Dún Laoghaire Harbour Marina Development
The Minister said the marina lease and contract were still being finalised, with customary safeguards for State and public interests; he described a proposed 11-acre facility and said the project was desirable. Miss Kennedy raised security, public access and planning concerns, while Deputies disputed the proposal’s support, ownership and tendering; disorderly exchanges led the Chair to end questions.
asked the Minister for the Marine the security arrangements which will be required by the developers of the marina at Dún Laoghaire harbour, County Dublin to protect the increased number of boats that are expected to use the facility; and whether these arrangements will require the fencing off of parts of the harbour in a way that will affect existing public access.
19.
Comment on this
asked the Minister for the Marine if he will outline the terms of the contract entered into with the MDIL for the development of a marina at Dún Laoghaire harbour, County Dublin; the details of the undisclosed lease; whether the State will acquire the capital assets after 30 years; whether planning permission is excluded in the contract; and whether the State has lodged particular terms in the contract to protect public access and the public amenity value of the harbour.
29.
Comment on this
asked the Minister for the Marine if he will table in the Houses of the Oireachtas a copy of the contract documents signed between the Commissioners of Public Works and Marine Developments Limited with his approval concerning the licensing to this private company of areas within the inner and outer harbours of Dún Laoghaire, County Dublin.
Comment on this
I propose to take Questions Nos. 13 and 19 and Priority Question No. 29 together.
No contract or other documents have as yet been signed between OPW and MDIL. It is not the usual practice to reveal the commercial details of the terms of State leases. However, I can assure you that the lease will contain the safeguards which are usual in such leases, to protect the State's and the public interest in the area. The general principles have, however, been agreed and it was on this basis that Government approval has been given. The details of the lease are at present being finalised.
The duration of the lease will be 30 years. The capital assets associated with the lease would in the normal course revert to the State, unless there is a decision at that time to continue the lease.
As is normal in a State lease, there will be a clause requiring the developer to obtain all necessary permissions, and prohibiting the developer from proceeding with any part of the development for which such permissions have not been obtained.
A technical liaison committee will be established to oversee the development and to ensure that adequate provision is made for access in all its aspects and for protection of the environment.
As regards access, there will be a clause in the lease to ensure that adequate access be provided to the piers, the slipways, and all harbour areas. The precise details of the security arrangements that will be required by the developers to protect the boats in the marina will be overseen by the technical committee. However, these arrangements will not involve the fencing off of part of the harbour in a way that will affect existing public access.
There will be a clause in the lease to ensure the protection of the environment. In particular, berth holders will be prohibited from discharging sewage from their craft within the harbour area. Water quality will be monitored continually and regular reports will be made to me.
Comment on this
I was very disappointed that the Private Notice Question in the names of Deputy Barry Desmond and I was disallowed and I would like now to raise some of the issues mentioned in that question with the Minister. First of all, can he tell us when he expects the contract and lease for the marina development to be signed?
Comment on this
As I have already said, they are the subject of discussion at present and it is my wish that they be finalised at the earliest possible opportunity so as to enable work to proceed on this very desirable project.
Comment on this
Is the Minister aware that the so-called directors are at present negotiating with interested parties in the constituency of Dún Laoghaire and making arrangements with them at a time when no contract has been signed with the State? Surely, this undermines the position of the marina generally. Let me also raise an ancillary matter, a matter of great concern to interested bodies and third parties in Dún Laoghaire, and that is the fact that no planning permission will be required for phase one of the development, a floating marina on the sea. Before the contract is signed, will the Minister consider what was done in the case of the Dublin Gas contract which is imposing a contractual obligation on the developers to go through the normal planning process? I understand the Minister has the power to do this and it has already been done in the case of the building of caverns in Dublin Bay.
Comment on this
The Deputy has injected a lot of new matter into this question. The Deputy could have put down questions in the ordinary way, which so many other Deputies did on this subject matter.
Comment on this
I asked the Minister a general question on the contents of the contract and lease and I also asked him a specific question——
Comment on this
It is usual to hear the Minister's reply after a supplementary question has been put.
Comment on this
It is important that we get the record straight. What we are proposing is to construct a new modern marina facility covering about 11 acres out of a total acreage of 300 acres in the Dublin Bay area. In fact, there is adequate scope for many more such developments and any proposal of that nature will be examined by us. All the various views will be taken into account. I held detailed and constructive discussions with the two Deputies concerned when they came to my office. I explained to them what the proposal was about——
Comment on this
I have a question down. Deputy Andrews has no question down. I have tabled Question No. 26.
Comment on this
We are dealing with Questions Nos. 13, 19 and 29 and the name of Deputy Desmond does not appear on any of those questions. I am calling on Deputy Andrews.
Comment on this
Will the Minister give an assurance to the House, despite the bad publicity being given to this proposal by Deputies Desmond and Kennedy and despite the Private Notice Question which has been motivated by the politics of revenge, that there is no threat to this proposal and that there is a large volume of support for this proposal in the Dún Laoghaire community? Can the Minister say, in relation to Question No. 24——
Comment on this
Is the Royal St. George Yacht Club an objector to this proposal? Is the Minister aware that the questioner, Deputy Pat McCartan of The Workers' Party, is a member of the Royal St. George Yacht Club?
Comment on this
We are coming to the end of Question Time proper. I want to facilitate a number of Deputies but they must be very brief. We are coming to the time devoted to questions nominated for priority. I will hear Deputy Desmond and Deputy Seán Barrett, if they will be very brief.
Comment on this
The Deputy is filibustering. May I ask the Minister who are the beneficial shareholders and owners of the company in question, Marina Development (Ireland) Limited?
Comment on this
Order, please. Deputy Desmond, you had a chance of putting down specific questions on this matter and you failed to do so.
Comment on this
Deputy Desmond, I will ask you for the last time to resume your seat or you will leave the House.
Comment on this
Deputy Desmond, will you please allow Question Time to proceed in an orderly fashion.
Comment on this
As a member of the Committee of Public Accounts I will ask the questions and you will not be in the Chair there.
Comment on this
Deputy Desmond, I have given you a lot of latitude but if you persist I simply will not take it from you and I want you to know that, no matter what Chair I am sitting in.
Comment on this
You refused to allow my Private Notice Question, a question that was in the public interest.
Comment on this
You had ample opportunity of putting down a question, as had so many Deputies here, on that specific matter and you failed to do so.
Comment on this
The question is down, it is No. 26, and you would not allow it to be taken today. You allowed all other questions relating to the public tender of the site except that one.
Comment on this
What the Deputy is doing is absolutely disgraceful. Is he for or against the marina?
Comment on this
On that basis I am now proceeding to deal with questions nominated for Priority Question No. 27.
Comment on this
It is not a proposal; it is a rip-off by two of Charlie's pals and the Deputy knows that.