Denis O'Donovan (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister, Deputy Varadkar, for coming to the House to take this issue. In many instances we do not get a line Minister in here and I appreciate his interest in this area.

I have argued this matter with a previous Minister, former Deputy Noel Dempsey, for many hours in the Seanad. For the past ten or 12 years, the Bantry Harbour board has been a success story and it should be left as it is. It is an unusual model, and apart from the oil storage and facilities on Whiddy Island, there must also be consideration of Garinish Island, which is a tourist interest, of inland fishermen and of the people still living on Whiddy Island. It encompasses approximately two thirds if not three quarters of all the Bantry Bay area, which is the second finest bay in the world. It is approximately eight miles deep and an average of eight miles wide in most areas. It has taken the biggest oil tankers ever built into the harbour and it was successful in retaining the entire British admiralty fleet at the time of the 1796 invasion.

There are a few points worth making. Its current structure is a low operating cost model, with no tax paid on profit. Members, at their own volition, get no payment whatever and all profits are retained and spent locally. The board has local control, with many users' interest in the bay being properly looked after. Its key focus is improving the marine infrastructure deficit in the inner harbour, which is an historic problem going back decades. It has a healthy bank balance somewhere in the region of ¤1.5 million. Its net worth and balance sheet has grown eight-fold in the past ten years, with ¤4.5 million spent in the past seven years on the development of Whiddy slipway, the Abbey Point slipway, commercial pontoons, pier raising at the main pier, land acquisition, derrick purchase and the surveys and planning costs for the inner harbour master development plan, of which I am sure the Minister is aware. The master plan can be rolled out over the next number of years subject to income availability from the oil shipping being protected.

The best way forward is to continue the harbour where it is, spending the money on local infrastructure and capital investment. I am expressing the fear of a vast majority of people in the greater Bantry area, including fishermen, harbour users, yachtsmen and oarsmen, etc. A plan was afoot prior to the Minister's arrival at the Department to have the Port of Cork assume control of Bantry, subject to certain conditions, and we are afraid that the greater interests of the people in the Bantry area will not be properly serviced and funding will be taken from the Whiddy oil process. I have absolutely no doubt if the board had a deficit of ¤1.5 million, the Port of Cork would walk away. At times the authority appears not to be interested in Bantry but I am afraid of conceding any big issue.

After many years, the Bantry Harbour board was established under a former Minister, former Deputy Peter Barry, and it is working very well. It has a low cost and is efficient, and it is making money. When the process is not broken, why should we fix it? I have very deep-rooted views on the matter as my forefathers going back to before the Great Famine were fishermen in Bantry Bay. I know most of the inlets and outlets there for good or bad. I am deeply concerned that if the Port of Cork takes over the running of the area, it will have a negative impact on many other interests. It may be good for the oil terminal and similar development but there are also socioeconomic and tourism interests to consider, as well as the welfare of inshore fishermen. There is also substantial fish farming in Bantry Bay and the fear is that down the road other interests will suffer and the community will be negatively affected if Bantry Harbour board is in any way taken in charge by the Port of Cork.

Perhaps I have gone on a tangent but I wait anxiously on the Minister's response.