Deputy David Andrews gave me notice of his intention to raise this matter on the Adjournment. Our time is limited. May I suggest that the Deputy takes six minutes and the Minister four minutes. Is that satisfactory?
Adjournment Debate. - B & I — Sealink Dispute.
Yes. I would like to give one of my constituency colleagues some of my time to say a few words, so I will be brief. We all know what this dispute is about. It is a commercial dispute between a State company, the B & I, and the private company, Sealink. Having regard to the failure of the talks yesterday it appears that the resolution to the problem may be found elsewhere. I believe it is unfair to invite the Minister for Communications to get involved in this dispute because the solution lies with the two companies. Far be it from me to take a jaundiced or prejudiced view of this matter, but I respectfully suggest that B & I are adopting a dog in the manger attitude to Sealink who are operating from Dún Laoghaire port.
This dispute arose from the failure to bring into Dún Laoghaire the Stena Sailor, a supplementary roll on roll off vessel to the St. Columba. The purpose of the invitation to bring in the Stena Sailor by Sealink was to leave the St. Columba free for tourist traffic and to use the Stena Sailor for haulage and heavy goods vehicles. I am not blaming the Minister for this refusal, because I believe B & I are operating part of an alleged agreement between themselves and Sealink in a very unfair way. We see the failure of the Stena Sailor to come into Dún Laoghaire as an attack on the future development of Dún Laoghaire Harbour. As a long serving Deputy in the constituency I have called for a harbour authority on the one hand and a unified car ferry terminal on the other.
We in Dún Laoghaire do not have any row with B & I but we are concerned with their failure to provide a haulage vessel and penalising Sealink for providing a roll on roll off vessel. I am asking B & I to look at this area in the context of the future development of Dún Laoghaire as a commercial harbour with a unified car ferry terminal. The failure to allow the Stena Sailor in is a symbol of what we consider to be an attack on the future development of Dún Laoghaire. The consequences of this refusal may have a ripple effect on Sealink's commercial attitude to the future development of Dún Laoghaire.
The prospect of Sealink totally withdrawing their operations from Dún Laoghaire is too horrific to contemplate. We are talking about a workforce on land and at sea in excess of 400 people. We are talking about the future development of Dún Laoghaire as a commercial centre. We are talking about Dún Laoghaire in the context of tourism — its hotels, guesthouses, the already severely pressed local shop owners and storekeepers and so on. These are what we consider to be the drastic consequences of the refusal to allow the Stena Sailor to come into Dún Laoghaire. It is more than a refusal to allow a ship to come into port. It symbolises all those elements to which I have already referred.
In Ireland we operate an open ports policy. I understand that to mean that a commercial operator can bring in as much shipping traffic as he wants. It is very unfair to victimise Sealink, as is happening at present arising out of a dispute to which they do not want to be party and I want to remind the House that the future of Dún Laoghaire depends on the urgent resolution of this problem.
May I say a few words?
I am calling the Minister of State to reply.
Deputy Andrews said he was willing to share his time with me.
I have already indicated that there were six minutes for the Deputy and four minutes for the Minister to reply. I cannot alter that because time is limited.
May I support my colleague Deputy Andrews? This incident highlights the need for a harbour authority in Dún Laoghaire to be established as quickly as possible.
I would be very pleased to facilitate Deputies if we had more time but the time is limited because of the vote just taken.
I welcome this opportunity to correct any misconception which may have arisen in relation to the action the Minister for Communications took last week of requesting the Commissioners for Public Works not to provide facilities in Dún Laoghaire for the Sealink vessel the Stena Sailor.
B & I had informed the Minister that the Sealink proposal to operate this additional vessel into Dún Laoghaire was in breach of the agreement which exists between B & I and Sealink. As the House is aware, the ferry operations of the two companies on the Irish Sea are the subject of a revenue pooling and capacity sharing agreement which both companies entered into last year covering the two year period 1986-87.
The Minister was and remains anxious that the issues in dispute between the two shipping companies on this matter should be resolved between the parties themselves as rapidly as possible. He was aware that discussions at a very senior level between the two companies had been arranged for yesterday, 24 March.
He took the view therefore that, pending the outcome of those discussions, the status quo in relation to shipping services into Dún Laoghaire should be preserved. His views in this regard were conveyed to Sealink and the Commissioners of Public Works. Sealink, nonetheless, indicated their intention of proceeding with the introduction of the service in advance of the discussions arranged. At the Minister's request, the Office of Public Works indicated to Sealink that in that event facilities would not be made available for the Sealink vessel.
Sealink were accordingly aware in good time of the Minister's position and that of the Office of Public Works. The Minister was, therefore, disappointed that Sealink chose, nonetheless, to sail the vessel in question into Dún Laoghaire on Friday last, 20 March. In line with the position which had been indicated earlier to Sealink, offloading facilities were not provided for the vessel by the Office of Public Works.
Later on Friday, representatives of Sealink sought a meeting with officials of the Department. At that meeting, the Sealink representatives confirmed their agreement to discussions with B & I on Tuesday, 24 March 1987, on this issue. They also asked if the Minister would agree to the unloading of the vessel, on the basis of an undertaking from Sealink that the vessel would not operate into Dún Laoghaire pending consideration by him of the outcome of the discussions arranged for 24 March.
On the basis of that undertaking, and having regard to the difficulties which had arisen for those with cargo on board the Stena Sailor, the Minister requested the Office of Public Works to provide the necessary unloading facilities for the vessel.
I understand that the talks held yesterday between the two companies were not conclusive, that both companies are considering their position, and that further talks are envisaged. The Minister expects to hear from both sides when talks have been concluded and he will consider the position further at that stage.
I support the line being taken by the Minister.
That is an extraordinary statement in the light of what Deputy Barrett said.
(Interruptions.)
The Dáil adjourned at 9 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 26 March 1987.