Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 4 Feb 1976

Vol. 287 No. 7

Adjournment Debate. - Bantry Employment Situation.

Mr. Crowley

I am grateful to the Ceann Comhairle for permitting me to raise this important issue on the Adjournment. It is a vital issue as far as the people of Bantry are concerned. It is unfortunate that we seldom come into the House with some good news to announce and the news from Bantry at present is very bad. The Bantry Towing Company has served notice that it will have to let 50 per cent of its employees go. I understand that the security personnel on the island will be halved in the near future. There is no need for me to spell out the tremendous industrial and economic injection the siting of Gulf Oil had on the town of Bantry. Directly, and indirectly, 250 people earn a living from Gulf Oil, but I understand the Carroll Shipping Company will also have to let 50 per cent of their staff go.

We are all aware that the safety at the terminal, the proper trans-shipment of the oil and the enforcement of the regulations in the harbour are of vital necessity as far as the town of Bantry is concerned. It comes as a surprise to me to find that the super tankers can now be attended by only two tugs and yet apparently comply with the regulations laid down by the Minister although the Minister was adamant that four tugs should be used in the attendance on a tanker. The duty of the Minister in this respect is clear-cut and he was aware of that duty in several speeches he made. However, we have a situation where three tugs carry on the job of mooring while one tug stands by at the end of the pier. As a result of the redundancies that will occur the situation must be remedied.

Already 70 employees of Gulf Oil have taken a voluntary cut in their pay packet amounting to £17 per week on average. The present situation is fraught with danger on two fronts, on the economic side there is the danger of jobs lost because of redundancies but, as important, is the downgrading in status of Whiddy Island from a terminal for transshipment to a storage depot. If any more redundancies occur or any more people lose their jobs ultimately this situation will come about. Up to April 1975, 40 million tons of oil were channelled through the port of Bantry, an amount greater than the total tonnage of all other ports together.

As a representative for that town, I cannot stand by and see it becoming a ghost town because of lack of employment for the people there. Of course, we had all sorts of promises about what would happen in Bantry. We had many "paper industries", as I would describe them. We were told that APCO intended setting up a refinery there. After an inquiry planning permission was granted for that refinery to be erected on Whiddy Island. I should like to tell those people who are complaining about a proposal to erect an oil refinery in Dublin that we would welcome that refinery in Bantry. We would like the Minister to use his powers to ensure that APCO erect a refinery for us. Another refinery was promised to us—not by the Minister, I hasten to add—the Aughaville refinery. Option was taken on some land and land was purchased. We all know that land is a good investment and that very soon those who buy land are able to double their money. With a fanfare of trumpets we were promised that an oil rig platform factory would be established somewhere in the Beara Peninsula but I regret to say that did not happen. We were told there would be a shipbreaking yard in the Bantry area but I am afraid that is another paper industry. We were supposed to get two carpet factories in the area but again that did not happen. The point I wish to make is that the economic future of Bantry depends on the wellbeing of Gulf; it depends on the constant employment given by the Gulf Oil Company. If there are any circumstances in which they can help out, the Government should do all in their power to retain that industry because it is vital for the economic wellbeing and life of Bantry.

Perhaps the Minister would consult with the Minister for Labour with regard to the £30,000 that was allocated for an APCO factory at Bantry. Are we not considered important enough, despite the fact that money was put aside for us? I do not mind what other area gets a training centre or an APCO factory but if we are to pursue properly our policy in relation to keeping the population in rural Ireland we must provide employment for the people.

Unfortunately, the news is not good. There were 34 ships a month coming into Bantry at one time but that is now down to 11. The Minister must accept a certain responsibility for the situation. When we had the unfortunate oil spillage in October, 1974, the Minister over-reacted in insisting that all ships stay outside the bay. As a result of that Gulf sent their ships to the Clyde and they are now trans-shipping from one vessel to another, not at the terminal as they did in Bantry. I have grave doubts about Gulf coming back and using the Bantry terminal for trans-shipping.

As a result of what happened we have lost the large ships calling into Bantry but, even more depressing from the economic point of view, we have lost the economy accruing from the ancillary services. I am referring to such matters as storage facilities, boat hire, the use of dentists and doctors, the loss suffered by travel agents in the area, by taxi owners and, perhaps the most important item, the supply of food for the crews. On average, there was a sum of approximately £5,000 spent in the town by the crew members of one ship alone. This loss must also be taken into account.

The decision by the Chair to allow this question on the Adjournment was a correct one in view of the economic climate in the west Cork area. Unless some positive initiative is taken by the Government that area will be in a serious state. Many people came to work for Gulf; they purchased sites, they built houses and they established themselves in the area. What will happen the town of Bantry if those people move elsewhere? In my opinion jobs provided in rural Ireland are far more important than any grand talk we may have about attracting huge industries, giving employment to 1,000 or 10,000 people. We know that at the moment it is costing the IDA and the chemical industry £60,000 to provide one job. Instead of giving brandy to geriatrics we should be giving a little orange juice to the infant industries because that orange juice will ensure the health and nourishment necessary to turn those undertakings into viable industries——

Mr. P. Barry

This is great stuff.

Mr. Crowley

The Minister can laugh if he wishes but the employment of people is a serious matter.

Mr. P. Barry

I am full of admiration for the Deputy. He has a marvellous turn of phrase.

Mr. Crowley

Employment is a serious matter and, in fairness to the Minister, he is one of the few people in Government who is concerned about it. Possibly that is because he is a Cork man. In his wisdom, the Minister produced the Harbours Bill, 1975. I do not know what reactions he got to it. There is one serious deficiency so far as Bantry is concerned, namely, there are no borrowing powers involved in the Bill. Therefore, whoever becomes the harbour authority will not be in a position to buy out anybody or to borrow money from the bank. We consider the whole future of Bantry is very much tied up with the harbour, with the industries there as well as the ancillary industries that can be established.

We want the oil refinery Dublin does not want. We want it in Whiddy Island because we want the ancillary industries that go with an oil refinery. I would prefer to see the people of west Cork employed at home even though there may be a little pollution. It is inevitable that when there is industrial development there is also a certain invasion of the environment and anyone who does not accept that is stupid. We are prepared to accept that small invasion of the environment. Is it not far better that our people are given employment at home rather than working in the sewers of Coventry or Birmingham? I hope the Minister will use his good offices to try to help in any way. I hope he goes along to his colleague, the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries, who before he became Minister was a director of the APCO group to see about the establishment of an oil refinery on the island. The Minister said that but, perhaps, that was a political gimmick at the general election time. If he still has any say with the directors, I wish he would urge them to establish this industry in Whiddy Island. I have not had time to study the secret document which was released by An Foras Forbartha about the establishment of the oil refinery in that area. I hope Whiddy is still O.K. for it.

Mr. P. Barry

It is still all right.

Mr. Crowley

So when they refer to the Beara Peninsula they do not include Bantry Bay. I hope the Minister can give us an assurance that this will be all right.

Mr. P. Barry

The planning permission is there and it can be built on that site.

Mr. Crowley

I again urge the Minister to take this matter very seriously. I believe his officials may have been in contact with the trade union officials representing the men working in the places I have mentioned and if he and his office can in any way ensure that no redundancies will occur he will be doing a good service for West Cork.

Mr. P. Barry

I am glad to give Deputy Crowley the chance to have this raised on the Adjournment. If what Deputy Crowley has said here tonight is being repeated by him in West Cork and the Bantry area, I am very glad to give the assurance that the enforcement regulations will not be responsible for any unemployment there. He made four statements, none of which is true. He said that giant tankers of VLCC would in future be serviced by two tugs. That is not true. He said that the Bantry terminal is being downgraded to a transhipment——

Mr. Crowley

I said it could be.

Mr. P. Barry

That is not true. He said that I over-reacted by insisting that all ships be berthed outside the bay. That is not true.

Mr. Crowley

I would refer the Minister to his speech in October.

Mr. P. Barry

VLCC have been coming into Bantry Bay in increasing numbers since 1968 but then there was the oil crisis in 1973 and there was a a run down in stocks in 1973 not just in Bantry. I am talking about the general situation in Europe. During 1974 even though the consumption of oil products had dropped at the consumer level throughout Europe, there was a restocking into refineries and storages throughout that year in part because of fears of another oil crisis, another prohibition of supplies out of the Middle East and partly because of replacement of stocks that had run down during the crisis from October, 1974 to February, 1975, so that the full effects of the oil crisis were not felt until 1975. At that stage and during the last year there was a serious drop in the amount of oil being shipped out of the Middle East through Bantry into Europe. Of course, Bantry was affected by that. There was a cutback in the refining capacity in Europe and there is at the moment by between 25 per cent and 35 per cent. Therefore, the oil was not required by those refineries, it was not transhipped from Bantry, was not ordered by Gulf from Middle East countries and there was a falling off in business generally.

Added to that, Gulf opened their terminal Bilbao which is similar to the Bantry terminal and that caused competition for Bantry. All these affected the throughput of oil as far as Bantry is concerned and Gulf say at the moment that it will be lower in 1976 than in 1975.

Mr. Crowley

That is why the redundancies are feared.

Mr. P. Barry

If there is a down turn in business, there is always a danger of redundancies. There is no danger of the downgrading of the Bantry terminal. It does not even make sense to talk in those terms because what Deputy Crowley is suggesting is that you put the oil in there and leave it there forever. What is the point of putting it in there unless they are to tranship it? It is a transhipment terminal for carrying oil in large quantities from the Middle East, storing it in Bantry Bay and then transhipping it to refineries all over Europe. I know the Gulf Oil Company are in negotiation with the various unions at Bantry. Nothing that is being done there will be finally agreed by my Department unless we are absolutely sure it will not interfere with the safety of operations in Bantry. Deputy Crowley may be sure that in the transhipment of oil, in the handling of the tankers, safety will be assured by my Department.

Mr. Crowley

So four tugs will still be needed.

Mr. P. Barry

That is so. There is no question about that. The Gulf Oil Company have been eight years in Bantry and they have been exceedingly co-operative, under the previous Minister and myself in any arrangements they were asked to make by us to see that the oil and the shipments were handled in a safe manner. That disposes of the Deputy's first two complaints. He said I over-reacted by insisting that all ships should be berthed outside the bay. When Gulf set up in Bantry they did so on an understanding in regard to berthing, unloading and so on. When the oil spillage occurred in October, 1974, there were ships coming forward full of oil and there was not the capacity to take them. At that stage we discovered there was a number of tankers berthed in Bantry Bay.

Officers of my Department put the point to me that this was unsafe and when this was pointed out to Gulf, that ships might be berthed in fog, that they would be moored, that they could not be seen by fishing boats, Gulf agreed. I said at that stage that they should berth one at the terminal and have one moored off the terminal at anchor pending sonar research by them on the seabed. That research has now been completed, giving them locations of level safe anchorages. They can be moored at specific points. They have now been decided after the sonar survey was carried out and they have been identified as safe anchorages and four LCCs can park there from now on at specific points and eleven shuttle tankers all at the one time in Bantry Bay. There was no restriction on the parking of shuttle tankers at any stage. They could be parked there at any stage. It was only on the LCCs. That was for one tanker at the berth, one moored off, and that was relaxed last summer for a second LCC. In fact, there was no hindrance on the throughout of oil as a result of any action taken by me.

Mr. Crowley

So, you over-reacted at first and changed your mind?

An Ceann Comhairle

Could the Minister be allowed to make his speech in his own way?

Mr. P. Barry

No. I did not change my mind. Conditions were totally different. The sonar survey has now been completed and this is what has identified the fact that there are safe places to anchor and it can be done and I would be totally negligent in my duty if I had not done that.

Deputy Crowley says that there are no borrowing powers in the 1975 Bill. That is not true. The 1946 Act is the Principal Act. All that the 1975 Bill does is to add Bantry Bay to the list of harbours under the 1946 Act. The Deputy would want to look at the 1946 Act to see what the powers of a harbour board are under that Act.

Mr. Crowley

What classification?

Mr. P. Barry

Class 2 harbour. They will have the borrowing powers as a class 2 harbour under the 1946 Act.

Mr. Crowley

Which is nil.

An Ceann Comhairle

Order. The Minister to conclude.

Mr. P. Barry

It is a perfectly simple matter for Deputy Crowley to look at the Act, which is in the Dáil Library.

I should say something about the position of unemployment in Bantry. A turn-down came in the consumption of oil in Europe. Bantry terminal did not supply one drop of oil into this country. Every drop of oil that went through Bantry was used outside the Republic of Ireland. The Fianna Fáil Party are fond of pretending that the recession is the fault of this Government. Positive proof of the Europe-wide recession is the reduction in demand for oil, most of which went through Bantry. Oil is not going through Bantry because of the recession in England and in Europe. There is not a demand for oil. As soon as the economy of Europe recovers, Bantry will come back to its own and will play a major part and that will be very welcome.

I remember 1967-68, when the refinery was being put in there and they were screaming for a harbour authority in West Cork. I do not remember Deputy Crowley's voice being heard. I remember myself making a speech in which I said that the people objecting to this were wrong, that it was an ideal location for it, that rather than being an environmental hazard it would, in fact, prove to be a tourist attraction.

Mr. Crowley

For an oil refinery?

Mr. P. Barry

No, for the Bantry Bay terminal.

Mr. Crowley

I was all for it.

Mr. P. Barry

Maybe. I am sorry. I do not remember the Deputy saying so. I am convinced that Gulf will be in West Cork and in Bantry for a long time and as soon as the economy of Europe picks up and there is a renewed demand for oil products they will be transshipped through Gulf for the benefit of the town of Bantry.

Mr. Crowley

I hope the Minister is right.

The Dáil adjourned at 9.15 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 5th February, 1976.