andMr. M. O'Leary asked the Minister for Transport and Power if there are any plans to base an oil refinery on 200 acres in the South Wall and Sandymount Green area, Dublin; and if discussions have taken place with any members of the Government concerning this matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Oil Refinery Base.
5.
Mrs. Lynch, Mr. L. Belton
I was recently advised by a commercial group that they intended to discuss with the Dublin Port and Docks Board the question of the establishment of an oil refinery in the port of Dublin. As is usually the case in initial approaches concerning the establishment of new industry, this approach was on a confidential basis.
My main concern in this matter would be to ensure that the requirements of the Harbours Act, 1946, and the Foreshore Act, 1933, are complied with. Assuming that the Dublin Port and Docks Board are prepared to consider this proposal they must apply to me for a Harbour Works Order and for any necessary lease under the Foreshore Act. No such applications have yet been made to my Department. If and when they are made they will be published in the normal way and any objections will be carefully considered.
The permission of Dublin Corporation under the Local Government (Planning and Development) Act, 1963, will also be necessary for any works proposed.
Can the Minister state definitely that no talks have taken place with any member of the Government and with any firm regarding the establishment of this refinery? Can he give a definite assurance on that?
I can only speak for the Minister for Transport and Power and, of course, for myself. In the answer, as the Deputy will see, there has not been a proposal made to the Minister for Transport and Power.
Is the Minister aware that such a thing is being mooted?
The early part of the answer said he was advised by a commercial group that they intended to discuss it with the Dublin Port and Docks Board. This initial advice would be on a confidential basis. He was advised that it was intended to discuss it with the Port and Docks Board.
While it may be on a confidential basis am I right in forming the conclusion that the Dublin Bay Association, who have serious doubts and apprehensions in this regard, are right in assuming that such a project is being mooted?
Yes. It is clear from the answer, which I dealt with for the Minister, that it is in train in some form but has not reached the stage where any proposal has been made to him for a Harbour Works Order or a lease under the Foreshore Act. If and when such proposals are made they will be published and anybody with an objection can make an objection.
Is the Minister aware that assurances have been given previously by members of the Government that in fact no further development will take place in Dublin Port until a development plan has been put forward and an inquiry held into that plan? Can he state why references to that assurance are omitted from the reply? Are we to take it that that assurance no longer stands and that only the procedures set out in the reply are to operate and not the requirement that there should be a draft development plan and an inquiry?
The Deputy is chancing his arm again on this.
There is nothing in the reply about planning permission.
The position is that we were told there would be a draft development plan. We have been told for two years that it is coming and it still has not come. We were assured that there would be an inquiry into this plan before any aspect of it was implemented.
That is a separate question.
We were told that no significant developments would take place until that plan was produced? We want to know does that stand or does it not?
I would like to know what the Deputy is quoting from. The Deputy can appreciate that a person's memory can fail on this and he can say that somebody gave him an assurance and ask me to stand over it now. It does not arise on this question for me. I certainly think it is another question.
We shall return to it. I appreciate the Minister's difficulty.
Have the Government received the plan from the Port and Docks Board yet? This has been going on for years and they still have not got it.
They are not going to do it.
The Deputy is on to another subject.
This seems to be a separate question.
It is a very important question. They are drawing back now.
On what is the Deputy basing that statement? The Deputy is making a statement which has no foundation in fact and he knows it.
This report, as reported earlier in the papers, has caused much concern in the area to old people. Could we, therefore, have an assurance that certainly in the Sandymount Green area there will be no oil refinery? This is a residential area. Under any port plan this just could not happen.
Hear, hear.
I think what the Deputies want to say to the Minister for Transport and Power is that no matter what arises this planning permission will not be given. The answer I have here is that there has not been a proposal made to him and when the proposal is made it will be published and objections heard. Do the Deputies want the Minister now to be told that it is their desire that he say no matter what proposal is made it will not be considered without——
Without a port development plan as promised.
I will pass that on to the Minister.
There should certainly be no oil refinery in the Sandymount Green area. It is a residential area. It is a very nice one but it is also a public playground.