§ MR. SEXTON (for Mr. T. M. HEALY)
I beg to ask the Secretary to-the Treasury will he explain why, although the Fishery Commissioners in 1885 granted £12,750 to erect a fishing harbour at Clogher Head, and the locality contributed £4,250, the Board of Works changed the plans and ordered the contractors to build a straight pier, as the Royal Commission had meantime recommended the place for a harbour of refuge; is he aware that 505 the pier was subsequently damaged by storms, costing an extra £7,000 to repair, and that, although a total of £25,950 has been spent on it, the harbour is practically useless to the fishermen except when the wind is due south, and is absolutely useless in an east, north-east, or north wind; that, to make it available in all weathers, it should be extended 300 feet into deep water, with a "bend" on it and a groin on the west side; is there any intention of acting on the Report of the Royal Commission and making the place a harbour of refuge; will the Board of Works do anything to make the money spent profitable, and after the repeated complaints about this Board, will the Government ask for the Report of an independent engineer?
§ THE SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Sir JOHN GORST,) Chatham
I am informed that the original plans were changed, and that the pier was carried further in a straight direction expressly in order not to prejudice the question of eventually making a harbour of refuge when funds are available. The damage done by storms cost £2,251, and not £7,000, to repair, and the total cost was £19,251, and not £25,950. My information does not confirm the accuracy of the other allegations contained in the question. The end of the pier is already in deep water. I am advised that with the addition of a "cant" 80 feet long at the end of the pier (which the Government intend to commence as soon as funds are available) the harbour may be considered a harbour of refuge. I see no grounds for consulting an independent engineer.