Seanad debates

Wednesday, 22 October 2008

Harbours (Amendment) Bill 2008: Committee Stage

 

1:00 pm

Photo of Denis O'DonovanDenis O'Donovan (Fianna Fail)

I do not wish to labour the point as we cannot develop it much further. We have had a lengthy debate on section 7, which is opposed by Senator Cummins and others. I urge the Minister to reflect on what has been proposed in the section, if not now, before Report Stage. I refer in particular to section 7(2)(b) concerning two wide-ranging issues. I am somewhat concerned that we may be giving more power to An Bord Pleanála than is appropriate. The measures would affect Bantry Harbour, my home area, Fenit in Kerry, Sligo and other ports. Section 7(2)(b)(2) states:

"The transfer of the functions of the Minister for Transport [The Minister is giving away those powers.] in relation to the compulsory acquisition of land in accordance with subsection (1) shall include the transfer of all necessary ancillary powers in relation to the substrata of land, easements, rights over land (including wayleaves and public rights of way), rights over land or water or other such functions as may be necessary in order to ensure that the Board can fully carry out its functions in relation to the enactments referred to in subsection (1).",.

Will the Minister of State clarify what is meant by "substrata". Do we mean the high-water mark or the ebb tide? For instance, in my area of the Port of Cork approximately 60% of the foreshore rights of Bantry Bay are owned by the former Lord Bantry, now vested in Bantry House. Recently, the harbour board in Bantry purchased a quarter mile of those rights in good faith and at market value in order that developments could take place within the inner harbour. What is the impact of the compulsory powers vis-À-vis the rights of the former Earl of Bantry in that regard? What is the situation? A lot of mariculture and aquaculture activities take place in relatively shallow water, for example, scallop culture. Like my colleagues, I have concerns about the potential impact of the section. It is not unreasonable for the House to request the Minister of State to outline in more specific detail the exact powers that are being given to An Bord Pleanála.

I do not wish to return to the example of the Cork port authority and what happened there but I have concerns because of previous local experience regarding the rights of authorities. I refer to the dredging of the inner harbour in Bantry, which is potentially possible. When the Taoiseach was Minister for Finance he provided approximately €4 million through the Department for the project but that money has still not been spent and many investigations are ongoing in that regard. What impact would the proposed change have on such developments?

I do not wish to labour the point but I have genuine concerns. I am sure my colleagues who spoke previously have the same fears. Senator Ned O'Sullivan spoke on Second Stage about the developments regarding Fenit and the possible consequences for huge development in Foynes in the Shannon Estuary region. There are also implications for Sligo. In the not too distant past it was proposed that Sligo Port would relocate. The Minister of State is aware of the major concerns about the relocation of Dublin Port to Balbriggan. Similarly, there are concerns about the control and development of the ports of Drogheda and Dundalk. Other ports about which there is concern include Rosslare Harbour, which is probably one of the most popular ports in Ireland, Waterford Port and New Ross. Perhaps I am being unfair to An Bord Pleanála but I have worries about it. Local authorities can have more local knowledge on which to base decisions and a greater bird's eye view of what is happening in ports. I have grave concerns. The proposed legislation in section 7 is all-encompassing. It is a very broad omnibus provision.

Recently, a proposal was made, in co-operation with Cork County Council, to run some sewage pipes along the foreshore within the inner harbour in Bantry. However, it could not be done without the consent of the harbour board and Bantry House. Fortunately, Bantry Harbour board had bought the rights in that area. Outflow pipes were put in place to bring raw sewage to a place where it could be purified. I suppose it should have been done many years ago. The foreshore was a big issue in that instance, as it is with every move that is made. I appreciate it does not have an impact in places like Baltimore and Kinsale. At one stage, we had to wait two or three years for a foreshore licence to be granted so that progress could be made with a proposal relating to the inner harbour in Bantry.

Will foreshore licences remain within the remit of the Department that is responsible for marine and fisheries matters? Are they within the remit of the Minister of State, Deputy Noel Ahern? I recently heard that certain functions and powers with regard to foreshore rights, or some other rights, have been delegated to the Sea-Fisheries Protection Authority, which is now based in Clonakilty. Perhaps I could be enlightened in that regard. These matters cause concern when we try to make quick progress with foreshore projects. My colleague, Senator McCarthy, will confirm that it took a long time for the local authority to issue foreshore licences in respect of sewerage jobs in Baltimore and Schull. When I was prodding this along, just as one uses a prodder when one is loading cattle onto a truck, I was told there were problems with staffing. I had to contact the Office of the Attorney General and the Office of the Chief State Solicitor. There are worries in this regard. Where do we draw the line? What powers are to be given to An Bord Pleanála? I am not sure if the Minister of State can allay my fears today. Can he get more information on the matter in advance of Report Stage, which I understand will not take place until February 2009?

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.