asked the Minister for Transport and Power whether a final decision has been reached in regard to the future of the Grand Canal; and if he will state its nature.
43.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Future of Grand Canal.
42.
andMr. McQuillan asked the Minister for Transport and Power whether, in the light of the reported statement by the Minister for Finance that the Grand Canal will not be closed, he will state what the present position is in the matter.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 42 and 43 together. The question of the future of the Grand Canal is still under consideration and no decision has yet been taken in the matter.
Can we take it that before the canal would be closed, the decision to close it would be discussed in the Dáil? Is the Dáil the final arbiter?
Legislation has to be introduced in the Dáil to close the canal.
In view of the apparent and understandable difference of opinion in the Government Party on this matter, can we take it that when it is discussed in the Dáil, there will be a free vote?
That is a separate question.
Hold your horses.
Did I understand the Minister to say that if it were proposed to close the canal, legislation would be necessary? I take it that no legislation would be required if it were proposed to keep it open?
It would depend on who proposed to do it.
Is it not in existing legislation that the canal be kept open as long as it is used?
For navigational purposes.
Can we take it that all the interests concerned will have a fair opportunity of putting their case before any decision to close it is taken? Can we have that assurance?
Yes.
In view of the fact that a single boat navigating the canal once a year can keep it open——
We will send you up the canal.
Now, admiral, keep quiet.
(Interruptions.)
Is that the position?
Are you having a free vote on whether Deputy Dr. Browne is to become a member of the Labour Party?
Legislation will have to be introduced if the canal is to be closed as long as there is navigation on the canal and there is an amount of navigation on it at the moment.
If an organisation chooses, at least once a year, to use the canal, then no legislation can be introduced to close it?
Legislation can be introduced even if there is navigation. Legislation can be introduced to close it.
On the decision of the Minister?
On the decision of the Government.
Are we to take it that the statement of the Minister for Finance at the Árd Fheis of his Party, as reported, that the canal would not be closed, represents Government policy or has there been a change since he spoke?
The Minister intimated that the members of the Árd Fheis by a majority expressed the view that the canal should be kept open. He did not give any indication of Government policy.
The Minister is reported as saying—unless he wishes to suggest he was misreported—that having heard the views of his colleagues at the Árd Fheis, the canal will not be closed. Has there been a change of policy since the Minister for Finance made that declaration?
The Deputy is making a play on something. He knows that at these meetings the Minister gives a declaration on what he regards as the minority or majority view of the members. He was simply making a statement that a majority of members had stated they would like to see the canal open.
Would I be right in saying that the Minister's statement was not a blueprint but a prognostication?
It was not a prognostication.
That was the formula which the Minister for Transport and Power used before. It was good enough to fool the boys at the Árd Fheis.