HC Deb 30 August 1886 vol 308 cc786-7

asked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether his attention has been drawn to the evidence given during the recent fishery inquiries in Innishowen by Mr. R. M. Fleming, the lessee of the Culdaff Salmon Fishery, with reference to the pier lately constructed at Culdaff, viz.— That it is of no benefit to anyone; that it is not suitable for even the smallest description of boat, as it is so arranged that if you wish to land you have first to get out of the boat and wade ashore; that no provision in the way of a boat-slip has been made, and the boats cannot be left in the dock over six hours without being broken to pieces by the rise and fall of the tide. Altogether it has been about as useless an expenditure of public money as could possibly be imagined; whether the Commissioners inspected the pier, and agreed with the complaints put forward against it; whether four thousand pounds have been expended on it; whether this pier was constructed under the Board of Works; and, whether it is to the same authority that the Government propose to entrust the works which the proposed Royal Commission are intended to recommend?


I have made inquiries about this case, and I am informed that the pier named was constructed under the Board of Works, who acted on instructions from the Fishery Pier and Harbour Commissioners. These Commissioners instructed the Board to make a pier at a cost not exceeding £4,000. The plans made by the Board were submitted to, and approved by, the Fishery Pier and Harbour Commissioners; but the limit of £4,000 was probably insufficient to enable the pier to be made as long as was desirable it should be. No complaint, so far as I know, has been made as to the quality of the work, nor of any de- parture from the plans approved by the Fishery Commissioners. No responsibility, therefore, attaches to the Board of Works in the matter. The latter part of the Question I am unable to answer.


May I ask if the allegations in the Question with regard to the fishery pier are correct; and if the Board of Works are prepared to supplement the existing structure so as to render it useful?


said, the hon. Member knew, as well as anybody, that the Board of Works had no control over the Fishery Pier and Harbour Commissioners. They could only spend such a sum of money upon the works as was placed at their disposal. There was no objection to enlarge the pier if the Commissioners approved of it.