Maurice Cummins (Fine Gael)

I raised this matter during the Second Stage debate on the Bill because I believe this provision is a retrograde step. I served on the board of a port company in Waterford, where there were three local authority members — one from Waterford County Council, one from Waterford City Council and the third from Kilkenny, where the actual port is located. The local authority members were people who had expertise in the area.

I worked in Waterford port for more than twenty years and served on the board of Waterford harbour commissioners from 1979 and that is why my local authority appointed me to the board of Waterford port. There are many other people like me around the country. I do not understand why local authority members are being precluded from serving on such boards. People should be appointed on the basis of ability. There are many local authority members who are well qualified and have the necessary experience to make a valuable contribution to the boards of port companies.

I agree with the proposal to reduce from 12 to eight or nine the number of serving members but why make the local authority members the scapegoats? The Bill refers to the fact that the Minister "may" appoint one member of a local authority to the boards of port companies, but does not place an obligation on him or her to do so. As has been already stated, this is an attack on local democracy.

I urge the Minister of State to examine the attendance records of the boards of port companies. I would bet my bottom dollar that councillors have a better attendance record and are making a more significant contribution than some of the other so-called experts serving on the boards.

I fully support Senator McCarthy on this issue. A number of speakers on the Government side of the House expressed their concerns on this matter during the Second Stage debate. There appears to be a common thread running through all types of legislation coming before the House lately whereby local authority members are precluded from serving on various boards and bodies. Such members were elected by the people to represent them locally but the legislation is suggesting that they are not good enough to represent the people on boards of companies such as port companies. Ports are the heart and soul of areas like Waterford city and to preclude local representatives from port company boards would be a retrograde step.

I urge the Minister of State to rethink this matter. The idea of excluding local authority members is obviously coming from officials who are dealing with the entire legislative programme. Some people might ask why local authority members should be on the boards of port companies but if the Minister of State examines the record of such members, he will be pleasantly surprised to find that they are the ones who make valid contributions and who are in attendance more than any other members. Their good attendance is not due to them receiving expenses, lest anyone should make that suggestion, but because they have an interest in port affairs in their local communities.

This provision should be revisited. Going from a situation where there are three local authority members on the boards to the possibility of only one being appointed is not good enough.