Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 15 Feb 1984

Vol. 347 No. 13

Adjournment Debate. - Greencastle (Donegal) Harbour.

I thank the Chair for allowing me to raise this subject on the Adjournment and the Minister for coming here this evening. The last time any substantial sum of money was expended on the port of Greencastle was in 1963. In 1978 the estimate for the development works on the pier was £840,000 and Donegal County Council agreed to pay their 25 per cent contribution. Unfortunately, because the situation has drastically changed since then and costs have escalated, the council will find it difficult to meet their contribution. In 1979 a revised estimate gave the cost at £1.5 million, in 1981 that increased to £2 million and the total cost is now estimated at more than £3 million. At 1983 costs the local authorities' contribution will be in the region of £60,000 per annum for 30 years. This will be a very severe imposition on the local authority. However, the Minister told me he was not responsible for that aspect and that I should get in touch with another Department.

There is a dire need for the development of this fishing port. Fishing is a very extensive business in Donegal and the economy of the county, and the country, depends on fishing. Killybegs serves the west of the county, Burtonport the north-west and Greencastle the east. The Department have spent a considerable amount of money developing another part on Lough Swilly, Leenan, which will complement the Greencastle port. There is extensive fishing in the North Atlantic and these ports are very important to the fishermen.

There is an estimated turnover of £4 million in the Greencastle port. Over the last three or four winters our fishermen fished for mackerel in the North Atlantic and these fishermen had to go to the port of Derry to discharge their catches. This meant they lost money because they had to travel 25 miles to and from Greencastle.

I do not need to stress the importance of developing this port. In fairness to the present Minister and his predecessors it must be said that they have shown a willingness to develop this port. The time has come to take action, otherwise fishermen who are prepared to invest in larger boats will be denied the opportunity to expand. Statistics show that every fisherman at sea can create three onshore jobs. In Greencastle there are approximately 150 to 200 fishermen fishing from that port and the onshore jobs are limited. There could be an expansion of processing catches if the proper facilities were provided. Unemployment in the Inishowen Peninsula is the highest in the country and there is a great need to create jobs in that area. Here is a golden opportunity for the Government to help. They could provide the money which should have been spent over the past five or six years. This would be an investment in the future of the fishermen of Greencastle, the young people who would get onshore jobs and enterprising people would be prepared to invest in the fishing industry if the proper facilities were provided.

I understand that Donegal County Council wish to send a deputation to meet the Minister and that the Minister has had consultations with the fishermen's co-operative. I would be interested to hear what will be done for this area in the future. I would be very concerned if there was any cut-back on the planned development because this development was to make this a prosperous and enterprising fishing port. Any cut-back in the planned development would not be to the benefit of the fishermen or of anybody who wished to invest in the fish processing industry. If we have to go back to the drawing board there will be a delay which should not be allowed, because we all know how urgent it is to develop our ports. As I said, here is an opportunity for the Government to take action. I hope we will hear some good news from the Minister tonight and that he will give a commitment that something will be done to help Greencastle in 1984.

I am giving way now to Deputy Gallagher.

I welcome the opportunity to add my voice to that of my colleague about the necessity to develop the harbour at Greencastle. Donegal County Council have given a definite commitment to contribute 25 per cent of the overall cost. That contribution was available in our estimate a few years ago and we hoped that money would be forthcoming.

Our main purpose this evening is to impress on the Minister the urgency of providing moneys out of this year's capital allocation for harbour development. I understand that most of this money would be going to Howth and a small percentage to Killybegs. I was heartened to hear the Minister of State at the Department of Fisheries and Forestry, while answering questions in relation to harbour development, say that there had been no definite decision taken yet as to where this money would be spent. I would hope that Greencastle would be one of the ports that would definitely be considered for development during 1984. As was pointed out by Deputy Conaghan, Greencastle is a port which could be used extensively by the larger boats for fishing off the north-west coast of Donegal and the west coast of Scotland, boats which at present go as far north as Stornoway. Were it not for these enterprising fishermen who invested money in larger boats there would be no mackerel at all landed in the country. It is unfortunate that these people must steam back to Killybegs, some 24 hours steaming, as time and fuel at sea are so costly. We must consider making a facility available to them at Greencastle.

Greencastle basically is a white fish port, the reason being that the larger boats could not use it. The progressive fishermen of Greencastle have proved themselves over the years. I can say without fear of contradiction that the quality of fish coming out of Greencastle on to any market in Ireland, the United Kingdom or any continental one—where they are shipping some of their fresh fish at present — is as good as any other fish leaving the United Kingdom or Ireland. If the moneys are given for the development of this harbour certainly these progressive fishermen will take advantage of it. The boats based in Killybegs will also take advantage of the facilities at Greencastle harbour.

Greencastle is noted for its quality salmon which can compete with the best quality in any part of the world. This port has proven itself through its quality white fish, salmon and enterprising fishermen. If given the opportunity I believe they should be given and the commitment on the part of the Donegal County Council to ensure that the moneys are made available it can only lead to success. I think we can speak on behalf of Donegal County Council and guarantee that if the Minister provides the moneys this year we can match every £3 with a £1 from Donegal County Council. A port with a turnover of £4 million each year— without taking into consideration at all any of the larger boats—needs to be seriously examined by the Minister. If this harbour is not taken into consideration this year Greencastle, like many other harbours in need of development in Donegal, such as Burtonport, will deteriorate further. If moneys are to be spent by the Department of Fisheries and Forestry then it is abundantly clear that they must be spent on the development of Greencastle harbour and on the dredging of Burtonport harbour.

I was wondering when the Deputy would get to Burtonport.

I visited Howth recently. I hope the Minister, a man from the West, will look very seriously at the ports in the west which are providing jobs. The expenditure we are requesting this evening will ensure added value for those ports and greater job opportunities for the people in this area. Greencastle harbour where I have worked for many years, particularly during the salmon and white fish season, has not improved one iota in recent years. We should now offer incentives to these fishermen in the 65 to 80 foot boats category, who are at present experiencing severe difficulties due to lack of white fish and the fact that that size boat does not have the power to work the grounds where mackerel are to be found at present. We are endeavouring to entice people to take advantage of the new regulation under which FEOGA grants are made available for boats up to 33 metres. I welcome that development but I had hoped that boats of up to 40 metres would have been considered also. The larger boats should definitely be considered. While I welcome this development on the one hand I might say it is nearly impossible for the fishermen to invest in these larger boats because, as I understand it, the deposit required is in the region of 20 per cent. It should be remembered that this size of boat costs something like £2,500,000 and that a grant of 20 per cent leaves £500,000 deposit to be met by the fishermen.

The Deputy would seem to be wandering a little.

The development of Greencastle is absolutely necessary. If it is developed along the lines outlined by Deputy Conaghan then those larger boats could use it. But at present they are being hindered from doing so because of the 20 per cent deposit required by An Bord Iascaigh Mhara and the Department of Fisheries——

That is another day's work.

In the Minister's absence I was pleased to hear his Minister of State refer to all the harbours in Donegal and say that there had been no definite decision taken as yet. That being the situation, we implore of the Minister to make moneys available this year for the development of these ports.

Would the Minister allow me one minute?

It is not for me to do that.

That is why I sat down to allow Deputy Harte some of our time.

There are two or three minutes left.

I was unaware that this debate was taking place until it was brought to my attention by Deputy McGinley. While I welcome the interest Deputy Gallagher has taken in it I could not help but hear him say that Greencastle had not developed at all in the last few years. Nothing could be further from the truth. Greencastle has developed. I know there is need for further development there but, if it has not developed in recent years, one might well ask who has been in power here in recent years, who is responsible for this? I might remind Deputy Gallagher that the money identified as being needed for the development of Greencastle harbour came as a result of an in-depth inquiry into cross-Border communications, known as the Donegal/Derry cross-Border survey which was put forward for EEC money. The person who pushed that most was the present Taoiseach as Minister for Foreign Affairs. Under the Deputy's then Government there was identified a need of £50 million by the EEC. Part of that £50 million was to be spent on Greencastle. The EEC Commission mentioned that £50 million was needed, that the Dublin Government would pay £12,500,000 and the Westminster Government the other £12,500,000——

——and the Deputy does not want any more of it. If Donegal does not want it for Greencastle, we will take it in Cork.

Deputy Gene Fitzgerald should watch Cork.

Obviously the Deputy does not want it for Greencastle.

What I am saying is this, that the amount that was mentioned was £50 million. As soon as there was a change in Government in 1977 that amount decreased to £40 million. Deputy O'Kennedy, as Minister for Foreign Affairs, said he never heard of the figure of £50 million.

That was only another gallup promise; I would not worry too much about that.

If there has been a neglect of Greencastle it was by the Fianna Fáil Party in refusing to put up the money. The money that was meant for this project was £50 million and as soon as there was a change of Government in 1977 that decreased to £40 million and Deputy O'Kennedy has gone so far as to say that he never heard of a figure of £50 million.

(Interruptions.)

If there was neglect of Greencastle, it was caused by the Fianna Fáil Party failing to put up the necessary money. However, having said that, belated as it is, I welcome the interest of Deputy Conaghan and Deputy Gallagher in trying to get Greencastle going. I know that the Minister in office at the moment has already agreed to visit Greencastle.

The Deputy's time is now up.

The Minister will be announcing in his own good time what this Government propose to do for Greencastle.

Maybe we will hear it now.

We will not need the vocal support of either Deputy Gallagher or Deputy Conaghan.

Deputy Harte should have used his time trying to help the people of Greencastle. It is a shame that he used his two minutes looking back. That reinforces our opinion of his attitude towards North-West Donegal, but we will look after that area. We will assist and give the Government some of our time. We are glad to hear the commitment from Deputy Harte.

Do the Deputies want to hear the good news, or do they not?

We would be rich were it not for Deputy Gallagher.

The Minister has been called here to answer a question and he should be allowed to reply to it.

The proposed scheme for Greencastle is estimated to cost about £4 million over a three-year period. It has to be said that Donegal County Council would be expected to provide 25 per cent of that sum. As we all know, the financing of a scheme of this magnitude must be spread over a number of years and before the scheme is commenced the necessary funding must be available to meet the contractual commitments which must be entered into.

For several years, the major part of the provision in the Fisheries Vote in the harbours area has been taken up by major works in fishery harbours like Killybegs, Castletownbere and Howth, with the result that many other ports badly in need of development have been neglected, or at least their development has been deferred. This has come about as a result of the decision taken some years ago in relation to designated fishery harbours—something with which I happen to agree, even though it was carried out by another Government.

The Greencastle proposal has been in the Department for, I think, about ten years and while many plans have been conceived in that time, I would hope to act as midwife on the delivery of at least some of these plans in the not too distant future.

There are many other harbours in the country competing with Greencastle and I must say that Deputy Gallagher came into the House a few weeks ago—and I do not know if Deputy Conaghan is aware of this — demanding that Burtonport be given priority in County Donegal. He did mention that tonight also as being of major importance. Greencastle is competing with places like Schull, Clogher Head, Kilmore Quay, Burtonport, Rossaveal and other ports as major potential for development.

The three fishing ports are supplementary, one to the other.

We are doing this in a concentrated attack.

I appreciate that. I fully accept that improvements are necessary at Greencastle, when one considers the level of activity taking place there. It has hard working and very progressive fishermen who deserve somewhat better facilities than they have at present.

The major works at Killybegs are nearly completed. We are talking here about the provision of a synchro-lift which will complete the job there and the Howth works will also be completed very shortly. These projects were soaking up the major part of our finances for harbour development. We shall then be able to turn to the proposal at Greencastle, which has been agreed on the basis of an amended scheme. The original scheme was for the construction of a pier which would provide 200 feet of berthage and water depths of up to seven feet at mean low water at spring tide and the extension of the existing pier to provide 400 feet of additional berthage and at least 12 feet water depth at mean low water, spring tide.

There were other matters, for instance, deepening 400 linear feet of the existing berthage to nine feet from the present depth of seven feet and provision of approximately 8,000 square feet of an additional reclaimed area to provide working space for the fishermen. There was also provision for improved lighting and extension of oil bunkering facilities on the extended pier. They were the original proposals. These proposals have been scaled down from a previous proposed scheme because of the cost factor. The scaled down version only pertains to the reduction of the cleared area necessary and also the omission of an auction hall. This has been discussed with fishery interests in Greencastle and with the management there. They agreed that there was no need at present for the major facility of cleared area, which can be reduced, or for the auction hall. Deputy Conaghan's fears, it is hoped, will not be realised in that any changes will not entail delays from the point of view of the Board of Works with regard to planning and redesigning, because we are talking about specific matters which are being taken out.

The Office of Public Works have been asked to furnish up-to-date estimates of the expenditure for 1984. The problem here is that, as the Deputies will realise, there are contractual commitments outstanding in relation to works which are on-going. We are awaiting the details from the Board of Works to see what our contractual commitments are out of a total sum of £2.7 million this year for harbour development. We have not yet received these details but when we get them, we shall prepare a scheme of work which will take in the balance of the money left out of the £2.7 million.

There are several urgent projects to be looked at and, indeed, I can tell the House that Greencastle figures as one of the priority projects on that list. The Deputies can take it from me that I will do everything possible to facilitate improvements at Greencastle. I finish by saying that I hope to be able to commence work there in 1984.

Would the Minister accept an invitation to go up to Greencastle to meet the fishermen there?

I would be delighted to.

We would all be delighted to see the Minister.

The Dáil adjourned at 9 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 16 February 1984.

Barr
Roinn