Denis O'Donovan (Fianna Fail)

Not at the time in 1986 when the commitment to provide £5 million or £6 million was made. The report further states:

The Commissioners aspire that the remaining state funding of EUR 2.8 million would be funded through a combination of allocations from the National Development Plan, Department of Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and The Islands and further allocations from the Department of the Marine and Natural Resources. Applications have been made to the relevant governmental bodies for this funding.

My memory may be diminishing but at times it is like that of an elephant. I recall that the then Minister with responsibility for this area, Deputy Mary Coughlan, visited and a clear commitment was given because Bantry pier was also serving islanders, of whom there are only a few remaining. It was facilitating an island community and, therefore, funding in the region of €500,000 to €750,000 was to be provided through the islands grants scheme to support the proposal in respect of the provision of cross-departmental funding which was considered to be an option at the time.

There is a paragraph in the report on the state of readiness for corporatisation. Is this no longer an option? Two board members told me after Christmas that they still harboured the notion that it was an option. However, I have some reservations that it will be a success but it is important to mention paragraph 1.7 of the PricewaterhouseCoopers report which reads:

The Harbour Commissioners continue to finalise preparation for corporatisation. In this context, they have retained an assistant Harbourmaster on contract and have also retained the services of Port of Cork to provide technical and operational support to the Port of Bantry, as required. Arrangements are currently being finalised as regards administration, secretarial and accounting resources and procedures. The Commissioners have also retained the services of a firm of solicitors to deal with the legal aspects of the corporatisation process.

The Harbour Commissioners have entered into discussions with Cork County Council with a view to acquiring certain assets on corporatisation date.

The relevant assets proposed by the harbour commissioners to be acquired are then listed. They include Bantry railway pier, which the harbour commissioners now own, Bantry town pier, the Abbey slipway, the land bank on the hinterland of a proposed new pier and the inner harbour docks. The report continues:

At this juncture the Commissioners and Cork County Council have agreed in principle the inventory of property to be transferred. The matter is conditional on confirmation of title to the related properties by Cork County Council and agreement of the transfer by the Department of Marine and Natural Resources and the Department of the Environment. However, it is assumed that, in order for business to proceed, the company would continue to have access to these assets absent completion of the asset transfer process prior to corporatisation date.

Corporatisation was prevented because in late April or early May 2002, prior to the general election, a document from the financial controller of the board was not submitted to the Department before the Government fell. The process was as close to completion as a scrum when the Munster rugby team and its opposition crouch down before engaging. It is regrettable that the plan for corporatisation was abandoned.

It is important to examine the areas of which Bantry will lose control if the Bill is enacted. We will lose the outer harbour which includes Whiddy Island, the site of the national oil reserves in the event of a war or catastrophe. I am informed that some of our national oil reserve is held in Norway. I do not know how we would transport this part of it in the event of a war. We would also lose the Leahill pier structure, a 60 m jetty used for loading aggregates on the north side of Bantry Bay. This berth can accommodate vessels of up to 40,000 tonnes GWT. Further investment has increased this capacity to 75,000 tonnes GWT. If such a facility were to be constructed today, it would cost at least €10 million.

We are told Cork Harbour board will look after these assets but there has not been an iota of consultation. I would love to ask the members of the board to tell me where Gortnakilla or Gerahies pier or Leahill Quarry and pier are located. They would not have a clue. As I indicated, we are dealing with the blind and will have to hope for miracles if the Bill is passed.

Bantry town has a 120 m pier owned by Cork County Council which is not a player in this process. Control of the railway pier and south western pier, two significant fish farming facilities and a floating dock in Glengarriff which is suitable for passenger embarkation and disembarkation would transfer to the Cork Harbour board on the demise of the Bantry Bay Harbour Commissioners. Other assets to be transferred include the outer harbour, the Whiddy Island single point mooring buoy for the export of crude oil and import and export of other oil related products, a 90 m jetty on Whiddy Island which is in a state of disrepair, the Whiddy Island bank pier, Leahill pier, the 40 m Glengarriff floating dock and Bantry town pier.

Aquaculture and fishing facilities in Bantry will be affected by the proposed change. A fishing fleet of ten vessels operates from Bantry Bay and catches shrimp, prawns, crab and lobsters. The vessels are mainly in the 30 ft. to 35 ft. category but include two deep sea fishing vessels. The landed volumes amount to approximately 1,000 tonnes per annum. The Bantry Bay Fish Farming Co-operative represents ten companies and generates considerable revenue. The shellfish are processed onshore and the processing factories generate substantial revenue. The aquaculture industry is zealous about guarding what it holds. Representative organisations were not consulted on this issue. In 2002, trade in Bantry Bay amounted to 100,000 tonnes. Including quarry products and oil, the volume of imports and exports in the area is approaching 2 million tonnes.

I am concerned about the future of marine tourism should this Bill be passed. Income from this sector in Bantry is critical. Even in 2002, the harbour commissioners recognised the significant potential for the development of marine tourism and leisure activities to exploit the natural amenities of the bay area. According to the PricewaterhouseCoopers report, the successful development of such activities would require investment in the port infrastructure facilities. This raises again the issue of dredging and the extension of the pier. According to the report, the commissioners were mindful of the need to encourage and develop these activities through a combination of private development and public-private partnership. However, this objective was regarded as a long-term goal to be fulfilled once the port's primary objectives had been achieved. The harbour commissioners included capital expenditure of €1.2 million in their business plan for this purpose.

I will skip through some of the details as I do not wish to repeat myself.