 1910 and 1920 it was opened to permit the passage of the Harbour Board's dredger to dredge the mouth of the Strabane Canal. That would go to show that within very recent times the bridge has been opened, and the fact that provision had been made in the past for that goes to show the right of the people of Donegal to a free passage for seafaring vessels to the territorial waters.

Mr. Carney

For some reason, which probably I could divine if it were within my province to do it, the Northern Parliament made, or purported to make, a grant to the Derry Corporation for the purpose of building a bridge to replace the existing Carlisle Bridge connecting Waterside, as it is called, with the Derry side, or what should be the Donegal side. At present Carlisle Bridge contains an opening span which may or may not be used. For our purpose it does not matter whether it has been used or whether it would be used or not. We hold that from Inishowen Head to Lifford the people of Donegal are concerned.

Nobody can visualise what is going to happen within the next five, ten, or twenty years. If a development should take place in this country whereby it was essential for the purpose of central distribution in Donegal to have a port situated at the village of Carrigans, if we allow this proposed bridge to be built we would be placing ourselves in the position of blocking the people of Donegal from the right-of-way to the seaboard. If we have rights we should stand over them. It is not our province to look all the time at the other fellow's side of the question. The main consideration should be our own particular interests, our own particular point of view, giving in fairness a due proportion to the other man's point of view.

The Minister might say that if we wanted to interfere in the building of this bridge, if we, for example, said to the Derry Corporation, or to the Government of the Six Counties, that we are opposed to the erection of a bridge without a movable span, the Minister might ask what are we prepared to do in regard to meeting the costs. That is not our business. It is our business to protect whatever little rights we may be entitled to under the Treaty. Recently when the diplomatic luminaries of the Free State were blazing the path across the Continent making trade treaties with Continental countries there was a more important question here at home. Seven years ago to this day these rights which we hold we are entitled to were implemented, and until the present day, although seven years have elapsed, there has been no definition as to what we are entitled in regard to our property, not alone in the Twenty-Six Counties, but in the territorial waters surrounding the Twenty-Six Counties. It has often been held in regard to territorial waters surrounding the Six Counties that the Free State is entitled to them. Whether that is so or not I do not know. The point I am concerned with is that as regards the Foyle, which the Minister probably knows far better than I do, from the fairway of Inishowen Head to Lifford that there has been no line of demarcation as to what the Six Counties or the Twenty-Six Counties are entitled to. No indication has been given as to whether the Six Counties have any rights, not alone from the fairway of Inishowen Head to Lifford, but around the Six Counties as a whole in regard to territorial waters.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That does not arise on the question of a new bridge.

Mr. Carney

It should arise for this reason——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is confined strictly to what arises out of Deputy Blaney's question of yesterday.

Mr. Carney

Exactly. There is a bridge to be built in the Six Counties—which, without a movable span would block our ingress and egress to waters in our territory in Donegal to which we hold we are entitled. Nobody twenty or forty years ago could have visualised that there would be a development in the Shannon such as the Minister has been responsible for, nor can we visualise now what may happen in ten or twenty years' time with regard to places like Carrigans. It is possible that we have not vision enough. It may be thought that I am an optimist with regard to Carrigans. The same would have applied with regard to the Shannon scheme or to aeroplanes a hundred years ago. No one can say what may take place with regard to Carrigans twenty years hence. I hope the same state of affairs will not exist then, but if the Six Counties still remain separated from the Twenty-Six Counties we will be in the position in the event of the development of a port at Carrigans that we cannot get out to the deep sea. Therefore, if you have the rights you hold you are entitled to now they should be protected, and for that reason the case was put up by Deputy Blaney that we were entitled to these rights under the Treaty, and that the people of Donegal are entitled to have a free passage to the deep sea when they want it, and the Minister should protect their rights.

Minister for Industry and Commerce (Mr. McGilligan)

The answer to the question yesterday expressed the inability of certain people to obtain evidence "that in the present conditions the proposed replacement will impose hardships on citizens of the Irish Free State—of such an extent, at any rate, as to justify a demand for the largely-increased expenditure which a movable span would involve. Nevertheless, in view of what in present circumstances seems to be rather a remote possibility, that developments might occur which would at some date in the future render the provision of an opening span desirable, representations have been made," and the matter rests there for the moment. Deputy Blaney asserts that he is not satisfied with that answer, and he brings forward this case to-day. I feel, after listening to Deputy Blaney to-day, that it was a pity that somebody more competent to deal with this matter had not been entrusted with it from the beginning. Many months ago I interviewed Deputy Blaney. I told him then, not the contention that was accepted, but the contention that had been made in regard to this bridge, and I asked the Deputy to get me information, of he could, from the Donegal County Council, or on his own part, to rebut the case made. Is there a case in the present circumstances to warrant us asking for an opening span to be made at the moment? I am leaving the rights out for the moment. I told him then that, as it was represented to me, the traffic that came from above the bridge was carried in barges or in lighters known as the Strabane fleet, that drew only a few feet of water, that there was about 10,000 tons carried by the Strabane fleet and that a certain amount of general cargo was carried in that way. There was, in addition, a certain amount of sand and other building materials brought down, mainly sand, from two sandbanks on the river, at New Buildings and at St. Johnston. I told him, further, that it was represented that, although the river at full tide appeared to be very wide and navigable, in fact—and one could see it at low tide—it is twisted, tortuous and shallow, or little better than a canal, and could only be used by a type of flat-bottomed boat or barge that would only draw a few feet of water.

Mr. Blaney

That is your contention.

Mr. McGilligan

It is not my contention. I did not accept the contention. I put these points to the Deputy in the conversations I had with him. The Deputy must give me two or three minutes now. He had ten minutes.

Mr. Blaney

That was the contention of those who are working against this.

Mr. McGilligan

It may be. I opposed that contention, and I asked Deputy Blaney to get me certain information. With his permission I am going to read the letter he sent me. I told him further, that it was represented that the river was not wide and was only for a very short part above the bridge dredged on one occasion when the dredger was let go through. I told him, further, that the representation was that there was no port at Carrigans, or at St. Johnston, or Lifford, or at any other portion of the Free State littoral and no river traffic at the moment. I told him that the representation was that for forty years past the bridge had been opened three times, once to let the dredger up, secondly to let the dredger down, and thirdly to test whether the span would open or not, and I asked him to get me information on these points.

Mr. Blaney

What is the information?

Mr. McGilligan

I do not know if the Deputy considers that the letter he wrote to me is confidential or if I can read it.

Mr. Blaney

You can read it as far as I am concerned.

Mr. McGilligan

The information I got from him then was a letter stating: "It is understood that the old bridge has only been opened on a few occasions. However, in the event of developments taking place in county Donegal it might possibly become necessary to have the proposed new bridge opened on frequent occasions." On the question of the alteration of the course of the channel, which was a question that was also put up——

Mr. Blaney

That was a question you wanted answered.

Mr. McGilligan

It was not.

Mr. Blaney

It was a particular question you asked.

Mr. McGilligan

The Deputy said "it is believed that the channel alters its course every few years, but it is learned on reliable authority that this would not present an insurmountable engineering difficulty of having the new bridge erected with an opening span to permit the passage of steamers." The rest of it is about objections that were taken to the Bill when it came before a Committee of both Houses of the Northern Parliament and has no relation to what I asked him about. If the Deputy thinks it has relevance I will read the whole letter. That is the information the Deputy gave me, and I took that as meaning that the contentions made by these people, with the facts and in the present circumstances, are to be allowed to go unanswered as far as Deputy Blaney is concerned, because if that is the only evidence which I can get from Deputy Blaney on which to ask people to spend £35,000 extra on a movable span——

Mr. Blaney

Why is the Minister so concerned about the expense?

Mr. McGilligan

I have another point of view. If I had only that view, and if I was only going to rely on what Deputy Blaney has put up I could not go anywhere and make representations to anybody. I want to have that point made clear. However, the Deputy comes along to-day and says that it is a wide and navigable river. He says that he has some figures showing that it is twenty-two feet deep at Carrigans and a certain width. I would like to know at what state of the tide the twenty-two feet depth was taken. I am not sure—it was introduced into the context but I do not know whether it applied to the river—but he talked about it being well lit and well buoyed. Does the Deputy believe that the river above the bridge is well lit and well buoyed?

Mr. Blaney

I cannot say that it is at present, but if the Derry Harbour Board were doing their duty it would be.

Mr. McGilligan

This is a question of what is. Again, I got information about two boats, the "Lily" and the "Swift," that went up, incidentally one in 1887 and the other in 1889, to Strabane. That is to say, in so far as there is any proof at all it is proof that the Northern Government, by not putting in a movable span is blocking the movements of ships to its own nationals.

Mr. Blaney

I saw from an issue of the "Sentinel" some time ago that the Moville steamer went as far as Castlefin some years ago. I want to say that that is not the point at all. The point is our rights.

Mr. McGilligan

I would come to the rights if the Deputy would only keep quiet.

Mr. Blaney

The rights of the Free State.

Mr. Carney

Whether we use them or not.

Mr. McGilligan

Yes.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister has less than two minutes left to him to reply.

Mr. McGilligan

The Deputy was asked to provide certain information on certain concrete points that had been urged with regard to how far the present circumstances warranted the contention that here and now a movable span should be made in the bridge. There is his letter. If he has got further information to-day it is vague stuff that he saw in the "Sentinel." That is to prove my point that it would have been better if this had been handled by somebody more competent to deal with it. On the other hand, there is the question of what might be called legal right. How far that goes is a matter to be hereafter determined.

Mr. Carney

After seven years!

Mr. McGilligan

I stated that representations had been made, and the matter rests there for the moment. Does the Deputy want me to state the contentions I have made? Does he want me to state the case that can be made for the bridge as opposed to the case which we put up? In other words, does he want me, while the case is at hearing, on the naked legal right, to expose here what I know of the case that was made to me by the Donegal County Council or by Deputy Blaney?

Mr. Carney

Where is it being heard?

Mr. McGilligan

Does the Deputy understand that representations have been made, and that the matter rests there at the moment?

Mr. Blaney

There is the representation that the Northern Government would make provision at a future date.

Mr. McGilligan

Representations have been made that they should undertake, in the event of such a possibility arising, that the necessary steps for a movable span would then be taken.

Mr. Blaney

That the bridge might be constructed now, and in six, ten, or twelve years hence a movable span might be required by the people in that part of Donegal?

Mr. McGilligan

And, therefore, that it would be legitimate to ask that the matter would be done now. Deputy Carney's analogy about the Shannon was that fifty or a hundred years ago people might have objected when some bridge was being put across an inland part of the Shannon because of the possibility that an electricity scheme would be started there and that that would entail the demolishing of the bridge—the pulling down of a lot of property.

Mr. MacEntee

But the Minister would have had control over that property. He has no control over the bridge that is being erected now.

The Dáil adjourned at 3 p.m. until Wednesday, February 12th, 1930, pursuant to the resolution of the House of this day.