I will explain my motives. Before anybody spoke to me and having read the report and considered the recommendation of the consultants that the headquarters should be split in two, I made the decision that that ran contrary to the concept of a united port company. I announced it at the opening press conference in Limerick, and I claim credit for that. The reason for my decision is simple. It does not make any sense to have two divisions in the headquarters of the company as recommended by the consultant. That is not to say that some administrative work which is specific to the port of Limerick will not be carried out in Limerick. However, the main corporate headquarters should be in Foynes. The combined business of the two companies and the facilities over which most business influence can be exerted by the new port company are at Foynes. Also, the thrust of Government policy is away from centralisation in major towns and cities. I explained this fully to the boards and management of the two port companies when I visited them and believe my view has been accepted by both.
I introduced a specific amendment to the Bill in the Seanad on foot of the concerns raised about the identification of the headquarters location of the new port company. The Bill now empowers the Minister, in addition to prescribing by order matters such at the company name, also to provide for the identification of the headquarters location. It will be at Foynes in the case of the new port company, and I was already committed to that.
It is somewhat puzzling that despite public pronouncements on issues such as the location of the headquarters, there remains a degree of unease and lack of acceptance that commitments given will be delivered upon. While these fears are unjustified and are groundless, nevertheless, the more clarity there is now about future actions and the new structures the better. For this reason I announced on Second Stage that Kieran McSweeney, the current chairman of the Foynes Port Company, who lives in Limerick – that was an important factor in my decision – and who is a member of the transitional implementation board, has agreed to accept my invitation to act as chairperson of the new single port company. When the board is constituted in accordance with section 43(2)(e) of the Harbours Act, 1996, as amended by this Bill, I propose to nominate Mr. McSweeney in that capacity. I am delighted that Mr. McSweeney, an IBEC nominee to his current position, has agreed to take on this challenge and to bring his strong business and commercial expertise as well as his public service background to making the new company an outstanding success.
Regarding inserting a specific provision in the Bill that the new company headquarters will be located in Foynes, I am not convinced that this is necessary or in line with good legislative practice. While I note what the Deputy says in regard to the 1998 Bill, I do not accept that it is a precedent. I do not think it was good practice then, and it would not be good practice now. However, the headquarters, meaning the principal office of the company, the company's registered office, the place where the board holds its meetings – which is not to say that it cannot hold its meetings in other places if it wishes to do so – and the core of senior executive staff will be based at Foynes. I cannot be more specific than that. I will consult the implementation board on the technical details.
I intend to move very quickly once the Bill is enacted to make the appropriate order identifying Foynes as the headquarters location. My Department will ensure, in the context of its corporate governance role, that arrangements for the new headquarters at Foynes are put in place as a priority by the implementation board.
Given that we want to make this the most prestigious port in the country, it is appropriate that a new building should be built to house the new headquarters, and that new building should reflect and be reflected in a prestigious and high-profile location in Foynes. I do not for a moment feel that the Ted Russell docks in Limerick would be downgraded. The headquarters in Foynes will reflect very well on the estuary. It is in the centre of the estuary. As Deputy Deenihan says, it takes in Kerry and, if Ballylongford proves successful, it will be strategically located to Ballylongford. I was also conscious of the existence of the ferry which gives immediate access to the headquarters in County Clare. Limerick City is developing fast. It does not need to have this headquarters. It will be a major boost for Foynes to have it there. It is not necessary for me to enshrine that in legislation. My word is my bond, and it will be a brave Minister who would come after me and change it.