HC Deb 18 March 1889 vol 334 cc28-9
MR. MURPHY (Dublin, St. Patrick's)

asked the Secretary to the Treasury, whether the Foynes Pier having silted up, is unapproachable by vessels except at high water; whether the Railway Company and the Steamship Company between them provided a barge connected with the pier by a landing stage which enabled passengers and goods to embarked and disembarked at all states of the tide; whether the barge and landing stage have recently been removed by the peremptory order of the Board of Works; whether he is aware that a large traffic is carried every summer by railway to Foynes, and thence per steamer to the Lower Shannon ports, which will be put a stop to by the absence of the appliances which have been removed; and, will those appliances be restored, or will the Board of Works add to the pier a suitable jetty carried into deep water?

*MR. JACKSON

I am informed that the pier is unapproachable except at high water. The landing stage and barge were placed at the end of the pier by the Railway and Steamship Companies entirely for their own passenger and goods service and was removed by the Board of Works solely because these Companies declined to enter into a reasonable agreement to protect the Board's rights and those of the public. If they execute such an agreement for the coming season the barge and stage can be replaced by them, and the considerable traffic by which these Companies benefit will be fully accommodated. There are no harbour funds available for placing a jetty at the and of the pier for the benefit of the Waterford and Limerick Railway Company.

MR. MURPHY

May I ask whether the arrangement, said to be a reasonable one, and which the Railway Company refused to enter into, had relation to a portion of the property—the large net—which did not belong to the Company, and over which they had no control. Was that a reasonable arrangement?

*MR. JACKSON

I cannot answer that question without further inquiry, but I am informed that the Company removed the pier and barge of their own motion on a previous occasion, and it was only when they sought permission to put them back that the Board of Works called attention to the matter. I believe it is a matter that might easily be settled by arrangement.