Conor McGuinness (Waterford, Sinn Fein)

I have a number of questions. As other members have already spoken, I will put them now. Deputy Mac Lochlainn set out the context to this discussion when he said it is about the infrastructure at our ports and harbours. The wider context is that the failure to invest over many years in regional infrastructure has hampered economic development and economic diversification and has put livelihoods at risk. I fear that the lack of infrastructural investment when it comes to ports and harbours is putting lives at risk as well as livelihoods. It is certainly putting the lives of coastal communities at risk. The other context in which this discussion takes place is the depletion of our offshore and inshore fishing industries over many years. There are fewer boats and fewer people employed. The Brexit deal copper-fastened a massive decrease in the fishing opportunities available to our fleets. That context is important for this discussion.

I have already spoken about Cé Heilbhic at this committee. I have spoken about it in the Dáil. I have spoken about it for many years. I spoke with some of our witnesses about it before we came into this meeting. It is a case in its own right that needs to be resolved but it is also a really good example of the failure of the current funding mechanism. For those who do not know, Cé Heilbhic is a small local authority-owned fisheries harbour in the west Waterford Gaeltacht. It is a couple of miles from my home and is a place I am proud to live in and represent. However, because of siltation it is impassable at low tide for all sorts of vessels. A small inshore fishing fleet operates out of there. Of course it is also the home of the Helvick Head and Dungarvan RNLI station. The local authority, Waterford City and County Council, has told us that it does not have the money to pay for the preparatory work required to make an application to the Department for funding to dredge the harbour. We will have the local authorities in for the second half of this meeting. It is a classic catch-22 situation in that the Department is refusing to fund anything but a shovel-ready project. All the preparatory work on the foreshore licence, on planning and on the environmental impact must be done before an application will even be considered for funding. In most cases, that work costs more than the actual work of dredging the harbour. That is certainly true in this case. To my mind, this seems to be an arbitrary rule because it does not apply to the development of housing. It does not apply to the development of an enterprise centre a couple of miles from Cé Heilbhic where different Government Departments and agencies are happy to fund preparatory work. It only seems to apply to local authority ports and harbours.

My question to each set of witnesses relates to that particular case, but also to the wider example. There are many piers like Cé Heilbhic around the coast. There are many local authority-owned ports and harbours in the same situation.

Do the witnesses agree that the system is not fit for purpose and is out of step with other funding mechanisms, that it is potentially putting livelihoods and lives at risk, and that perhaps we need a new way of funding these local authority harbours? That is particularly for the IIMRO and the NIFA, but also for the other witnesses.