Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 10 Jun 1959

Vol. 51 No. 3

Public Business. - Local Government Bill, 1959—Second and Subsequent Stages.

Question proposed: That the Bill be now read a Second Time.

The purpose of this Bill is to remove a special restriction on the building of bridges over the River Shannon. Where a bridge over navigable water has to be reconstructed, the general procedure is that a public inquiry is held into the merits of the particular solution proposed. Following the inquiry, the Minister for Local Government makes a bridge order, but the consent of the Minister for Industry and Commerce is required; he is the Minister concerned with navigation interests. In the case of the River Shannon the Commissioners of Public Works must be consulted also, in their capacity as Shannon Navigation Commissioners. Navigation interests in the case of the Shannon are therefore amply protected by these requirements.

It sometimes happens that, where there is an existing opening span, the best engineering solution is a new fixed span which will give adequate clearance for navigation. This is at present prevented, in the case of the Shannon, by the Local Government Act, 1955, which was amended to that effect at the Committee Stage in the Dáil. In the case of Athlone bridge the local inquiry showed that the proper solution on engineering and economic grounds is a fixed bridge. The proviso in the Act of 1955, however, obliged the Minister for Local Government to make a bridge order providing for a new opening span. This would be more costly and difficult to provide. The Westmeath county council and other local bodies have protested against the position thus created and have urged the enactment of the legislation now before the Seanad. County councils concerned with other Shannon bridges where there is a prima facie case for a new fixed span also favour the proposed legislation.

The Bill introduces no new principle in the matter of navigation rights. It was at one time assumed that the bridge order procedure under Part IV of the Local Government Act, 1946, enabled a bridge to be constructed even if it involved a curtailment of navigation rights. The original intention of subsection (1) of section 40 of the Local Government Act, 1955, was to put this beyond doubt. The words excluding the River Shannon were inserted at the Committee Stage in the Dáil. The restriction is an unreal one, because navigation is already limited on the Shannon by fixed bridges at its entrance and by narrow locks with high cills. Some of the so-called "opening" bridges, including Athlone, have not been able to function as such for many years, but they have afforded sufficient clearance to the navigation using the river including pleasure launches.

In commending the Bill to the Seanad, I can assure them that every consideration will be given to rights of navigation and that there will be no question of a fixed span being provided at a site where the clearance is not adequate for navigation purposes.

As I mentioned, a bridge order had already been made in the case of Athlone bridge, providing for a new opening span, although a local inquiry had shown that a fixed span would give the same clearance to navigation as the existing bridge had afforded since 1942, when the opening span ceased to function. Special provision is therefore made for this case in section 2 of the Bill, which proposes to amend the Athlone Bridge Order by providing for a fixed span instead of an opening span.

In conclusion, I should like to stress the urgency of the Bill. Severe weight restrictions have been imposed in the case of some of the Shannon bridges and reconstruction work is urgently necessary. The enactment of this Bill will enable work to proceed at once on the design and construction of a relatively simple new span at Athlone, and will enable the necessary steps to be taken for the provision of new permanent spans (fixed or open, as the evidence warrants) at the other sites requiring urgent attention.

I welcome this Bill. I think it is most necessary that some of the bridges over the Shannon at the present time should be repaired and that nothing should be allowed to stand in the way of repair of these bridges which constitute a great menace to traffic, particularly those bridges where there is a weight limit and a speed limit. I am fairly familiar with some of these bridges as I pass over them frequently on my way to the west on different routes and I have often thought that they should be widened and made more safe by the provision of fixed spans. It seems to me that timber structures at the present time, with the weight of lorries and cars, are quite out of date. I hope the work will be commenced as rapidly as the Minister states.

This Bill is necessary in order to permit the local authority to erect, as common sense would suggest, a fixed bridge. Had the Bill of 1955 been allowed to go through as originally drafted, this Bill would not be necessary now; but the then Deputy MacBride insisted on behalf of a pressure group around the town of Athlone, who called themselves the Inland Waterways Association at the time—and who certainly are not contributing very much to the rates of Westmeath, Longford or any other county—on putting in an amendment to the 1955 Bill that a swivel bridge be built across the Shannon. Nobody was in favour of it except the then Deputy MacBride. He was able to bring sufficient pressure on the Government to induce them to come to the Dáil and bring in an amendment to put an imposition of £100,000 on the ratepayers of five counties in the Midlands. That is a sufficiently clear indication of the tactics that can be applied by a Deputy who was then a leading light in the Coalition Government. I objected to it at the time and I had various deputations here from the Westmeath Ratepayers' Associations, especially the Association of South Westmeath, protesting against this imposition. The people of Athlone and district were up in arms against it. They can now thank that former Deputy for the inconvenience of having a baileybridge, which is a temporary structure, across the Shannon.

I welcome the Bill because it will enable the local authority to go ahead with their bridge programme. Not very long ago, I had a letter from Athlone Urban Council urging that this Bill should be implemented at short notice and urging the representatives of the area to speed its passage through the Houses of the Oireachtas. Navigation on the River Shannon is a dead duck. It is time Mr. MacBride and his adherents recognised that. Anyone who wants a mast on a boat that will not pass under a fixed bridge should be obliged to carry a saw with him.

Somebody should drown himself?

If anybody is to drown himself, I suggest the Senator. Go to the highest part on the bailey bridge in Athlone and jump in.

That is counselling a crime and is very unparliamentary.

If Senator O'Quigley was as long dealing with Senator L'Estrange as I am, he would not count it a crime to curtail his activities.

You would love to get him out of the way and curtail his activities.

Fortunately, we are well able to do so.

He is getting under your skin.

No. I am sure the Senator, as a member of Westmeath County Council, welcomes the fact that the ratepayers will be saved the trouble of erecting in Athlone a swivel bridge that is unnecessary and entirely unsuited to present-day traffic, purely to please Mr. MacBride and his little pressure group around the town of Athlone.

I should like to welcome this Bill. But I should like to say that good roads lose much of their value when they are frustrated by bad bridges, and I should like to ask the Minister when he has done this task of constructing a bridge across the Shannon, could he turn his mind effectively to the bridge across the Barrow in New Ross. For what seems to me to have been endless years now, we have had to crawl across that bridge at under 10 m.p.h. It is deplorable— since this is a main tourist road—that this road should be frustrated by a thoroughly bad bridge. I would urge the Minister to do all he can to speed up the rebuilding of that main bridge. It is an eyesore. It is a danger. It is a frustration to anyone who wants to make reasonable speed from Dublin to Waterford or from Wexford to Waterford. So, I hope the Minister will not stop at the Shannon but will proceed very soon to cross the Barrow as effectively as the Shannon.

I do not feel there is much to answer on this, except to say that this Bill, if and when it becomes law, will mean that in the future the Minister and the Department of Local Government will be allowed to use their discretion as to whether a swivel or a fixed bridge should be erected when we want to reconstruct any of these bridges on the Shannon, whereas in the past we were tied hand and foot by existing law and had to replace a swivel bridge with a swivel bridge, whether or not a need existed for it.

In so far as the Barrow Bridge is concerned, I understand that Wexford Co. Council have already had some preliminary survey made by a consulting engineer. I cannot say anything more except that if the matter is brought to our attention by the local authority, we shall try to facilitate the reconstruction or replacement of the bridge, if it is desirable or necessary.

Might I ask the Minister if he would take the first opportunity of crossing that bridge and having a look at it himself? It is a deplorable situation at the moment. If he has any power at all, I hope he will urge on the local authority to do something soon. It has been down there as an eyesore and a danger in this condition for many years now.

Question put and agreed to.
Agreed to take remaining stages to-day.
Bill put through Committee, reported without amendment, received for final consideration and passed.
Barr
Roinn