Cork Tramways (Employees' Compensation) Bill, 1933—Money Resolution. - Shannon Electricity (Amendment) Bill, 1933—Second Stage. – Dáil Éireann (8th Dáil) – Thursday, 20 Jul 1933

Cork Tramways (Employees' Compensation) Bill, 1933—Money Resolution. - Shannon Electricity (Amendment) Bill, 1933—Second Stage.

Mr. Lemass

The purpose of this Bill is to correct what appears to have been a minor mistake in the drafting of the Shannon Electricity Act, 1925, in consequence of which compensation cannot be paid to certain persons entitled to it until this amendment has been effected. The 1925 Act gave the Minister for Industry and Commerce power to acquire compulsorily lands or premises, easements, way-leaves, water-rights, fishing rights or other rights over or in respect of any lands, premises or water; it authorised him compulsorily to terminate, restrict, or otherwise interfere with any easement, way-leave, water-right, fishing right or other right existing over or in respect of any lands, premises, or water; and authorised him compulsorily to divert, close, remove, or otherwise interfere with any public or private road, way or bridge or any canal or other artificial waterway or any artificial watercourse. The Act of 1925 did not, however, empower the Minister compulsorily to interfere with lands or premises.

The Minister in the course of his functions had compulsorily to interfere with lands or premises, and in consequence of the absence of these words in the Act and the other words set out in Sections 2 and 3, compensation cannot be paid to persons whose lands or premises were interfered with but not acquired. Investigations have been made in all these matters, and it is desired to have this amendment effected. It is clear from the framework of the Act that it was intended to have this amendment in providing for compensation for such people, and it was only when the compensation was about to be paid that some legal genius who always discovers such things at awkward times discovered that we had no right to pay out the money.

Mr. Dillon

I take it that a legal genius discovered that the Electricity Supply Board had not the power to interfere with lands or premises. Is not that it?

Mr. Lemass

Yes.

Mr. Dillon

I think there was an action brought in the High Court to restrain them.

Mr. Lemass

I will not say that. I do not know if that has occurred.

Mr. Dillon

I want to draw the Minister's attention to this. We are going, apparently, to give extended powers to the Minister for Industry and Commerce to interfere with people's property for the convenience of the Electricity Supply Board.

Mr. Lemass

No, no. The Act related only to the consideration of the Shannon scheme. The Electricity Supply Board was not in existence at the time. It was brought into existence about 1927. This has nothing to do with the Electricity Supply Board, only with the construction of the Shannon works. I do not think it is likely that any lands or premises will be interfered with in the future. This amendment is to provide for compensation for something that has been done already. It was only when we came to pay out the money for compensation that the flaw was detected.

Mr. Dillon

This is to amend the Act of 1925, but under that Act very extraordinary powers were given to the Minister, and naturally they were utilised for the purpose of constructing the works. So far as I am aware very similar powers have been given to the Electricity Supply Board under the 1927 Act to interfere with private property. There was a case in which the Minister or the Electricity Supply Board were sued in the courts, and it was sought to restrict them from putting a pole in front of somebody's drawing-room window. I think it was stated then that the Electricity Supply Board were entitled to put the pole in the middle of the drawing-room floor if they wanted to, and I think it was Deputy McGilligan's intention when he went out of office to introduce some kind of amending legislation to restrict these powers.

This Bill, I recognise, is merely introduced to correct an anomaly, but I think this is the occasion to draw the Minister's attention to the powers that were given to the Minister under the 1925 Act, and are at present in operation under the 1927 Act to the Electricity Supply Board. I wish to draw his attention to the powers that have been given to the Electricity Supply Board to acquire property belonging to the citizens of this State. I want to submit that some of the rights given to the Electricity Supply Board and the Minister are preposterous and those rights should be closely examined and drastically revised. I know it will be a matter of some difficulty to examine the whole question but this is a matter that deserves to be very fully examined, and urgently requires remedying.

Mr. Keyes

I should like to draw the attention of the Minister to a legitimate grievance that the Limerick fishermen have. This grievance led to a very serious fracas last year. Some sort of provision should be made to put up a grill or something to prevent fish going into the turbines and thus depriving the fishermen there from what should be their natural property. The difficulty could be avoided if an effort were made to put up a grill but efforts to have that done have met with failure and I wish to draw attention now to the necessity, if it is necessary, to have a clause inserted to restore the natural right of the fishermen. It is time to do something for those men. They have lost very heavily and I do not want any further interference by the military or the police to prevent people getting what they consider they are naturally entitled to. If the Minister puts in any necessary provisions for the erection of this safeguard it would prevent any recurrence of these affairs and leave the natural run of fish to the fishermen who have been fishing there all their lives.

Mr. Lemass

The purpose of this Bill is the payment of compensation to persons whose lands or premises were compulsorily interfered with in the course of the erection of the Shannon works. Those responsible for the works proceeded on the assumption that they had the right to interfere and could pay compensation for any losses occasioned by their interference. It was when the question of paying compensation arose that it was discovered that certain defects existed in the Bill. It has not anything to do with the fishermen. As I mentioned in reply to a Parliamentary question some time ago, we have had an Inter-Departmental Committee considering the whole question of Shannon fisheries. It has reported now and its report is being examined. On the face of it, I can say that it is probable legislation will be introduced at an early date but what will be the nature of the legislation I am not in a position to say. It is clear that it is a matter distinct from that covered by this Bill.

Mr. Keyes

Are the fishermen not equally entitled to be compensated for the destruction of their living?

Mr. Lemass

It is quite clear that where the owners of fishing rights had their property destroyed, or its value reduced by the operation of the Shannon scheme, they are entitled to compensation under the Shannon Act of 1925, and there is no question of our right to pay them compensation. This Bill remedies certain defects in respect of land and premises. The Deputy's question is a somewhat different one. It relates to the future of the fisheries. Those who have lost, or whose property has been damaged, are entitled to compensation, but the men on behalf of whom Deputy Keyes speaks have been getting their livelihood from the fisheries, and are anxious that their livelihood should continue, and it is in connection with their case that we have the Inter-Departmental Committee at work.

Question—"That the Bill be read a Second Time"—put and agreed to.

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 20 Jul 1933