Seanad debates

Wednesday, 22 October 2008

Harbours (Amendment) Bill 2008: Committee Stage

 

1:00 pm

Photo of Michael McCarthyMichael McCarthy (Labour)

For the sake of clarity, I never mentioned local authority members. I have pointed out that section 8 envisages scrapping local authority directors and reducing board membership such that the user representative will be abolished. I stated I would oppose it because it was an assault on democracy. I accept the Minister of State has been listening to us speak on this amendment for almost 35 minutes and I understand how others may have made the point on local authority members and how the impression could be created that it is what we were discussing in principle, but it was not.

Section 8 amends the Harbours Act 1996 to provide that the articles of association of a port company shall state the number of directors shall not be more than eight. The current limit is 12. The case made for reducing membership can be made correctly again in section 11 as it deals with the same principle. The Minister of State said that 12 members is considered excessive. Who says 12 members is excessive? Was it board members, the chairman, the user representative, the people in the area or the commercial users of the port? If another element of the answer to this question exists, I do not know what it is. Did somebody in the Department decide that 12 is excessive? Does that person share the same mentality as the Einstein who thought that mussel farming should be obliterated in Cromane, the same Einstein who would not identify himself or herself when it was proved this was wrong and the ban was lifted? Who said it was excessive? For what reason do they believe 12 local authority members to be excessive? Did they take soundings from the commercial ports, the Minister or the port chairmen? What was the line of thinking behind section 8 reducing a port company's board from 12 to eight members? To clarify my earlier statement, I said it was the local authority directors and the user representatives. Removing them is an assault on local democracy.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.