Dáil debates

Tuesday, 5 December 2006

British-Irish Agreement (Amendment) Bill 2006 [Seanad]: Second and Subsequent Stages

 

10:00 pm

Paudge Connolly (Cavan-Monaghan, Independent)

This Bill, which makes provision for a slight but important adjustment to the British Irish Agreement Act 1999, is welcome. The 1999 Act was one of the fruits to flow from the Good Friday Agreement which, at the time, constituted an historic compromise between Nationalism and Unionism. The majority of Irish people on this island endorsed the Agreement because it afforded them the opportunity to transform the face of Ireland for the better after three decades of conflict.

The Good Friday Agreement forged between the North's political parties and the Dublin and London Governments, would pave the way for an end to violence and civil unrest. The North-South dimension was of crucial importance, best exemplified by the establishment and successful operation of cross-Border bodies. Co-operation for mutual benefit has already taken place in a number of areas: tourism, agriculture, infrastructure and health.

In tourism, Fáilte Ireland is successfully promoting the entire island as a single destination. That is welcome. Attractions such as the Shannon-Erne Waterway and a fully restored Ulster Canal could be marketed on an all-island basis. All the waterways are under the aegis of Waterways Ireland. We have heard about the restoration of the canal in a number of contributions. It has many benefits. We have witnessed the benefits the Shannon-Erne Waterway has brought to County Leitrim, which is a place in which to live. It has brought much tourism potential to Blacklion and Belturbet in Cavan. A spur should be brought to Clones and we should get on with the job. There is no reason not to do it. People talk about impediments. With a will to drive it on both sides and co-operation in a Border area, the benefits that would flow to a town such as Clones would be nothing short of fantastic.

In the cross-Border body, CAWT, Co-operation and Working Together, there is potential for more meaningful co-operation than at present. A large tranche of the population lives on either side of the Border. Some 12 counties and up to 1 million people are involved. Those areas have been denuded of hospital services and have been neglected by both central governments in Belfast and Dublin. The situation in Tyrone is similar to that in Monaghan — it has no hospital and services are being removed. Accident and emergency services are provided at both ends of the N2 from Dublin to Derry, with no accident and emergency unit in between. While one exists on the coast in Drogheda and another on the coast in Derry, the current situation is unacceptable if we are to look after people fairly. We need a regional trauma centre in that Border area where people could be brought and stabilised in the event of an accident. The Cavan-Monaghan region has a large number of accident black spots and rather than having a regional trauma centre in a regional centre of excellence we could have a standalone regional trauma centre. We should consider such matters, as they would give more meaning to the concept of cross-Border co-operation.

Under the special EU programme, INTERREG will be most affected by the terms of the Bill. Coming under a new EU territorial co-operation objective, INTERREG programmes have made a significant contribution to waterways infrastructure in Ireland. The development of the cross-Border waterway links the island's two major rivers, the result of which is that one can travel by boat from Belfast to visit our colleagues in Limerick.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.