Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The phrase "promptly thereafter" is a little vague. It would be helpful for a number of reasons to inform the context in which we will be operating for that decision to be made relatively soon. In a way, I welcome the fact there are several weeks, or maybe a couple of months, to go, given that people will have the opportunity to make their views known to the Minister. The Minister is inviting them to do so, and I urge them to do that. The voice of the stakeholders, including but not limited to the elected representatives, must be heard in making the decision. We need real public consultation on it. I am confident that the public wants the dissolution of the Dún Laoghaire Harbour Company.

I will explain why the Minister should choose the option proposed in the amendment. He referred to the finances and said if we get what we want, he will have to take the money issue and operating costs seriously. I accept this. There will be challenges. As part of his decision-making process, the Minister will be examining, if he has not already done so, the profit and loss account for 2013. The company made an operating loss in 2013 of €383,000 and a full loss of €890,000. It also made a loss in 2012. The company has axed the numbers of essential front-line workers, such as the harbour police and maintenance workers. I saw a fantastic table contained in one of the submissions to An Bord Pleanála, which I may submit to the Minister over the coming days. The table shows that the progress from profit to loss, in a consistent pattern over the past six years, coincides with the cutting of the workforce. If the cutting of the workforce was supposed to improve the financial position, it has had the exact opposite effect. There is an exact correlation between the axing of the front-line workforce and the company's move from a position of profit to loss. Although a number of factors have contributed to it, it is interesting.

In contrast, for some time, I have alerted the Minister to the incredible waste in which the harbour company engages. Compiling the cruise berth plan cost the harbour company €625,000, which is almost the same amount as the loss it made. The Minister should read the council's very detailed report from May 2015 on the recent history of developments in the harbour. The council has contributed an extraordinary €1,217,000 to activities in the harbour. While many activities take place in the harbour, the bulk of the money was spent on subsidising the harbour company for the elements of the master plan to which people are opposed. The floating swimming pool received €156,000. The tender berth received €230,000, although given that we have no problem with the small cruise ships coming to the Carlisle Pier, one could argue that it was reasonable to spend this money.

The council paid €250,000 for the planning for the giant cruise ship berth. Approximately €31,000 was spent on trips abroad related to the cruise berth and further money was spent on welcome events for the cruise ships. It adds up to nearly €1 million from the council over recent years, the expenditure of which was dictated by an unaccountable stakeholders' group comprising the CEO of the Dún Laoghaire Harbour Company, the director of services in the environment section and a representative of the Dún Laoghaire Business Improvement District, BID. These three people have decided that expenditure and the council has come to know about the detail of much of it late in the day. This is a lot of public money in a situation in which the public are at odds with all the key elements of what the money has been spent on developing.

Before this hundreds of thousands of euro was spent on a plan to build a ten-storey apartment block on the Carlisle Pier. I do not know whether the Minister remembers it. There was a public consultation on four proposals, all of which involved high rise development on the site of the historic Carlisle Pier. The biggest group of people said they did not want any of them. The one the public preferred was not selected. The group selected the second least favourite and then nothing happened, although a huge amount of money was spent on it. This goes on and on.

Another issue for the Minister to consider regarding all that money wasted on things the people did not want is the combined cost of the harbour board and the very high salaries and expenses of the executives. This is where the due diligence comes in. I estimate it to be approximately €600,000 per year. Did the Minister know the salary of the CEO of the Dún Laoghaire Harbour Company is approximately twice those of the CEOs of the other harbours of regional significance dealt with in the Bill? It is a waste of money. If one removed all that wastage, the company would break even. The company has been subsidised consistently by public money over the years. We would be in a better financial position if we dissolved the harbour company and brought the harbour under council control. It has revenue streams and property, which generate revenue.

People have not just said "No" to the harbour company's activities, but have set out alternatives. For example, there is great enthusiasm for a diaspora museum. People have been calling for it for years, going back to John de Courcy Ireland.

It is an open goal, even as national priority. Carlisle Pier was the exit point for the vast majority of those who were to form the Irish diaspora. The oldest suburban railway in the world extended to that pier, which was constructed in the 1830s. There is a wealth of heritage associated with the diaspora and emigration. It is an absolutely open goal and we could generate an enormous benefit, certainly locally and regionally but probably nationally, by developing a diaspora museum on the site rather than wasting it on madcap plans, excessive salaries and massive financial gambles. There is considerable enthusiasm for a State-run national maritime and sailing centre. The council has just passed a motion on this.