Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 5 Jul 1966

Vol. 61 No. 15

Adjournment Debate. - Northern Ireland Haulage Operators.

Mr. Murphy

I asked for leave to raise on the Adjournment the action of the Minister for Transport and Power in allowing Northern Ireland lorries to operate for reward in the Republic of Ireland. I am alleging, Sir, that what the Minister is doing has no legislative authority, that he is, therefore, acting in contempt of the Oireachtas, that he is encouraging and condoning illegal haulage by operators from Northern Ireland, that his action is completely contrary to public transport policy as laid down in legislation adopted by the Oireachtas which the Minister is charged to administer. Furthermore, and very important, his action will lead to loss of employment by workers in CIE, County Donegal Railways, Londonderry and Lough Swilly Railway, and damage to the business of many legal hauliers in the Republic.

I think it is necessary, Sir, that I give the Seanad some background information so that they will understand what I am talking about. In Northern Ireland up to quite recently you had an integrated public transport organisation such as we have here with CIE. The Ulster Transport Authority was an organisation which operated rail services, bus services, lorry services and also owned hotels and workshops. In recent years the Unionist Party finally gave way to pressure to allow every owner of a lorry in Northern Ireland to carry not only his own goods but to operate for reward throughout the Six Counties. It followed from this that the railways had no future in regard to the carriage of goods. They have ceased completely to carry goods by rail; they are no longer the public carriers and the rail lines have been reduced to 200 miles. The Seanad will know that the Portadown/Derry line was closed and this created exceptional difficulties in this State in maintaining a link with County Donegal.

Special arrangements had to be made by CIE to run liner trains to Belfast and to Derry via Antrim. These arrangements are rather difficult, awkward and costly but nobody in the circumstances expected charity from the Northern Ireland Government. I am intimately concerned with this. About one half of my members in Northern Ireland have lost employment and now they are scattered to Rhodesia, Canada, Australia and all around Britain.

Mr. Lenehan

Instead of going on strike.

Mr. Murphy

And about £4 million has already been paid in compensation. That is not the end of compensation. This comparatively large amount has apparently not created any difficulty in the peculiar and complicated circumstances of financing the Imperial contribution in respect of Northern Ireland. I do not agree with that policy of the Northern Ireland Government but this is not the place to debate that or express my views about it. I expressed them strongly in the appropriate quarter. I am simply giving the necessary background information so that the Seanad will understand why this problem has come to the fore.

The trade unions representing employees in CIE first became aware of the problem when we were told at a consultative meeting with CIE last October at inter-Departmental level that the Northern Ireland Ministry were pressing for the entry of 50 operators from Northern Ireland into the Republic. These would be allowed to carry traffic into the Republic or to pick up traffic in the Republic but there would be no back carriage except with the permission of CIE in respect of County Donegal, by the two undertakings there, County Donegal Railway and Londonderry and Lough Swilly Railway. The pressure was on by the Northern Ireland Ministry to allow 50 operators to carry for reward. I am not talking about lorries carrying their own owner's goods. I am talking about carrying for reward. Fifty will be allowed to come in carrying for reward but could not pick up goods here except with the permission of the transport authority here.

CIE were opposed to that. They said that 50 would be unmanageable, that it would give rise to illegal haulage and would further create financial difficulty for CIE with inevitable damage to the Exchequer. The unions then saw officials of the Department of Transport and Power and we were told that 50 were going to be allowed in and we were further assured that the system of control would, in fact, make this number manageable. It was argued that the arrangements to be made would benefit CIE and County Donegal and the Londonderry and Lough Swilly Railway, because they in turn would have the sole right to operate into Northern Ireland for reward and that the new arrangements would effectively bar certain people who were at present operating illegally across the Border——

Mr. Garret FitzGerald

Legally.

Mr. Murphy

——and that the Minister was determined to resist pressure from them. This was confirmed by a recent publication from the licensed hauliers under an article "Irish Hauliers Are up in Arms" which quotes a letter received from the Department:

The Minister is aware that in recent years the relevant provisions of the transport law in Northern Ireland were effectively——

that possibly should be "ineffectively".

——enforced and that a small number of hauliers licensed under the Road Traffic Act have engaged in cross-Border transport to a limited extent. ...The Minister cannot accept that unauthorised operations in Northern Ireland in recent years by a few hauliers on a limited scale create a lawful interest either for them or for other members of your Association which would warrant a modification of the settled transport policy of the Government...

That letter was dated 1st April, this year.

The trade unions heard no more about the problem of the difficulty until they were asked to see the Minister last Thursday when he proceeded to read to us the answer given at Question Time by the Minister in Dáil Éireann that day. This indicated that instead of the maximum of 50 operators we had been talking about earlier, which had been pressed for by the Northern Ireland Ministry, our Minister has now decided to allow every Northern Ireland lorry operator who cared to apply for a permit to operate for reward into the Republic—every one of them. Now in return for this freedom to the Republic for Northern Ireland hauliers, the Northern Ireland Minister would allow into his territory a very limited number of licensed hauliers of the Republic whose areas of operation were contiguous to the Border.

In reply to a Parliamentary Question as to what legislative authority the Minister had for allowing Northern Ireland lorries generally to operate for reward in the Republic, the Minister was unable to refer to any legislation but appeared to indicate that Parliamentary authority was not necessary because this was an experiment and after 12 months' experience, he might consider promoting legislation. Fortunately, this is still a Parliamentary democracy and not a country in which government is exercised by Ministerial decree. I suspect that the Minister was put under political pressure by some licensed hauliers to have made legal what some of them were already doing illegally——

Mr. Garret FitzGerald

Legally.

Mr. Murphy

——and on which his Department had previously informed us that the Minister was going to stand up against this pressure. I do not know whether the Northern Ireland Ministry extracted a heavy price for this trifling concession or whether our Minister decided to make a typical flamboyant gesture to get some press mention by throwing open to all Six County operators the whole Twenty-six Counties. I am inclined to suspect the latter. In either case, he did not bother to check whether or not he was empowered to do this under existing legislation. That was the position last Thursday and this morning Congress had delivered by hand a letter, including a document which purports to be a record of the discussion which took place with representatives of Congress and the Minister last Thursday. The letter, dated 5th July, was delivered by hand this morning, and says, in paragraph 8:

The Minister's Statutory Powers for the granting of the necessary licences are contained in section 7 of the Road Transport Act, 1935, as amended—vehicle entry licences— and section 115 of the Transport Act, 1944—merchandise licences. Every Northern Ireland operator who wishes to engage in the cross-Border traffic will require, initially, a vehicle entry licence in respect of each vehicle and subsequently a merchandise licence.

This is the result of a week-end research to try to line up, within the existing legislation, what the Minister had already decided to do without any reference to the legislation. Let us look at these particular measures. I want to suggest that this is very shaky ground indeed. The Minister says—"Section 7 of the Road Transport Act, 1935, as amended". The Minister appears to be depending upon subsection (2) of section 7 which says:

The Minister may, if he so thinks fit, issue to any person who applies therefor a licence expressed to authorise such person to import into Saorstát Éireann lorries and tractors which at the time of importation comply with the statutory conditions.

Section 7 has usually been utilised to allow in a vehicle or perhaps a peculiar length of goods which could not be easily taken by public transport here and usually after consultation with the public transport organisation. But anyway it does say:

The Minister may, if he so thinks fit,

give a licence for the importation of a vehicle. That is fair enough. That is the importation of a vehicle.

We now go to the second part of it—the granting to these vehicles the right to carry for reward and the Minister, in the document given to Congress, refers to section 115 of the Transport Act, 1944, which reads:

If—

(a) it appears to the Minister (either as the result of representations made to him by any persons, representative of trade or a locality, or otherwise) that the existing merchandise road transport facilities in any area are inadequate, and

(b) the Minister is of opinion that the required additional merchandise road transport facilities can be provided more effectively and conveniently by a person other than an authorised (merchandise carrying) company,

then, instead of making an order under ...grant a merchandise licence to any person.

An Cathaoirleach

The Chair would like to remind the Senator that it is usual to allow the Minister ten minutes to reply.

Mr. Murphy

Certainly, I did not think I had spoken for so long. The whole point is this. I want to ask why does it appear to the Minister that in any and in what area the transport services are inadequate? What steps has he taken to satisfy himself that the services are inadequate and cannot be met by the existing public transport organisation and the licensed hauliers? If so, why does he attempt to deal with it by allowing in unlimited numbers of operators from outside our State. I say this is something thought up over the week-end to try to verify the decision already taken by the Minister and which does not, in fact, fit.

I would remind the Seanad that the views of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions in regard to promoting trade and contact at all levels between the two parts of the country are well known. What the Taoiseach, Captain O'Neill and their respective Ministers have been doing in recent times was advocated by Congress for many years. This, then, is not being raised in any injudicious fashion, or in opposition to citizens in the Northern part of our country. The Minister may say a lot about the promotion of the Northern Ireland operators when they come in but the fact is that they will find it quite easy to engage in wholesale illegal haulage once they come into the Republic. This will lead to loss of employment for workers in CIE and will make more expensive the railway to Derry and will also lead to loss of business within the Twenty-Six Counties.

I have said that the Minister has no right to be generous to Six County operators at the expense of the livelihood of quite a number of workers here. His responsibility is primarily to transport and power in the Republic and the workers in the Republic. I contrast what he said with what his colleague the Minister for Industry and Commerce said when asked in the Dáil last week to comment on the disappointment of the Northern Minister of Commerce in regard to the recent talks on freeing trade between the two parts of Ireland. Deputy Dr. Hillery said that the position of the Government was that they would put Six County industrialists at an advantage vis-a-vis the British industrialists—and I quote—“our first consideration is our own industrialists.” We are not talking here about industrialists, we are talking primarily about the workers. The first responsibility of the Minister for Transport and Power and his Government here must be to the people who are employed and have business in this territory. I condemn the action of the Minister. It is not in accordance with legislation, and in spite of the research made over the weekend it is quite illegal, and what he has been doing is in contempt of the Oireachtas.

Mr. Garret FitzGerald

I would appreciate if the Minister would permit me to take a minute and half of his time.

Minister for Transport and Power (Mr. Childers)

A minute and a half.

Mr. Garret FitzGerald

I just want to clarify a statement made by Senator Murphy. He said that this haulage which is at present proceeding and which was to be restricted under the agreement which was privately made between the unions, CIE and the Minister for Transport and Power, was illegal. My information is that it is perfectly legal, that these hauliers were licensed to operate for a temporary period legally in this country, and that the Northern Government in their discretion decided to permit them to operate in Northern Ireland whatever technical illegality operated in that area. They have been operating for years. The proposal to take away their rights to operate and to give a new monopoly to CIE, which was fortunately frustrated at the last moment, was one which would have dealt a serious blow to our export trade, and indeed one of the reasons why this agreement was subsequently frustrated and changed was that one particular firm was about to lose £100,000 export business because it was not going to be allowed to employ existing facilities in Northern Ireland. It is most fortunate that this private conspiracy was, in fact, frustrated at the last moment and that under this arrangement as it now stands it will be possible to have a continuation of this cheaper form of transport than that which would have existed under the arrangement contemplated.

An Cathaoirleach

It is now time for the Minister to conclude.

Mr. Childers

The Government decided in the light of the Free Trade Area Agreement and the growing liberalisation of our relationships with the North to ensure that the cost of transporting goods from and to the North should be at the lowest possible level, and they deliberately decided to liberalise this traffic by permitting Northern Ireland hauliers to come down here and back haul into the North, and to permit some 281 licensed hauliers whose areas are contiguous to the Border to carry traffic to the North and to back haul. In addition CIE, the Donegal Railways, and the Derry and Lough Swilly Railway will continue their traffic, but they will have to continue it in a highly competitive spirit. That is the position, and it is a firm decision of the Government that has been made in connection with the whole of our arrangements to expand trade between North and South.

As far as the law is concerned I am quite satisfied, having consulted the legal authorities, that I am entitled under section 7 of the 1935 Transport Act to permit the entry of Northern Ireland hauliers to apply for such a permit, and that under the Transport Act, 1944, section 115, I am permitted to grant merchandise licences to Northern Ireland hauliers who have received an entry permit under the 1935 Act, and that the matter lies in my sole discretion as Minister for Transport and Power, and that it is a matter for me to decide whether transport arrangements are adequate.

There may have been up to now an arrangement between CIE and the Ulster Transport Authority which confined the carriage of goods in certain areas. It is up to me to decide whether having regard to the existing arrangements we are making for expanding trade the transport arrangements are still adequate. There is nothing in the Act which involves me in having to give any kind of explanation in relation to statistics or the cost of vehicles operating or the conditions under which vehicles operate in relation to the issue of these licences. That is the position, to put it in brief.

It is not intended to liberalise transport for reward in the State itself. That could be a matter for long time policy. That will be considered when transport legislation comes up for review in 1970. There may, before that time, be a minor Bill to change the present regulations in regard to the operation of licensed hauliers, simply because a great many of those regulations date back to the conditions of 1933 and 1944. There have been changes since in the character of the roads, the character of vehicles and in the character of trade. But that would be a minor measure.

The only reason which would compel the Government to reconsider more speedily the whole question of the protection of CIE and its general position would be a very major and continuous disruption of services or any other kind of emergency that might arise. Apart from an emergency I want to make it clear that the question of what we would do then, as I said, is naturally a matter for long-term consideration. In that connection I have an examination being undertaken in connection with the Economic Research Institute into long-term trends in transport. This is a very difficult matter. A great many countries have attempted such surveys. The difficulty is that so many a priori assumptions have to be made for ten years ahead regarding the changes in the economy, if one is to calculate the number of vehicles which will be operated, how private investment will continue to expand over the period, and it is very difficult to make any definite decisions. As I indicated some months ago, CIE will have to compete with private competition on an extending basis. I made it clear that the Government is not a socialist Government. It has permitted many State companies to operate here because private enterprise could not do the job or would not do the job.

I want CIE to continue as an efficient transport organisation, but every year about £30 million are being invested in private transport. There is no big Irish company trying to compete with Aer Lingus. There is no private company trying to produce machine won turf on a large scale on the bogs. There is no Irish private company wanting to compete with Irish Shipping. But in the case of CIE there is this private competition emerging. CIE has actually increased its traffic since 1958 in spite of this tremendous private enterprise investment being carried out year after year and CIE will, I hope, be able to compete with the licensed hauliers and to continue its traffic on the railway to Belfast and beyond. I said that they may suffer some loss of trade, and if so it will be in order to ensure that we have the very best means of transport at the very lowest possible cost between ourselves and the people of the North.

The Seanad adjourned at 10 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Wednesday, 6th July, 1966.