took the Chair.
PRIVATE BUSINESS. - ADJOURNMENT DEBATE—DRAINAGE OF RIVER BARROW.
Before the adjournment for the Summer Recess, I desire to raise a question of very vital national and of local importance to my constituents—the question of the Barrow drainage. I am not satisfied that the Government are speeding up matters as they should on that river. This matter has been debated both in the British House of Commons and in this country for over a century. Thousands of pounds have been spent on engineering work and in other ways in connection with that river, but the unfortunate people there are still suffering as a result of the acute flooding and, according to the reply I received yesterday to my questions, it appears that they will have to continue suffering for the next couple of years. Yesterday I put the following questions:—
To ask the Minister for Finance whether he is aware that in the areas affected by the flooding of the river Barrow—Monasterevan, Portarlington, Garryhinch, Mountmellick and Rosenalis—grave dissatisfaction is prevalent amongst the people regarding the progress of the drainage work being carried out, and that they are seriously concerned as to whether sufficient work will be carried out this summer and autumn to reduce flooding to a minimum in the coming winter; whether the Minister will state now much money is available for expenditure on this river in the present year; and whether he will urge on the Commissioners of Public Works the necessity of employing larger gangs on the river between Portarlington and Mounmellick, and other places where large obstructions exist.
To ask the Minister for Finance whether he will state (a) the amount of money expended on the Barrow drainage work in the half-year ended March 31st, 1928; (b) the quarter ended 30th June, 1928; (c) the number of men employed and the number of gangs at work during that period; (d) the approximate period which it will take to complete the work at the present rate of progress; and (e) whether he is aware that several farmers, whose lands are flooded for more than half the year, are unable to continue paying annuities and taxes on land which is rendered useless to them by flooding.
This is the reply I received from the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance:
I will answer these two questions together. The expenditure for the half year ended 31st March, 1928, was £37,061 and for the quarter ended 30th June, 1928, £9,580.
About 250 men were at work during this latter period.
It would not be possible to indicate how long it will take to complete the scheme as, apart from anything else, the successful carrying out of drainage works depends to so great an extent on the weather; but probably at least three years after 1928 will be required.
£75,000 was estimated for the year 1928-29 to cover anticipated expenditure.
As I have already pointed out in reply to previous questions, it is an engineering necessity, in order to prevent loss and damage, that the work should proceed from the lower to the upper reaches of the river. As has already been pointed out, the Barrow drainage is not a relief work, but an engineering scheme, the estimated cost of which is based upon the use of the most economic methods of execution, apart from any other consideration, in the interests of those occupiers of the flooded and injured lands who will ultimately be called upon to pay their proportion of the whole.
When you look into the figures given and the amount spent—£9,580—during the quarter ended 30th June, 1928, which was a very favourable part of the year for drainage work, there must be something wrong. Any practical farmer, or anyone with a practical knowledge of drainage work, knows that the best and most economical time to employ men on drainage work is in the summer, and that in winter the staffs could and should be reduced. I have an intimate knowledge of the Barrow river and its effects in my own area, as I live within a couple of miles of it. At present you can practically ford the river anywhere in the area that is most affected by flooding. The river is practically dry at some points where there is room for a good deal of clearing work to be done. Later on, when the weather begins to put on its winter appearance, and the floods begin to rise, the banks will be covered and you cannot get near the river. I contend that gangs of men could be usefully employed at present in my area from Rosenalis in Mountmellick parish on to Portarlington. As a result of any work that these gangs might do possibly more water would be let flow on towards Monasterevan. In that area as well extra work could be done that would cope with the extra amount of water that would come down At any rate, from an economic point of view, I am satisfied that the best part of the year is being neglected. As regards the employment of men on this work, we have heard of rubber boots being procured for them. In winter that is necessary, but at the present time, and until the harvest, I think men would not mind working while standing in the water for some portion of the time.
In regard to the Estimates for 1927-8, there was mention of the acquisition of a bucket dredger at a cost of £15,000. I should like to know from the Parliamentary Secretary whether that dredger has been procured and whether it is at work in the lower reaches of the Barrow. Again, in 1926-7, £20,000 was voted, but the expenditure to 31st March, 1927, was only £17,604, leaving £2,395 unexpended at the end of the year. In a footnote it is stated that that was due to delay in the delivery of heavy plant. I should like to know if the plant which was considered necessary has been procured, because I contend, in putting up the case for our area, where the people suffer most from the Barrow flooding, that we should not be held up for the next two or three years and left as we are to facilitate people further down on the river; that it should be possible so to regulate things as to allow the water to flow on. Even if a little extra water goes down the river, as the result of work done between Rosenalis and Portarlington, there will have to be a policy of give and take. If that policy was put in practice, I think no one could grumble.
The Parliamentary Secretary reminded me in his reply that this is not a relief scheme. I agree that it is not, but from a national and economic point of view, I contend that in an area where you have hundreds of men unemployed and a good number drawing unemployment benefit, it would be wise to take on some of those men, when you have the power under the Barrow Drainage Act, and put them at useful national work of the kind, especially in fine weather. I have met several such men in Portarlington. Garryhinch and Mountmellick who asked me if there was any chance of their being taken on, as they had heard so much about this scheme and the work it would open up. I do not contend that it is relief work, but I submit it can usefully employ a number of men. Again, at this time in the Garryhinch area, between Mountmellick and Portarlington, there is a large number of men who have a lot of spare time on their hands, between the end of the turf cutting season and the harvest, and some of these men could be usefully taken on. I was reminded to-day that in the Athy area last year during the harvest farmers found a difficulty in getting men, because they were employed in the drainage work there. There is no reason why extra men could not be taken on now in the summer time and released afterwards for the necessary harvest work. I think that if we approached this from a practical point of view and got the co-operation of the engineers in charge, such an arrangement could be made to work out in practice. The area on the mountain side a couple of miles from where the river starts is very badly affected by flooding. According to the reply I received, it will take three years after this year before the work can be completed, and the people living there will have to exist for the next couple of years in the misery under which they have been suffering, which means that for five or six months of the year their holdings are half covered, if not completely covered with water, and their homes are inaccessible.
I suggest that the work should be so arranged that in various places the engineer could take on men and remove some of the bigger obstacles in the river—dead timber and growing timber and sandbanks that accumulate behind fallen timber.
Let me give an instance of what could be done. An enterprising and enthusiastic Committee, in Mountmellick, about three years ago collected money from the tenants and others interested in the Barrow Drainage in that area and district, with the result that they cleared the river for a distance of three or four miles. What was the effect? The road between Tullamore and Mountmellick, as a result of a day or half a day's rain prior to that drainage work, was flooded to the depth of a foot or more. They completed the work, and the road is dry ever since. Except for about 20 or 30 yards that road is dry ever since, even after serious floods in the river, because the water is able to get away, whereas before that it was submerged in time of flood for 100 yards or more. I believe that if the bigger obstruction —timber and the occasional sand-banks—were removed all along the river, and if that kind of work was done in that area, it would not cause any inconvenience to the men engaged in the work lower down, and would not cause any extra flooding in other districts. I am not satisfied that, at the rate at which the money is being spent up to the present, the money voted for the work for 1928 will be spent in the year. I think there is room for the Parliamentary Secretary to interfere and to urge upon the engineer in charge the necessity for speeding up the work and for using the money that has been voted for that purpose.
I would stress the point that in the area I speak of there are people at the present time with decrees hanging over their heads for annuities and rates. I know some of these people intimately, and I am satisfied that they are not able to meet their annuities and their rates as a result of the flooding going on in their area, because, in the first place, their tillage land is covered with water or is too wet to work in the spring time, and, in the next place, their meadowing is liable at any time to be destroyed by the floods which sweep across their land when the river is in flood. This is a matter that should receive the consideration of the Land Commission, and something should be done for these people. I have spoken to these people as regards the payments of the drainage cost afterwards, and they are perfectly satisfied to pay in order to get the work done. They will not grumble provided the work is done. They certainly cannot be satisfied to allow this scheme to drag on and to continue to suffer from the floods in the hope that some time something will be done. I need say no more. I have spoken to other Deputies from Leix and Offaly and from Kildare, and I understand they all look upon this situation in the same light as I do, namely, that there is great necessity for having the work done.
We are all agreed that credit is due to the Government for tackling this scheme, but it is one thing to tackle it, and it is another thing getting it through. This work was tackled two or three years ago and, according to the answer that I received yesterday from the Parliamentary Secretary, it will not be finished before 1932. The Barrow is the second biggest river in Ireland, and this is a big scheme and a big national question. The flooding of the river does immense damage to the country, and it is not too much to expect the Government to tackle it earnestly and to vote all the money necessary to get the work done. There is no reason why it should not be finished in a couple of years instead of extending it to almost four years. I ask the House to urge the Parliamentary Secretary, as representative of the Government, to do his utmost with the engineers to speed matters up. I have been asked to voice the plight the people are in before the House adjourns, and I feel confident that I shall get others in this assembly to do the same.
It was quite clearly understood by Deputies here at the time the Barrow Drainage Bill was introduced that the actual drainage work, when started, could not be completed inside a period of two, three or four years. I fully realise that at any rate. I am satisfied, however, if it is possible for the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance to justify the expenditure of £37,061 for the last three months of last year, and the first three months of the present year, and that most of that money went in wages, it should be reasonably possible for his Department to spend at least the same amount of money, and to employ the same number of men, in the period of the year we are now in. Any ordinary layman, apart from the engineer responsible for the carrying out of this important work, would, naturally and rightly, assume that a greater number of men could be usefully employed in the summer than in the winter portion of the year. What do we find from the figures that the Parliamentary Secretary gave us yesterday? They show that there has been £9,580 spent for the first three months ending June, that is, the first three months of the financial year, and that during that period the number of men employed was 250 all told. If the same rate of progress is to be made for the remainder of the financial year it will mean that instead of spending the whole of the £75,000 this House voted for the drainage, roughly we will only spend half the amount of the money which was voted in the Estimate. At the rate of expenditure for the last six months of the financial year it would be right up to the margin of the £75,000 voted for this work.
The House is entitled to know on what grounds the Minister justified this go-slow policy for the first three months of this year and why a smaller number of men is apparently being employed during the summer than during the last three months of last year and the first three months of this year. We are all aware that last winter was remarkable for very bad weather and that naturally had its effect both on the people who were responsible for carrying out the work and on the men who were employed on the work. From the point of view of the latter, the effect was much worse. Are we to understand that some of the machinery, such as dredgers and other things that it is proposed to get, is to be purchased out of the £75,000, or is that amount to be left aside purely for preliminary drainage work? If so, how do you propose to spend it, if you do not employ more men and go quicker on the job than at the present time? Deputy Gorry appears to think that the men should be taken on for three or four months during the summer and when it comes to harvest time the services of a lot of them should be dispensed with simply because the farmers might require them. I would prefer that there should be a minimum number employed on the preliminary work during the winter and the summer and that these men would get continuous work rather than be in the position of casual employees, one day doing Barrow drainage and the next day hoping to get work from the farmers there.
I think Deputy Davin is doing an injustice to what I said. It is quite possible to employ a certain number on the drainage work and keep them on permanently, but where men leave farming employment and go to work on the river, at slack times, it would not be unreasonable to have a certain amount of co-operation so that the men would be allowed to go back to farming work if that were necessary and if they were really required. That is what I meant.
I do not want to encourage the Minister to take men on the preliminary work, pay them at the rate of 29/- or 30/- or whatever miserable sum they do get, and then when it comes to September say to them, "You must go because the farmers are willing to pay you 8/- per week." I will be quite frank with the Parliamentary Secretary and with Deputy Gorry on that point. If the Deputy really wants a minimum number employed during the summer season and during the winter season I am in agreement with him on that matter, but I do not want semi-casual employment to-day on the Barrow and to-morrow looking for farmer's work at a quarter of the wages that they are offered on the Barrow drainage scheme.
They would get better paid in the harvest time. I think the rate of wages would be even higher than what they get on the Barrow drainage scheme.
It would be, of course, very much higher.
I only referred to the harvest season when they are actually getting in the crops.
I would be pleased if the Deputy would give me privately some information in support of the statement he has made. I desire to support his appeal to the Parliamentary Secretary, namely, that a larger number of men could be usefully employed at the present time. The local engineers, men who have qualifications in regard to drainage work, are of the opinion that this preliminary work could be carried out all over the area that Deputy Gorry has referred to. It is quite clear that along the river trees are causing obstructions, and particularly is this so on the upper reaches. It would be well if these trees could be removed. That is the opinion of qualified engineers. The engineers previously expressed that opinion when deputations waited on the Minister for Finance some twelve months ago. These deputations were accompanied by Deputies from the area. The engineers were of opinion that the work that has been mentioned could be carried out without interfering with the very valuable work that is undoubtedly being done up-river from Athy.
The Parliamentary Secretary and the Minister came to the House two or three months ago and presented an Estimate for £75,000. We must reasonably assume that they were satisfied that this money could be usefully spent within the financial year. If the present rate of progress is to be maintained, not fifty per cent. of the £75,000 will be spent. I am quite convinced that Mr. Challoner Smith and his engineers would be prepared to employ a far greater number of men than are now employed. The Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary have stated that £37,061 was spent in the very bad part of last winter carrying out work of this kind. If that is so, a far greater number than is now employed could be employed, and it is only reasonable to assume that a similar number could be employed, during the summer as during the winter.
I must pay a tribute to the engineers and to whomsoever is responsible, who deserve credit for the very valuable work that has been carried out. The preliminary work carried out last year has had very good effects in the Monasterevan area and down the river. It has considerably relieved flooding. Before the work started, if there was a heavy rainfall, the floods would remain around Monasterevan for two or three weeks. This year, as a result of the work that has been done, the floods were carried away in two or three days. I desire to pay a tribute to the people who deserve credit for that work. I hope the Parliamentary Secretary will see his way to accede to Deputy Gorry's reasonable demand.
I have very little to say on this matter, because Deputies Gorry and Davin have gone over the ground very well. A sum of £37,000, roughly, has been spent in six months of last year, and about £9,500 was spent in the quarter ending in June. I would like to say that very much more than £75,000 should be allocated for the drainage of the Barrow annually. It is a matter of vital importance. It is really a national question, and Deputies who live in the area can realise the hardships the people have to suffer. It is getting worse every year, especially in the areas of Portarlington, Mountmellick, Clonbulloge, Bracknagh, and Garryhinch. In the course of my business I often have to travel that portion of the country, and it is not an uncommon sight to see the roads covered to a depth of eighteen inches with water, and in some cases more. Very often that portion of the country is flooded for four or five months. You cannot see any land whatever. The whole place is simply submerged, and of course the land is absolutely useless. For that reason it would be really a national asset if the land were improved. If the land were drained it would be of great benefit to the nation as a whole. In the Barrow valley alone there are, roughly, 300,000 to 500,000 acres affected. Probably there might be more. In the immediate area of the river the only crop that the farmers can grow is hay. They can put in no other crop, because it would perish. It is computed that the farmer gets one crop in every three. Deputy Gorry will bear me out in that. For the last four or five years, a great many farmers have not got a single crop of hay. On last Tuesday I was setting meadows in the Barrow area, and I set some for 5s. an acre, and the prices went from 15s. to 25s. and in some places 35s. an acre. This was a good year, too, on account of the scarcity of hay. I have often set meadow there for 3s. or 4s. an acre.
They are usually set with a provision as to flooding.
Yes, there is a three weeks' provision for floods in the conditions of sale. If they have not removed their hay, and cut and saved it. they can look out after three weeks. I only mention these facts to bring before the Government and to impress upon them the urgency of the matter. In Portarlington and Mountmellick the conditions and losses from flooding are considerable. In these two towns the people have to leave entirely one side of the town, and clear out at times and take refuge in another part of the town. Sometimes there is as much as two or three feet of water in their part of the town. One could scarcely believe that the conditions are so bad. Referring back to what I was saying a moment ago with regard to the hay crop, it happens that if they get one or two or three wet days in midsummer it is inevitable that the hay crop will be lost. I would like to congratulate the Government on having brought in that valuable Act for the drainage of the Barrow. The only thing I will impress on them now is to try to expedite the work and hasten the drainage of this particular portion of the river. I know that the engineers have a lot to say on this matter, in fact, everything. They are working from Kildare up to Monasterevan, but in the meantime the areas above will, until they are reached, be flooded. There is the section in Garryhinch, and between that and Portarlington, in which, I understand, there are over 300 trees blocking the river. Some of these trees have been there for thirty or forty years. When the floods come down these trees block the river, hold back the water, and the whole country is flooded for miles around. If the Government could do some preliminary work in clearing that, it would be a great matter for the people in that area. I want to impress that very strongly upon the Minister.
A good deal has been said by the Deputies who have spoken on the flooding of the upper portions of the river. The portion of the river between Portarlington and Mountmellick requires the consideration of the Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary. The area around there is suffering from these floods. The local engineers say that that could be easily remedied. If the obstructions caused by the trees in the river were removed the flooding there would be got over, and the upper portion there, as regards the land that has been flooded up about Mountmellick and Garryhinch, would be relieved. I would like to stress on the Parliamentary Secretary to make an effort to put on more men in that section so as to remove the obstructions in that part of the river. One could scarcely believe until one went down there the hardships that are caused to the people there owing to the flooding of that portion. The Government from time to time made promises here to the people of that area. Since I became a Deputy I have myself introduced several deputations to the Government with regard to these obstructions, and promises were made that these would be cleared out. I am sorry to say that nothing much has been done there, and nothing is to be done at present. I want to press on the Parliamentary Secretary the necessity to have the work there carried out at once.
I think the Deputies for Leix and Offaly have made a good case for the carrying out of preliminary work in order to relieve the obstructions in their area in the upper reaches of the Barrow and its tributaries. I have called the attention of the Parliamentary Secretary to this matter as regards Kildare on several occasions, and I was told that there were engineering difficulties in the way. No doubt there are engineering difficulties, but still I think the engineers should not be so hide-bound in their professional practice as not to strain a point and to relieve the distress that exists where flooding is caused by small obstructions in the river. I know that a clearing of the river for a distance of 200 years or so would, in many places, give great relief to large areas of land. When dealing with problems like this the engineers find that in certain areas the ground remains covered with water for a long period after each heavy rainfall before it is drained away. The clearing away of the obstruction in the rivers works out in such a way that the flood is over in two or three days. Around Rathangan I know that great hardships have been suffered by the people, but I have been told that they are the last reaches of the river to be considered. I do not see why the Government should permit that, and why the engineers should not break away from this practice and do some of the work that the Deputies and the representatives of the area are asking to be done at once, so as to relieve the flooding in the Barrow delta. Surely the representatives here should have some say in the way this money is to be spent. Very little of that £425,000 has been spent yet. What the people want now is immediate relief from the flooding of their lands.
Yes, and work.
And work. I have asked the Parliamentary Secretary on several occasions to put on more men at Kildare at the Barrow drainage work. He has told me that he has to keep within the estimate and that the estimate was cut down to the minimum. I quite understand that. But still the problem of expenditure should be one for the Government to consider carefully. When a Bill is brought in for schemes of public utility like this and passed by the Houses, surely there is nothing unreasonable in asking the Government to do their duty in getting on with the work in that way. I hope the Parliamentary Secretary will break away from Departmental routine, and give instructions that this work must be carried out according to the wishes of the Deputies representative of the counties affected. I have nothing to say with regard to the management of the Barrow Scheme. I am sure that we have the best engineer that we could get to carry out the work. As I have already said here, I am very glad he is an Irishman, and an Irishman who has gained his experience here in this country. I have no doubt that he has an able staff. But he is working for economy. He wants to keep the work within the estimate which he has made out himself. I do not blame him for that. Still if he could manage to put on a few more gangs of men under able overseers I do not think there would be any loss of money on this scheme. If the Parliamentary Secretary is considering those areas of Leix and Offaly I hope that he will not forget the Kildare area and that he will also put on a big number of men there and do something for that unfortunate county of ours. He has not so much to show for the last two or three years. Perhaps it is not his fault. But I think he could send several gangs of men and spread them all over the county, and give our unemployed something to do in the rural area.
As I am one of the Deputies concerned with this work of the Barrow drainage, I suppose I would be expected to say something also. I have just this to say, that this scheme of the Barrow drainage is being carried out by the Department concerned on a par with the method by which the government of the country is being carried out by the Executive. That is, that it is merely tinkering with the job. They are only tinkering with the work of the draining of the Barrow. Since this work commenced, I am satisfied that half the rivers in the country could have been drained, if they had gone about the work in a thorough manner, as it would be gone about in any country but this unfortunate country.
With the same staff?
They are only playing with the job, neither doing it nor letting it alone. Since this work commenced on the Barrow the river could easily have been drained and the people there saved the sufferings that they have gone through in the past three or four years. I expect they will have to put up with this thing for the next two or three years before it is finished.
In spite of what the last speaker has said, I think it is generally allowed that the work done on the Barrow drainage has been well done. I think that has been allowed on all sides. Every Deputy who has spoken except the last Deputy has admitted that the work on the Barrow is of value and being well done. The only thing I have to find fault with is that the work is proceeding too slowly, and I suggest that during the summer months more money should be spent and more men employed than are employed there at present, and men who are idle could be put to work there.
If that can be done I think it would fill a great necessity. The summer period is, of course, the time to do what work should be done, and it is the time when it can be done best; but to say that the work is not being done well and is being tinkered with is rubbish. I think everyone in the district and adjoining counties will agree in that respect.
There is another county affected, more affected than some of the other counties. We, in Carlow and Kilkenny, would impress on the Minister the necessity of clearing away any obstacles in the lower reaches of the river. The Minister will, perhaps, be met by individuals who will complain that if these obstacles are cleared the water will come down earlier from the upper reaches. I do not agree with that. It is true it will come down a few hours earlier, but it will also go away a few hours earlier, so that it really makes no difference. This plea is being put up on the Nore and the Barrow, but the only thing I ask is that any obstacles in the lower reaches of the Barrow should be dealt with. While money is being given away for unemployment to people who will not work on farms I think it is a great waste of money to spend it in that direction while there is work of utility to be done. While there is work of utility to be done people can be employed there and made to earn the money which they would otherwise get in unemployment. If you gave them a shovel to keep back the tide and to shovel the sand along the beaches it would pay you better than paying them while they are idle. It does not need speeches to demonstrate the fact that once people become chronically idle for three or four years they will not work. They will not do so. It is against human nature. It is better to have them doing some work than having them idle.
Hear, hear.
Deputy Davin talks about paying a miserable wage of twenty-nine shillings or thirty shillings a week for this class of work. It is not a miserable wage in this country. It might be a miserable wage in countries that can afford more, but this country has limited resources.
Would you take that choice of work last winter?
No, not for choice. In fact, I do not know how these people could get to the river to do effective work during last winter. I am not going into the wisdom of paying for work during the winter as I have not got first hand information. I do not know how they could work at the river and give an effective return for the money last winter. People ought to get it out of their heads about twenty-nine shillings being a miserable wage. Agriculture cannot afford to pay that. That song has been sung on platforms and in this House frequently and it is time to change the tune. I want to repeat what I said before in regard to the question of objections being made because the Ministers and others are being met with the objection, not only in regard to this but in regard to other rivers and in regard to minor schemes of drainage, that the water of the river is being let down too quickly and flooding the lands below. That does not bear examination. You will hear many complaints about that but I hope that no attention will be paid to that plea.
rose.
Before Deputy Derrig speaks I want to point out that one hour has been allotted for this debate and the Parliamentary Secretary should be given some time to reply.
There are two reasons given why the work cannot be gone on with. One, in regard to engineering difficulties. I have no knowledge of the actual work which is being carried out but I think it is sufficiently long in hands to enable the engineers to have their schemes thoroughly understood and to know exactly where they stand. I cannot see where the engineering difficulties occur. If the work is being done piecemeal and if changes are being made necessary by the engineers now and again they would, of course, create complications but if the whole thing is being done in that good way we are led to believe and if there are competent engineers in charge I cannot see where the delay occurs. The other reason given is the weather. It is extraordinary that the expenditure in winter is greater than that in spring, and the only conclusion to which one can come to is that expenditure really does not represent wages. If it represents wages is there anything to show for it? The expenditure seems to have gone largely on the maintenance of the staff. We must take it that in winter a staff and other people must be kept there. Now, however, since the weather is likely to hold good, not only this scheme but every other scheme should be gone on with the greatest expedition. We know that in Galway the drainage of the Corrib was taken up and that when the upper reaches were drained the lower ones were flooded. It was a bad engineering scheme. I agree with Deputy Gorey that there is nothing to show why the work could not be proceeded with all along the river, at any rate work which does not present engineering difficulties, such as removing obstacles. The sooner the work on the upper reaches is done the sooner will the lower reaches benefit, but a certain amount of work should be done all along the river if it is one, single, engineering scheme.
I am a disinterested Deputy so far as the Barrow drainage is concerned, but I have a big interest in the Corrib drainage.
The Deputy cannot talk about the Corrib drainage now.
I know. I do not propose to do so, but I rise to put on extra pressure in regard to the Barrow drainage, so that when it is successfully finished we can reach the Corrib. We have unanimity of opinion from all parties in this House that the Barrow drainage is very essential and ought to be done immediately. Deputy Buckley stated in very plain English that all the work that has been done on the Barrow has been more or less tinkering.
You will find that there is no unanimity about that.
Deputy Wolfe took exception to that statement and said that it was so much rubbish. Why did not Deputy Gorey take exception to it?
It was not worth it.
It is true, nevertheless.
It is probably too late now. If the Deputy did so, Deputy Buckley would probably have answered him. Deputy Wolfe stated that Deputy Buckley's remarks were so much rubbish. If there was anything uncomplimentary in Deputy Buckley's remark, I think that Deputy Wolfe came a good second when he described that remark as rubbish. It is because of this cross-fire that I ask the Parliamentary Secretary to remember that no matter what differences there may be about the condition of the river we are all agreed that something should be done, that he should look on it as work of national importance and not allow any Party to claim credit for it. When the Barrow scheme is finished, he will have to listen to ten times as much talk from Galway Deputies when we come along with the Corrib, and we will not be long about it.
Just before the Parliamentary Secretary concludes——
The Deputy must allow the Parliamentary Secretary time to reply.
It is only a question.
I cannot allow the Deputy to put it now.
It is with regard to the tributaries of the Barrow.
The Deputy can ask the question when the Parliamentary Secretary has concluded.
As Deputies representing different opinions in the Dáil had an opportunity of voicing their grievances, I expect that this debate has served its main purpose, and I should say the reply is of minor importance. There was one point stressed by Deputies on the opposite side, and lest I might forget about it later I will refer to it now. They asked how was it that we have spent only £9,500 during the first quarter of the present financial year. That can be easily accounted for by the fact of the very bad spring we had. It was one of the worst springs for many years in Ireland, and accordingly the amount of work carried out was much less than the average. You may take it from me that I will be very much surprised if we do not expend the amount we have estimated for, £75,000, this year, and the work will be carried out on a much more rapid basis as the season proceeds.
The various objections of Deputies fell mainly under three heads. First of all, Deputies raised an objection to the fact that the work was not carried out in places where they would like to see it carried out. Secondly, they complained of the small number of workers employed; and thirdly, there is a general grievance that the work is not proceeding rapidly enough. Deputies ought to look at a question of this kind with a proper sense of proportion. It is a very big scheme, one of the biggest engineering schemes that has been tackled in this country at any time. The problem of the drainage of the Barrow has been one which confronted engineers in this country for over a century. It is a problem that has tempted the ablest engineers and a problem that baffled them until the present Government undertook it. Deputies should bear in mind that a scheme of that sort cannot be carried out in a haphazard, free-and-easy, give-and-take way, as one Deputy expressed it.
Before a spade was stuck in the ground in this scheme the operations of it had to be thoroughly planned out in advance. The work proceeded along a plan that had to be matured very carefully, and in the utmost scientific precision one portion of the work fits into another. Work that is being done today is going to have a definite reaction on work done to-morrow, and if you upset that scheme to please a Deputy here or there, if it is not going to result in upsetting the whole scheme, it certainly is going to result in upsetting the finances of the scheme. I can very well understand that the Deputies who today would like to bring pressure to bear upon me to have this work carried out in a way that would ultimately entail increased expenditure on the Government and on benefiting the land occupiers are the very Deputies who would voice the grievances of these occupiers later on when the bill is presented and when they will be called upon to pay up, because we know from experience that no matter what amount they have to pay, even though they may get good value for it, their grievances are going to be voiced and a general clamour will be raised. As I say, it is a very big undertaking. It is something on a par with military operations. The whole thing fits into one prearranged plan. It would be just as reasonable for a Deputy in the French Chamber during the war to get up when Marshal Foch was carrying on a grand general offensive in France and seek to have that offensive modified in one way or another, in order that the particular farm of some constituent of that Deputy might be cleared of the invader before another——
Do you mean that?
Mr. BOURKE
——as for Deputies to get up here and try to get particular farms of their constituents drained before others, or to have employment given to some of the people whom they very capably represent in the Dáil.
You are throwing more cold water on it.
Mr. BOURKE
We ought to face this thing with some sense of proportion, and we ought to take into consideration the difficulties that these engineers have to contend with in tackling this problem. With regard to the question of employment, I am afraid that I cannot hold forth any very great promises to Deputies on this point either. We have already reached the peak point as regards giving employment on the Barrow. There were 600 men employed in August of last year, and I do not expect to see that figure reached again. In the early stages of this scheme the work was of a superficial character. We had practically no machinery and, accordingly, most of the operations were carried out by hand labour. As the work progresses we will be dispensing with hand labour and going in more and more for machinery. There is very good reason for that the reason being that work by machinery is very much cheaper and more economic than hand labour. The estimate for the drainage of the Barrow is £425,000, and the main item of cost is the cost of excavating soft material. The excavating includes actual excavations of the material and running into spoil. The cost of doing the work by hand labour amounts to something like 6/3¼ per cubic yard. The cost of doing that work by machinery works out at something less than 2/- per cubic yard. Up to the present the work carried out by machinery and hand labour has been so proportioned that it works out on an average of something like 5/0¾ per cubic yard. Our estimate is based on the estimates that were given of excavating that material at 2/6 per yard. That will give Deputies an idea of the amount of leeway that we have to make up, and how in the future it will be necessary for us to go in more and more for the use of machinery every month.
Does the Parliamentary Secretary include the cost of machinery in that 2/6 per yard?
Mr. BOURKE
Yes. The cost of running and the machinery.
Will you give us an idea of the cost of the machinery?
Mr. BOURKE
I have not got it at the moment, but I can get the Deputy the information afterwards. It will be seen that if we are to carry out this big national scheme within the estimate, it will be necessary to go in, as I say, more and more for machinery. As regards the slowness of the work, I was glad to see that Deputy Davin very fairly admitted that the beneficial results of the work carried out have been very noticeable up to the present. Indeed, without paying a visit to the works at all, anybody standing on the bridge at Monasterevan or Athy who knows how that district was flooded a couple of years ago could not but be impressed by the different conditions that meet the eye there at the present time. In carrying out this work, the engineers, for their own reasons, came to the conclusion that the main district to be attended to, and the first district that required attention, was the stretch of river running from about six miles below Athy to about two miles below Portarlington—that is, the main stretch of the river—that comprises about twenty-five miles. Preliminary works have been carried out all along that stretch of the river, including the deepening of shoals, the removing of timber, the cutting away of sharp bends and various superficial works of that kind. Similar work has been carried out also along the Figile River for a distance of six miles. So much for preliminary work. The key stretch of the Barrow River— the really important stretch—where most of the obstructions are and where, as a result of lack of carrying capacity, the water is headed up so as to flood a great portion of the country, and also so as to cause flooding in the various tributaries, is a fifteen mile stretch between Athy and Monasterevan. It is here the engineers are concentrating at the present time. In order to realise what they have done and what they are doing here, it is necessary to know the kind of obstructions they have to deal with. Roughly speaking, they fall into two classes—natural obstructions and artificial ones.
The natural obstructions are shoals, islands, narrows and sharp bends. The artificial obstructions include bridges with insufficient water-way, mill dams, eei weirs, fords and navigation weirs. Taking the worst of the natural obstructions in order, going up-stream from Athy, there is, first of all, a long gravel shoal at Athy. There is a shoal and there are narrows at Barrowford, a rock shoal at Bert, one of the most important points on the Barrow and a very difficult problem to handle. It is being successfully handled, as I saw when I was down there a few days ago. There are shoals, islands and narrows at Reban and Kilberry, at Ballymanus and at Vicarstown. There are restricted and obstructed channels at Sallow Island and at Portmurraghan Island. There is a rock shoal at Monasterevan. These are the main natural obstructions on the river, but, as well, the whole stretch lacks carrying capacity and will have to be broadened or deepened. Upon the whole of these obstructions work on the main scheme has begun. In some places, the work has been done almost at full depth and width and in others the work is not yet in an advanced state. As regards artificial obstructions from Athy upwards, there is a navigation weir at Ardreigh to be part diverted and lowered. There is an insufficient water-way at the Grand Canal Horse Bridge at Athy. There is insufficient waterway at Crom-a-boo Bridge, Athy, and underpinning is also required. There is a great obstruction at Duke's Weir, Athy —the head race to Duke's Mill. There is an eel weir at Barrowford. There is a mill weir at Bert—a great obstruction. There is an eel weir at Vicarstown, an eel weir and ford at Portmurraghan Island, a pass bridge at Monasterevan with insufficient waterway and perched almost on the summit of the Monasterevan shoal. Of these items, the following is the present position:—Ardreigh Mill has been purchased, and work on the alterations is in hand. The Horse Bridge at Athy has been rebuilt, with ample waterway. Crom-a-boo Bridge has been underpinned and inverts put in, so that no obstruction occurs even in heavy floods. Duke's Mill and weir have been purchased. The weir has been removed and the mill is being used as offices, stores, and the general headquarters for the whole work. The eel weir at Barrowford has been removed. The mill weir at Bert has been purchased and temporarily sluiced. It is being used as a control for the up-stream waters during the excavation of the rock at this place. The eel weir at Vicarstown has been purchased and removed. The eel weir and ford at Portmurraghan Island have been removed. Nothing has been done to Monasterevan Bridge as yet, nor can anything be done until the excavation is complete. A new bridge will be required.
This is only a very general summary of the work that has already been carried out but I think it is a sufficient answer to Deputy Buckley's statement that we are merely tinkering with the job. I was very glad to hear Deputy Colohan pay a compliment to the engineer in charge of this work. I think we should be proud, irrespective of party, that we have Irishmen in the country capable of tackling big important engineering works of this kind and of carrying them out successfully. A little more of that kind of argument would do more to help us than some of the carping criticism we hear from time to time. There were some minor objections raised. Deputy Gorry spoke about the dredger. That is a point of detail. I am not familiar with the various places where the different dredgers are working at the present time. We have a great amount of plant at all times working on those rivers and I cannot tell him at the moment where the dredger is operating. As regards the Garryhinch and Mountmellick obstructions or the amount of trees in the river and all that, I can bring that point before the engineers, but I cannot promise they will deal with that before the time allotted in their programme for carrying out the work. All those operations are in a big general scheme. It has been visualised in advance, planned and mapped out in advance, and it is very unfair to ask them to hasten up a particular job before they are ready to tackle it, before the plant and machinery are moved so as tackle it in a proper scientific way.
I would like to ask the Parliamentary Secretary a question about a couple of tributaries on the barrow on the upper reaches. I want to know whether they would be dealt with in the scheme proper or dealt with as minor drainage scheme. I know of farmers who are moving in connection with these small tributaries.
Mr. BOURKE
Bring it to our attention and we can say then what can be done. Some of those tributaries are included in the scheme and some are not. I cannot tell at the moment.
I would like to know is it the intention of the Parliamentary Secretary to build a new bridge on the site of the old pass bridge of Monasterevan.
Mr. BOURKE
Yes.
I am glad to hear that.
The Dáil adjourned at 8.50 until 10th October at 3 p.m.