Seanad debates

Tuesday, 8 December 2015

Harbours Bill 2015: Second Stage

 

10:30 am

Photo of Hildegarde NaughtonHildegarde Naughton (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister to the House. In general, an updating of ports policy is welcome and on this basis, I welcome this legislation. However, the Minister will be aware that politicians in the west have had particular difficulty with the legislation, specifically the decision which still remains active, to place Galway on the lowest rung of ports in this country. I, therefore, very much welcome the Minister's decision not to sign any commencement order until planning decisions are finalised in Galway and elsewhere. However, while this is welcome, I wish to bring some of the concerns of the people in Galway to the Minister's attention. They and I would be interested to know the commercial or economic reasons for the proposed transfer of ownership. They are of the view that there is little or no benefit to such a transfer. I would be interested to hear the Minister's view on that issue. There is also a general concern that for a city of its size and potential and for a port serving a vast area of the coastline, the absence of a modern national port is unacceptable. If this comes to pass, as outlined, there will be no national port from Foynes to Donegal and, as stated, in the other House, Foynes is nearer to Cork than it is to Galway.

Access to TEN-T funding was mentioned in previous debates. In the Dáil, the Minister of State was at pains to point out that Galway or a local authority port would still be eligible. However, the legislation seems to have Drogheda, Dún Laoghaire and Galway remaining as limited companies with their shareholding held by the CEO of the local authority. Only the first two seem to have been included with Dublin Port as eligible for TEN-T funding. It would, therefore, seem to those involved that Galway has been excluded and is, therefore, the only commercial port of its size in the country to be excluded from TEN-T funding. The Minister will be aware that this can amount to up to 20% of capital expenditure for the proposed extension of Galway Port. What reassurance can the Minister offer the people of Galway that they will not be disadvantaged when seeking funding?

While the Minister's decision not to sign a commencement order is welcome, the issue still remains outstanding pending the expansion of Galway Port. My view is that the port of Galway should have been afforded the same status as Waterford and Rosslare Ports, that is, tier 2 status. The decision would appear to have been taken without any regard to future capacity and made on the present tonnage and capacity. Galway needs to be a national port and eligible for TEN-T funding. The Minister should be aware that the effect of not being a tier 1 or a tier 2 port will make it extremely difficult to attract investment funds for the port's extension as potential investors in the sector will look to national port.

I see no provision in the Bill setting out the criteria for any port to be upgraded to a tier 1 or a tier 2 port. If this were in place, the people of Galway could see what is required in order to benefit from an upgrading. It would bring much clarity to the situation. Will the Minister look again at the legislation in this regard to see whether it would be possible to insert a section on what the requirements would be to move between designations? Galway Port has the potential to become a major employer and a major source of revenue, not only for Galway but for the western region. This is not a flight of fancy; it is a fact. There is significant cruise ship business going untapped. To attract this investment, there is a need for an upgrade of the port and it is vital that it achieves tier 2 status to do this. The current proposal has the potential to hamstring any future development by making investment in the port unattractive. I urge the Minister to examine my constructive suggestion and to include a provision to enable a port to upgrade if it meets these suitable criteria. Again, I thank the Minister for his decision to postpone the signing of the commencement order.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.