Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 24 Feb 1949

Vol. 114 No. 4

Private Deputies' Business. - Drainage Problem—Motion.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

I move:

That Dáil Éireann is of opinion that it is essential in the national interest that immediate action be taken to prevent a recurrence of flooding throughout the country and calls for a much more active and urgent implementation of the Arterial Drainage Acts.

This motion was put down by Deputy Seán Collins and myself because, being Deputies who represent rural constituencies—like other Deputies representing rural constituencies—we appreciate that the drainage problem in this country is one of the gravest problems facing any Government and that it requires immediate and active and continuous attention. It is surprising to learn that we have still in this country 1,500,000 acres of land which is subject to flooding. We have still 1,500,000 acres of land which is lost to its owners and lost to the country from the point of view of production and the yielding of wealth.

I put down this motion because I believe that the question of drainage, particularly arterial drainage, has not received the attention that it should have received. That belief was based on my knowledge of the blatant neglect of this problem evidenced by the previous Administration. I do not intend to waste the time of the House in discussing what the previous Government did or failed to do while they were in office but it is right to say that, whatever useful work they may have done in other spheres or whatever plans or schemes they may have had in mind, they gave no outward sign of concern for the drainage problem. It is true that the Arterial Drainage Act was passed in 1945, with the support and assistance, I think, of all political Parties, but it was not put into operation, so far as the people could see, until June, 1948.

During the years following 1945 the country suffered very considerably from flooding, particularly in the winter of 1946, with resultant hardship, damage, and injury to the agricultural industry. It is not possible under any extensive scheme of drainage to deal with abnormal flooding but it is possible to pursue a scheme of arterial drainage more actively than has been done in the past. I want to impress on the Parliamentary Secretary—and I know I am speaking to a man who is concerned about this problem and aware of the need for action—that in the last 26 years very little has been done to reclaim what I might describe as floodable land. Some progress was made, particularly in the years prior to 1932, but in the last 16 years very little has been done. The problem has now become part and parcel of the drive for greater production in agriculture and in other spheres of our economic life. We can only get that production if we use every acre of land and that is possible only by proper drainage and reclamation.

I do not believe that the powers at present available to the Government are sufficient for dealing with this problem. Under the 1945 Act, the old drainage boards and drainage districts were abolished and their particular powers and functions transferred to the county councils. Power was given under the Act for arterial drainage in catchment areas of particular rivers. That Act is now seeing its first application in the drainage of the River Brosna in my constituency, but one is forced to the conclusion that the drainage problem cannot be dealt with exclusively by arterial drainage in a catchment area. There are problems in each county and in each constituency which are too small for the arterial drainage programme, so small that their place in the programme would mean that they would be attended to in, perhaps, ten or 12 years. Yet these particular problems or difficulties may be of such magnitude as to be outside the scope of any special employment scheme. They are too small for one and too big for the other. If the powers of the Government remain as they are at present, problems such as these will not be attended to until they are dealt with under the arterial drainage programme.

I do not believe that any Government that is satisfied with a situation like that—as the previous Government was —is a Government which is serious about tackling the drainage problem. I welcome the assurances given in the last week or so and in this House last night by the Minister for Local Government and the Minister for Industry and Commerce that arrangements will be made to tackle what I would call the in-between drainage problem. I am not concerned as to how that is done but I am concerned to see that it is done.

I welcome the proposal that in each county council area provision will be made for the draining and maintenance of rivers and waterways by the county council engineer at the expense of the Central Fund. Apart altogether from the employment that such a proposal will give, it will mean material improvement of rural areas that have been flooded in recent winters as a result of badly maintained and neglected rivers and waterways.

If I were to conclude without mentioning the pet problem in my constituency of Knockbarron, I could scarcely go back to my constituents. In one particular area in my constituency near Kinnity there is a local drainage problem because a particular river has become completely choked and has changed its course to run along a public road, flooding the land of some seven or eight farmers, depriving the people of the locality of a public road and causing considerable hardship and damage. That particular river, known as the Camcor, at Knockbarron, will be reached on the arterial drainage programme, I understand, in a period of some ten or 12 years. It has been flooding the lands of the people of Knockbarron and the surrounding district for the past four years. I do not know what was done before, but I have raised the question of getting some work done with the county council, who stated: "It is no concern of ours. There is no drainage district surrounding this particular river and it is not vested in us." I have raised it with the special employment scheme office and they, of course, very properly stated that the work involved is too great to be undertaken by them. I have raised it with the Land Commission, who also have declined responsibility. I have raised it in this House with the Minister for Local Government and pointed out to him that, as a result of the flooding, a road has ceased to be usable. Again I was told that it was no concern of his Department.

I am certain that there are many similar drainage problems and I just instance that as a case where, by reason of lack of unified responsibility, lack of powers and, to use a Civil Service phrase, lack of functions, a problem will not be attended to. I am glad that now, apparently, powers which were lacking in the past are going to be taken by the Government. I hope that when these powers are taken problems such as the one I have mentioned in Knockbarron and others in areas in my constituency which I could mention, will receive the immediate attention of the Parliamentary Secretary or whatever officer of the Government will be carrying out this programme. I emphasise to the Parliamentary Secretary that this problem needs active and continuous attention. It would be a serious crime if, after the experience of the winter of 1946, we were to have in any part of this country again flooding of such a sustained nature extending over a period of three or four weeks by reason of the neglect of drainage in the past. It would be a serious thing if, after that experience, a repetition should occur next winter or any coming winter. I know that the Parliamentary Secretary is aware of this problem and I trust that when these new powers have been taken the problem will be followed up and dealt with extensively.

The need for drainage is not localised in any part of the country. In Kerry they have their own particular problem, and in Cork, in the West, and in the Midlands the problem is acute and damage, hardship and injury have been caused in the past. I hope that the problem will now be one of prime concern to this Government. It was one of the matters which had its place in the ten-point programme upon which this Government was formed and I hope that in the coming six or eight months we shall see real progress made towards the solving of our local drainage problems. Drainage is a problem which needs immediate action and I hope that at the end of this debate or during it we shall hear from the Parliamentary Secretary his plan and policy for the coming 12 months and that we shall see in our constituencies practical evidence that that policy and plan are being carried out.

Mr. Sweetman

I formally second the motion and reserve my right to speak later.

Mr. O'Leary

I should like to add my voice to that of the Deputy who has spoken, because in Bridgetown in my constituency when heavy rain comes serious flooding is caused. In the Macamores district serious damage is caused to farmers who cannot get to their land. I ask the Parliamentary Secretary to see that something is done in these areas. It is all very well to start drainage work in Leix and Offaly, but the work ought to be spread out so as to help farmers in other areas who suffer from damage to their land and loss of cattle. Since I became a Deputy I have heard a lot of talk in this House about drainage work. There has been talk about it since 1943, but very little drainage has been done. The previous Government made a start at drainage work. Since this Government came into office machinery has been brought in and drainage work put into operation in Leix and Offaly. We are glad to know that a start has been made, but in every constituency where flooding is doing damage to land and property it is the duty of whatever Government is in power to go ahead with the work and not sit down on the job as the Fianna Fáil Government sat down on it for 16 years. The reason why Kilkenny and other places were flooded is that nothing was done. We hear talk about the promises which this Government and the last Government made and some people on the far side call us a popular front, but I am glad to say that we have done something. I must congratulate the Departments and the Parliamentary Secretaries for the efforts which have been made. Deputy Killilea may smile over there.

Mr. Killilea

Is a man not entitled to smile?

Mr. O'Leary

We are doing something and that cannot be denied. Let that progress go on. For the past few years with every flood we had, all the Deputies in the House from Wicklow to Tipperary put down questions about the loss of cattle, sheep and produce on the land under the floods. The reason was that the scheme was inactive for so long. No scheme was put into operation—it was on the Order Paper all right, but it remained there. Now a start has been made in Deputy O'Higgins' constituency which is giving good employment. Let that progress be continued.

I will ask the Parliamentary Secretary to consider the points I have made for the people I represent in Wexford, where floods have taken place, where whole areas in Macamores were flooded for want of drainage. I will ask him to give consideration to those points and do something in our area as has been done in Laoighis-Offaly.

Mr. O'Grady

It is refreshing to hear from the benches opposite that the problem of drainage is, after all, a serious one. We were told when they were in opposition that even the drainage of the Shannon was a simple operation. I remember listening to the present Minister for Defence, who at that time represented an area that was, and is, suffering as a result of lack of drainage, stating in this House that enough men left one small village in his constituency at the confluence of the Brosna and the Shannon to drain these rivers. Nothing, I think, could be worse than to hold out false hopes to the people of the country that drainage is a problem which can be solved overnight. I appreciate the difficulties confronting the Parliamentary Secretary and I would be honest enough at least to admit they are there, for I know something of the problems which he has to face. They are not simple and they will not be easily overcome because, if you take the broader view of this problem and not a mere narrow parochial outlook, the principal artery of this country is the Shannon. I would like some of the people on the opposite benches to tell me how the Shannon is going to be drained in a short time or how it is going to be easily drained. Whether for good or for ill, the establishment of the Shannon scheme put a barrier to the drainage of the Shannon. The fall in the water from the time it leaves Lough Allen until it reaches Killaloe, a distance of 111 miles—I forget the exact distance but it exceeds 100 miles—is only 11 feet. When you tackle the drainage of that river and its tributaries, as is being done on one of its tributaries at the present time, and continue that work, you can see the difficulties that lie ahead. In time of severe flooding, such as that referred to by Deputy O'Higgins which occurred during the winter of 1946-47, you will have a huge increase in the volume of water flowing into the Shannon. Deputy O'Higgins mentioned, incidentally, that the area of land liable to flooding in this country was something like 1,500,000 acres, but he did not mention how much of that area lies in close proximity to the Shannon. It would be interesting to know—and I hope that the Parliamentary Secretary will give us the figures— exactly what area of the country is flooded by the Shannon and its tributaries, because that is the really big problem in the drainage of this country.

We were told that nothing had been done by the previous Government, forgetful of the fact that all the whistle-blowing that took place in June could not have taken place were it not for the preparations which had been made for the drainage of the Brosna. It was ready for implementation not in June but in April, 1948, and as a result of the change of Government or of some other crux that arose subsequently it was deferred from April to June. There has been no addition to the number of schemes which have been undertaken. Three other schemes were ready, for instance, the Glyde and Dee. Twelve months have elapsed and there has been no question from the opposite benches as to the delays which prevented the implementation of that scheme.

Mr. Donnellan

I am surprised at that, from a man who knows that that is not right.

Mr. O'Grady

I am speaking the truth——

Mr. Donnellan

It is not correct.

Mr. O'Grady

—and the records in the Department will prove it. That scheme was ready before the change of Government and two others as well, in West Limerick and in North Kerry. As far as I am aware, there has been no great addition to the solution of the drainage problem since then. I hope there will be and the more success that attends the efforts of the Parliamentary Secretary the better we will all be pleased. The scheme which is under way at the moment is estimated to cost £1,080,000. That is only for a tributary of the Shannon and there are several such tributaries. That in itself should make Deputies understand that this problem of national drainage is not a small one and that it will take the best efforts of our engineers and the best engineers that can be had. One of the problems which the Parliamentary Secretary will have to cope with is engineers.

Mr. O'Leary

What was the Deputy doing for the last 16 years?

Mr. O'Grady

I would like if Deputy O'Leary would get a gramophone record prepared with "Sixteen years" on it and he could play it day and night. I did not interrupt; it is not my habit to interrupt and any remarks I have to make will, I hope, be of a constructive nature.

Mr. O'Leary

Like those that were going on all day.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Will Deputy O'Leary please keep quiet?

Mr. O'Grady

Again I repeat that I did not interrupt the Deputy.

There are many other problems, not, perhaps, of as great dimensions as those of the Shannon, in every constituency and in every county in Ireland. Even in my own constituency, Clare, there are several rivers which come within the category of "in between rivers." They are not considered sufficiently large to be made the subject of a drainage scheme under the 1945 Act and they are too big a problem to be brought into a minor relief scheme or any of the other schemes which have been in operation.

This problem of drainage has been with us for a good many years, despite all the prophetic utterances that we used to have from Deputies on the opposite side of the House. I could very easily get up here and say to the Parliamentary Secretary: "Hurry up with the job; it is an easy one; you will have no difficulty in dealing with it; all you have to do is to blow another whistle and you will have it all settled in a couple of years." But, I suggest, it will take a good deal of whistling before a quarter of the rivers that are flooding the land of this country are drained. I appreciate the necessity there is for drainage. There is a lot of talk at the moment about the reclamation of waste land and of bringing it back into productivity. I fully realise that you cannot bring land into productivity while it is water-logged. The first essential towards the reclamation of waste land that is liable to flooding—some of these lands incidentally, are carrying a very high valuation —is drainage. The drainage of waste land, and even field drainage, depends for its success on the water on these fields being able to get away into the rivers and, ultimately, into the sea.

I hope that the Parliamentary Secretary will be able to speed up drainage in the future. He has an advantage which, at all events, the Fianna Fáil Government had not. He has machinery available to him now which was unobtainable during the war years. We tried by every means in our power to obtain the necessary machinery, but during the emergency it was not possible to get it. Now that there is an improvement in that direction, I hope he will be able to get all the machinery that he requires and that he will not hesitate to purchase whatever machinery is necessary.

In conclusion, I would appeal to Deputies on all sides of the House not to try to minimise the importance of this very difficult problem for, as I say, nothing could be worse for our people than to leave them under the illusion that this problem of drainage is a simple one. For instance, the Minister for Defence told us on one occasion that a few men from the little village of Brosna could drain the Brosna into the Shannon. The Deputy almost left me under the impression that he could drain the Shannon with his stethoscope.

Mr. Coburn

I desire to support the motion. I congratulate Deputy O'Grady on the tone of his speech in which he appealed to Deputies on all sides to help the Parliamentary Secretary to make this drainage question a success. There is no doubt whatever that, owing to the lack of drainage, large tracts of land are going to waste. They are producing nothing owing to the fact that they are water-logged. There seems to be no immediate hope of the water being taken off those lands. In fact, I think the acreage of land wasted in that way has been on the increase during the last number of years. In my opinion it will require the active support and co-operation of all concerned, including the farmers, if the intentions of the Parliamentary Secretary with regard to this drainage question are to be crowned with the success which, we all hope, he will be able to achieve.

I know that in the county I represent schemes for the drainage of land there have been held up during the last six or seven years. If it had been possible to carry them out they would have brought great advantage to the county. I know, of course, the difficulties which confronted the then Parliamentary Secretary. There was the lack of machinery during the war years. We in Louth did not pillory him in the House because we knew the circumstances that existed at the time. We were prepared to wait until better times would enable the Board of Works to carry out these necessary works. I want to refer particularly to the deepening and widening of the River Glyde. I understand that work has been on the stocks for some considerable time, and I hope the Parliamentary Secretary will be able to get it under way as soon as possible.

I agree with Deputy O'Grady as to the difficulties which confront anybody who is concerned with the drainage of land or the deepening or widening of rivers. Water is a very fickle thing. In the past it has baffled engineers of very high standing, and it certainly can be said that drainage is not the very simple matter that some people seem to imagine. It calls for the exercise of patience and foresight, and those responsible must ensure that plans are well laid before work is undertaken. It is work that requires time and money, and, above and beyond all, it calls for the goodwill and co-operation of the people. In that connection, I think the Deputies can play a most important part, each in his own district, by bringing before the people the drainage schemes that in their opinion are essential for the draining of the land in their areas. They should point out to the people that it is their duty as well as in their own interest to co-operate to the fullest extent in the steps that may be taken by the Parliamentary Secretary for the drainage of the land of the country. The execution of drainage works creates not only employment but brings great prosperity to the people because it has the effect of increasing beyond measure the productivity of land that otherwise would be wasted. I hope that the efforts of the Parliamentary Secretary, aided by his officials and supported by the co-operation of all concerned, will be crowned with success.

Mr. Sweetman

I want to refer to one particular problem which has arisen in the County Kildare and which, possibly, has also arisen in other constituencies. As everybody knows, we have in Kildare a very big expanse of bog. That expanse was, to some extent, drained during the period of the emergency to assist in providing a fuel supply for the City of Dublin; but the drainage that was carried out by Bord na Móna in the Bog of Allen has created for the farmers living in the area of the bog a new problem. Prior to that, the situation was that when, in the ordinary course, we had a heavy rainfall, the bog acted as a sort of sponge. It held the water until it actually came down off the bog and went into the Rathangan River, or the Barrow in the south, or the Blackwater or Boyne in the north. Now, however, the situation is, as a consequence of drainage done from Rathangan to Edenderry and across to Timahoe by Bord na Móna, that the sponge that was there no longer operates as a sponge, so that when we get a heavy rainfall the water over a large area of the bog rushes straight down and floods very large parts of the land surrounding the verge of the bog, parts which heretofore were never subject to flooding. It is a new problem, therefore, to that extent. It is a problem which will have to be tackled and tackled fairly soon if substantial damage is not going to be done. I agree for once with Deputy O'Grady that the whole problem of drainage is a difficult one, but it is a problem that has got to be tackled with energy, foresight and imagination. Unless it is tackled in that way we are going to arrive at the situation where though we may be improving the drainage in one particular area we travel so slowly that by the time we come to the next area the full benefits of the first may have gone. Therefore, I am very glad to see that the Parliamentary Secretary and the Government as a whole are tackling in a substantial way the problem of drainage throughout the country.

We have in North Leinster in particular the big problem of the Boyne. Not merely does the Boyne flood a great deal of land on its own but its tributaries do substantial damage in addition. Particularly in my constituency the Blackwater renders a very large part of the North Kildare land almost unproductive, certainly not anything like as productive as it should be. As I said in the beginning, that problem has been gravely accentuated and influenced by the draining of bogs by Bord na Móna as the result of which not merely has the water which used to be soaked up like a sponge come off the bogs but it has thrown silt into the Blackwater and the Boyne in a way that was never known before. I would urge the Parliamentary Secretary, therefore, to take early steps either on his own account or in conjunction with Bord na Móna to deal with this problem. The people in those areas have been put in the position in which they now find themselves as a direct result of Governmental action in the matter of fuel provision.

Deputy O'Grady mentioned the Electricity Supply Board plant at Killaloe and the effect that it was having on the Shannon reach. I gathered from him that as far as drainage was concerned he thought it was a pity that there was a hydro-electric works there. It is only fair that I should say in that respect that our experience in regard to the Liffey reservoir in Kildare is exactly the reverse. Prior to the set-up in Poulaphouca there were substantial areas that used to flood along the lower reaches of the Liffey. Since the hydro-electric station was set up on the borders of Kildare and Wicklow there has been no evidence of that flooding. Therefore, in that one instance there certainly has been an easement of the difficulty.

Before I came into the House during the course of the emergency I seem to remember somewhere about the beginning of the compulsory tillage scheme a statement made by the Minister at that time that we had lost something like 1,000,000 acres of arable land. I think it is acceptable without question that the loss there was on the previous consideration of the problem about 25 years before, had largely arisen from lack of drainage, through old drains silting up and through arterial drains not being attended to. That alone should make the problem that has to be faced quite clear to us. It is the only way in which we can adequately ensure that there will be greater productivity from our land on a really large scale as apart from the land already in operation. The reclamation of large areas will assist very substantially in settling more people on the land and it will without question bring greater wealth to much of the rural areas around. I hope, therefore, that the Parliamentary Secretary will ensure in the time that lies ahead that there will be real, active and energetic steps taken in regard to this whole matter. If he continues in the same way as during the last 12 months, regardless of whether the plans were made by the Fianna Fáil Government before or the Parliamentary Secretary now, the results under his aegis and the Board of Works will be such that we shall be able to come along here in a few years time and say that we have been able to reclaim a substantial proportion of land that was previously not arable. In addition we shall have been able to make the life of those living in the flooded areas more congenial for them to earn their living on their own land.

Mr. McQuillan

I think we are all in agreement in this House that the major problem facing us is that of drainage. No matter how much we talk about agriculture and productivity of the land we can never hope to have that productivity until the land is drained. The first time I spoke here on the Estimate of the Board of Works on drainage I said that I considered the Board of Works should "get the works". I have not changed my views on that in any way. The main reason why I want to speak here to-night is to impress on the Parliamentary Secretary and the Government that our Party, the Clann na Poblachta Party, insist that this problem should be faced in a workman-like manner. Any question of finance or of cheese-paring cannot and will not be allowed to enter into it.

I asked the Parliamentary Secretary some time ago to carry out a certain scheme on the Shannon. I asked him whether it would be possible to open the sluice gates at Banagher in order to relieve the summer flooding. I had made previous representations on that matter and so had other Deputies. As a matter of fact it has been going on for years. The board gave the answer that the opening of those sluice gates would not affect the flooding in the region above it at all. However, the people living in the area told me that the flooding would be reduced and I pointed that out to the Parliamentary Secretary. I said that it was the Board of Works' word against the peoples'. I should like to have a record here that when the pressure was brought to bear the Parliamentary Secretary agreed to give a trial to this matter of opening the sluice gates. As a result of that trial numerous people in the surrounding areas have written to me saying that it had been of immense value to them during the summer period when they wanted to get their hay in. That is a typical example of what the "new look" can do if a man is prepared to face up to his work. With all due respect to the experts' opinion, even in a case like that it was better to satisfy the people locally and show them one way or the other whether it could be done or not. In that particular instance it could be done and I should like to have that placed on record. I hope that during his term of office the Parliamentary Secretary will show the same outlook towards the drainage problem as he showed in that particular item which I put before him. I can assure him that, as far as Deputies of our Party throughout the country are concerned, anything we can do to help him in this matter we shall be only too glad to do.

I could be very sore about this problem because I come from an area that is flooded for seven or eight months of the year. I could give a long list of the faults of Fianna Fáil and deal with their lack of attention, when in office, to this drainage problem. I do not want to do that. I want to see this Government tackling the drainage problem in a thoroughly workman-like manner. If the Parliamentary Secretary does that, he will have the thanks not alone of this Government, but even of the supporters of Fianna Fáil, whom it concerns just as much.

Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance (Mr. Donnellan)

I am delighted that the speeches on this motion have been so brief and I thank the Deputies who have spoken. I am one of those who believe that it is not talk that will help us in this matter. I believe it is hard work from our engineers and experts. I hope, with the exception of the statement we have had from Deputy O'Grady, that the House will endeavour to keep this matter of drainage above politics. To all of us, no matter on what side of the House we sit, and to the people outside, drainage is an important matter and it would be a bad thing for us if we tried to score political points off one another in relation to something that is so vital as drainage. I hope it will be kept on that plane by any speakers who follow me.

There was one statement made by Deputy O'Grady to which I must refer. He mentioned the blowing of a whistle and he wanted to make little of the start on the first of our great arterial drainage schemes. If he wants to belittle it, he can do so, but I may tell him that his statement that that scheme was ready to start in April is not correct. What could I start it with last April? Was it with a few rusty excavators, 20 years old, and out of commission? Could I have started the scheme with them? Certainly not. I had to wait until some of those were repaired and until I could purchase other machinery. That is the reason why the scheme was not started in April. The machinery with which to start it was not there.

The Deputy stated that the Glyde and Dee scheme was prepared a year ago. It is not finished yet. According to the Act, the Glyde and Dee scheme has to be exhibited, and that will mean a delay of a few months more. I can assure the House that if we could go forward with it to-morrow morning, we would gladly do so. The moment the scheme is prepared we will go ahead with it. The same thing applies to another scheme now under survey. The survey is nearly complete. There is the field catchment area taking in the Brick and Cashen in South Kerry. That is also nearly complete. I hope within a short time that we will have at least three major drainage schemes in operation.

I can assure the House that there is no one as interested in having drainage carried out as I am. There is no use in my saying that I am satisfied with the progress at the moment. I am not. Any man who has the responsibility of getting this work done placed on his shoulders and who knows that there are over 1,000,000 acres subject to flooding, cannot be satisfied no matter what progress is being made. He must feel that there is a danger that he will be dead and gone before all the land is fully restored to our people. Every man with any sense of responsibility realises that the sooner that land is brought back to fertility the better for the people.

Even if I am not satisfied with the progress made, I fail to see who can be blamed. I cannot blame the commissioners, the officers of the Board of Works; I cannot blame the engineering department and I cannot blame the workers where we have schemes in operation. They are all doing their best, and still I do not feel satisfied, no matter how fast we move in the direction of having the job done. I would not feel satisfied even if it were possible for us to have ten major schemes in operation. I fully realised, when the Taoiseach asked me to take charge of the Board of Works, he did it with the intention that drainage should be my main object. I fully realise the responsibility I have taken over.

When a motion like this is put down, it often occurs to a person to come to the conclusion that some members of the House must feel he is not doing his duty, is not moving fast enough. I looked up the records and I found that this motion was put down at the end of February last. It is my duty to make clear what has been done since last February. I am not going to criticise what was done before then. I have no doubt that as far as the outgoing Parliamentary Secretary is concerned he was probably doing his best, and so was the man there before him.

I have looked up the records and I find that Deputy Smith was also interested in this problem. I may as well be honest about it, that, even though any of you might think quite differently, the Arterial Drainage Act of 1945 was a godsend to this country. I say that, having been in the office for the past 12 months, an office where we have got 100 years' experience of drainage at our disposal.

Everybody knows that we had piecemeal drainage carried on in this country. Any amount of money was spent in the past on piecemeal drainage. On looking up the records in the Board of Works one finds that very often after thousands of pounds had been spent on a scheme people complained that the cure was worse than the disease. Such drainage has proved of no advantage whatsoever.

A drainage commission was set up ultimately and on their report and recommendations the Arterial Drainage Act of 1945 was passed unanimously by this House. That Act provided that drainage should be done in catchment areas and that such drainage should be maintained. They recommended that there should be no piecemeal drainage of any kind. Everybody knows that when a cup is full you cannot put more liquid into it. With piecemeal drainage in operation certain portions of rivers were drained. Those certain portions had no outfall and the result was that such drainage proved for the most part a costly failure. The Drainage Commission recommended that drainage operations should begin at the outfall and that the whole catchment area should be completely surveyed. Only under such circumstances could drainage be a success. The Brosna has abundantly demonstrated the proof of that. The next important recommendation was that drainage should be maintained. Rivers are like roads. If you construct a road and then ignore it for ten or 15 years you find at the end of that time that the road, however well constructed in the beginning, is impassable. Something similar happens in the case of drainage. A drainage scheme which is not maintained has no utility. It deteriorates day by day. Piecemeal drainage which is not maintained must be a complete failure.

No matter how slowly we may move in implementing the Act of 1945, our progress is sure. Arterial drainage must of its very nature be slow. In the first place a complete survey must be carried out; the area must be mapped and all the regulations governing drainage must be carried out. Once that is done success, so far as our engineers in the Board of Works are concerned, is guaranteed. Even if work is slow the fact that its success is guaranteed must in a large measure outweigh its apparent slowness. At the moment we are in process of building up. We are in a situation something like that of a building contractor. When a building contractor starts a scheme he has first of all to assemble his machinery and materials. The first ten houses will be slow but, once the organisation is there, the work will go on more and more rapidly. We are doing something like that in relation to drainage. We are building up. As soon as we have our plans, our machinery and our material we shall move faster and faster.

There are, roughly, 100 catchment areas in the country. Deputy O'Grady said that I deserved sympathy. That may be true, but whether I shall get it is another matter. We have now started arterial drainage and all over the country people in the different catchment areas are demanding that we should do their area first although for many years, when no drainage at all was being done, there was not a word heard. Now they are crying out that their area be done immediately. But we cannot proceed like that. The Drainage Commission laid down a certain priority list. On that list the Brosna was number one. Then there was the Glyde and Dee, the Feale catchment area in Kerry and the Brick and Cashin. They laid it down that those were the most important schemes. It is our intention to proceed along the lines they recommend. We feel that in certain areas we may not recover as good land as might be anticipated but to those areas where people are subject to flooding in their homes we shall also turn our attention. In that direction we have at the moment on hands a survey of the Corrib. That is the most difficult scheme we have yet tackled because the catchment area covers over 1,200 square miles. It comprises the reclamation of 300 or 400 acres of land and includes important tributaries and an area around Lough Corrib and on to Ballyhaunis and Roscommon. When I went into the Board of Works I thought it desirable that we should do some drainage work in that particular area. It is because of that that we are now engaged on a survey of the Corrib. The Glyde and Dee scheme is almost ready except for the exhibition of the scheme. The Brick and Cashin scheme is well on the way to preparation. There is a fourth scheme under survey. I expect that in the near future we shall have three of them working simultaneously. In this respect I should like to remind the House that it is not possible to carry out a survey to-day and start work within a month or even a year. Even if we had all the machinery necessary it would still be impossible to carry out work with that degree of rapidity.

The Brosna is a huge scheme. A survey had to be made of the entire catchment area—an area comprising 500 square miles. That survey commenced in August, 1942, and all the available drainage engineers in the Office of Public Works were engaged on that until the summer of 1944. More than 530 miles of rivers, streams and drains and an area of about 95,000 acres of land and bog had to be examined in detail. The Brosna scheme entails interference with the water-rights of no less than 34 mills and two distilleries. It interferes with the water system of a few towns and villages. It entails the building, reconstruction and underpinning of 400 bridges. Coupled with that there is some minor interference with two private properties. Now the Brosna is not one of our larger schemes though it is an important one. Yet it has taken years to do that much work on it. We are working on it now. We feel, however, that surveys must be carried out more quickly. For one thing we are now getting machinery more quickly than we thought we would.

I want to pay a tribute now to our Minister for Finance. He fully appreciates the necessity for this work and, as far as I am concerned, the purse is always open. Any money that is required for drainage to reclaim more than 1,000,000 acres of our land is willingly and readily given. Because of the magnificent co-operation I am getting from the Minister for Finance I must take full responsibility if the work is not carried out with desirable rapidity. If the work is not done satisfactorily then it is upon my shoulders the blame must lie. Since this Government came into office, we have purchased £250,000 worth of machinery and brought it into this country. We have more on order and in the near future the board will be meeting again to discuss getting more machinery. At the moment, we have on the Brosna some excavators weighing 60 tons, machines which can take up in one bucket two tons from the bottom of the River Brosna. We are doing there roughly the work of 4,500 men per day in manual labour. As the House will realise, when we have three schemes going together, as I hope we will, so that work of that description can be carried on, we may hope to see the day when the work will eventually be completed.

I want to assure the House that, so far as I am concerned and so far as the commissioners and the engineering staff are concerned, they are pushing an open door in asking us to speed up drainage work. We intend to double, and, if possible, to treble, our survey gangs for the coming year and in the near future we shall be in the market for engineers. Drainage, however, is a rather strange problem and every engineer is not suitable. Many of the engineers we take on, we have to train, and it takes some years before an engineer becomes equipped sufficiently to be of value to us. In the near future, however, we hope to put these engineers on a solid established footing so that we will get men, good young engineers, who are willing to devote their lives to this very necessary work. In the past few months, I found a certain amount of trouble in the Board of Works, in this respect, that people were not being patient. I felt that the 1945 Act was to a certain extent a hindrance, because the moment that Act came into operation it prevented county councils, the Board of Works or any other body from interfering in certain repair works and drainage works. For instance, when the Act became law a county council was not entitled to remove obstacles from a river—obstacles such as a tree which had fallen across a river or silting which had taken place under bridges.

Mr. Smith

Where is that provided for in the 1945 Act?

Mr. Donnellan

If the Deputy will allow me, I will deal with that. They were not allowed to go in except in areas where they were responsible for maintenance schemes which they had carried out there already.

Mr. Smith

There was no such provision in the 1945 Act.

Mr. Donnellan

A deputation came to me from the county councils, and, realising the terrible gap between our Arterial Drainage Act and work of that description—work which probably could be carried out by our Special Employments Schemes Office—I made a recommendation to the Minister for Local Government, which, as he announced here last night, I am glad to say, has been accepted by the Government, that, for the future, local authorities should be given authority to get their engineers to carry out schemes for the removal of such obstacles and that full cost grants should be given by his Department. I am glad that that recommendation has been accepted, because in many cases these obstructions were becoming worse and worse and doing harm further upstream. There was a great cry for us to go in there, but for years it was not possible for us to go into some of these catchment areas. I believe that this move is a move in the right direction and I believe it will ease quite a lot of the flooding which took place last December and November, following the heavy rainfall.

Mr. Killilea

Have you to amend the 1945 Act to do that?

Mr. Donnellan

The Minister told you that last night. These are a few of the things I want to put before the House with regard to the way we are working and what our views are. I can assure the House that the great interest of the Board of Works is drainage particularly. We are doing our best in every possible way and it is our hope to go forward as quickly as possible. As I said, drainage is not a matter on which the different sides of the House should attempt to score political points. It is not worth while for either of us to do so. Deputy Killilea and I come from an area where there are different political viewpoints, but it is an area where, regardless of those different political viewpoints, we realise the great necessity for drainage work, and in putting forward this motion Deputies are, as I say, pushing an open door. I know that the motion has not been put down as a vote of censure. I am sure that the mover and seconder of the motion, realising the work we have done and the way in which we are trying to do it, will feel satisfied and will withdraw the motion.

Mr. Smith

I must say that I found myself in substantial agreement with the Parliamentary Secretary in his defence of the general drainage plan, recommended to the Government by the Drainage Commission, on which the 1945 Act is based. I was, in fact, in doubt as to whether the Parliamentary Secretary would deal with another aspect of drainage about which there has been some fairly loose talk in these last few days, in the hope that he might at least clear my mind as to the Government's intention in regard to this matter.

When I came to this House some time in 1945 with the Drainage Bill, as it then was, the one thing I found during the course of the discussion was this. I am not going to trouble Deputies by referring to the records, but I suggest that those who are interested should go back and have a look at the records, to get a picture of the criticism that was levelled against me as the person responsible for recommending these proposals for legislation, not only in this House but in the Seanad. I am not now saying, nor did I say then, that I had any objection to a person being critical as to the powers that I sought in that Bill. The peculiar thing is that those who were critical—and so critical that they described these powers as dictatorial—are now coming along and suggesting to the House and to the country that the 1945 Drainage Act was, as the Parliamentary Secretary has described it, whether he intended to do so or not in his concluding remarks, obstructive in dealing with certain problems. I was disappointed that the Parliamentary Secretary did not see fit to give us some fairly clear indication of what this three-line Bill is going to be like, which will empower county councils, we are told, to enter upon lands and carry out all necessary functions so as to effect improvement in the drainage condition of those areas.

I will tell the House a little of my experience while I was in the Office of Public Works. Just like the Parliamentary Secretary, I am not a technical person in these matters. When you go into an office of that kind, you go in, of course, with respect for people who have technical training and technical knowledge; but at the same time you go in with a certain amount of suspicion. I had been, I suppose, like the Parliamentary Secretary, associated with local bodies for many years and I had watched these technical people, engineers and others. They were often right, of course; they were often wrong; they were often faulty in their judgment and they often bewildered me as a layman as to the extent that I should rely upon the advice and guidance which they tendered to me on problems with which I had to deal. When I went into the office of the present Parliamentary Secretary, I had that sort of idea at the back of my mind and every time a case came before me where it was suggested by those technical people that if even a minor drainage scheme were carried out in some particular area, costing maybe from £100 to £500, damage would be done to somebody down the stream, I hesitated to believe that in many cases, because it was not a thing I wanted to believe. I had to come before this House with an Estimate every year and I was sure to be attacked by Deputies on all sides— just as much on the side of the Government, if not in the House, certainly outside it, and sometimes in the House, too. There were people interested in the production of turf, or specially interested in good meadowland, or in rescuing land from water in areas where the farms were small, and so on.

As I say, I was naturally hesitant to accept the advice of those technical people when they informed me that harm would be done by the execution of such works. I want to make this admission to the House, that I held that doubt so firmly that, in a number. of cases, I actually gave a direction that the works should be carried out— because it was not clear to me that what was feared would transpire. And I do openly here admit that I have positive evidence now, evidence that I can gather with my own two eyes any winter's day I like, that the advice given by those technical people, which I did not act upon, was sound and correct. The Drainage Commission was, after all, composed of many men, whose names I cannot give now, who had both a technical and a practical idea of the drainage problems of this country. When they in their report suggested that piecemeal drainage was a dangerous proposition, however much I might dislike that in a sense that it would obstruct the carrying out of a certain type of work that might appear to be useful in a particular district, I must admit that it was sound. Is it any wonder, then, that I should express my disappointment that I have not heard more about the way in which this Dáil is, in a three-line Bill, to give to local bodies the necessary power that will enable them to tackle this problem—which is described by Deputy O'Higgins in moving this motion as "in-between" drainage work? I must confess that I have no idea of what the mover of this motion had in mind when using that term.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

I used it as describing something.

Mr. Smith

I give the Deputy an illustration of why I am somewhat puzzled by the term "in-between" drainage work.

I happen to have some land situate in a district that separates two catchment areas. As a matter of fact the water from this land flows into two catchments. I can stand there and look at a stream flowing towards the Erne. I can turn to the right and see a small stream—in both cases the streams are very small and very insignificant— flowing towards the Boyne. Now it is possible to determine to the fraction of an inch where the Boyne water starts from my farm and where the Erne stream commences. I make this point and I have proven it from that very farm. I shall tell you why I have proven it. I have also land situated along the bed of the Anna Lee which is a very large contributory to the Erne catchment. I know that schemes that have been carried out for the last 20 years in the areas that separate the Erne catchment from the Boyne, have resulted in enabling the water to move more quickly down to the main artery and, as a result of the speed of the movement of the water, because of the small drainage work carried out there, I find that the land along the Anna Lee, which is the main tributary of the Erne, is flooded much more frequently and to a greater extent, and the roads in the district are covered with water much more often than they were ten or 15 years ago.

I am not, as I say, a technical person but I have been interested in this problem just as every countryman has for many years. I have no complaint to offer on the score of the views put forward by Deputy O'Higgins because, after all, I could not, in fairness, expect him to have a practical man's view of the difficulties of this problem but these difficulties I suggest to the Parliamentary Secretary are there. He or the Government, to-morrow or in four or five or six months' time can introduce legislation that will give authority to local bodies, as he says, to clean and remove obstructions, say in the Anna Lee, but they will find themselves up against a very big problem. I do not know so much about the condition of other rivers but I speak from a knowledge of the river in my own district and the picture I have in mind of that river, and I know it is not far different from the conditions in which you will find any similar artery in the country. I asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce yesterday—I do not want to deal with this matter in the sense of going back over the debate that took place yesterday—in all genuine sincerity, how local authorities were going to deal with this problem. I mentioned machinery. I had not in mind the type of machinery that has been acquired by the Board of Works for the execution of major drainage under the Arterial Drainage Act of 1945, but I had in mind the necessity for some machinery because the river I have in mind could not be dealt with by the local authority in the manner described by the Minister for Industry and Commerce. If the smaller in-between rivers that I know Deputy O'Higgins has in mind, are dealt with without dealing with the Anna Lee, then I may leave the district.

General MacEoin

It is not much good, anyway.

Mr. Smith

It may not but it means a lot to me.

Captain Giles

They could do without you there.

Mr. Smith

Deputy Giles should not be so unmannerly. I am surprised that he would not be more kindly disposed towards a neighbour. All I am looking for is information. We were assured by the mover of the motion that a certain approach was being made to the problem. If that is so, I am glad to hear it. As a practical man with a practical man's knowledge, I should like to be told just how this problem is going to be tackled. I will admit that when the Arterial Drainage Act was being prepared, I was conscious of, and could see, the difficulties associated with large tracts of river that were never included in any drainage district. I could see the appalling condition in which many of these rivers were. It certainly baffled my mind and the minds of those whose advice I sought at the time as to how that problem could be tackled. Whether you believe me or not, I was as anxious to find a solution to the problem as anybody else. That is the mildest way in which I can put it. I cannot say that anything I have heard since this debate was initiated, or anything that I heard yesterday, has convinced me in that respect. I am being led to believe that these powers are going to be taken in a further Bill but I should like to assure the House that farmers have certain rights. If, for example, you are going to take powers in this House to enable drainage work of the in-between type which Deputy O'Higgins has in mind to be carried out, and to drain this water down through these small schemes on to my land and the land of my neighbours, you will be up against all sorts of difficulties. I know a man, a mill owner, who has to go to live upstairs three times a year because of flooding. If you give the local authority power to deal with the in-between flooding of the type Deputy O'Higgins has in mind, in that district without attacking the problem associated with the Anna Lee—and I suggest you cannot tackle that problem without removing the major obstructions—you will wipe that man out. We hear a good deal these days about the rights of landowners. Mind you, I am not one of those who stood for, or tolerated, if I could overcome it, an unreasonable objection or an unreasonable attitude on the part of any landowner to State intervention or the intervention of local authorities, to improve general conditions whether in regard to drainage or other matters, but I have always recognised that private individuals have certain rights.

We hear a lot of talk these days about the necessity of ensuring that nobody will go in on anybody else's land, unless the owner has first extended an invitation, and of a three-line Bill being introduced to give local bodies power to do what I have described. I have not given an exaggerated description of the problem as I see it in the district I know best. If any technical or practical man goes there with a reasonably open mind I will satisfy him that, without attacking the main artery of the river I know best and the major obstructions, it will be unfair to the farmers in the region and, after all, they, too, are entitled to live. I was pleased, not because I was the person responsible, with the defence by the Parliamentary Secretary of the general scheme of the 1945 Act, but I was terribly disappointed with the limitations of the explanation which he gave in regard to what is intended as to the powers which are being given to local bodies in regard to drainage. I should like the Parliamentary Secretary to tell me, the House, and the country, if this scheme that is in a few months' time to solve all our ills has been recommended by the engineers of the Board of Works. Are they standing over it? What do the technical people in the Office of Public Works who are responsible, and who have enormous knowledge of drainage problems, think of it? What do the law advisers to the Government think of the prospect of giving powers in a three-line Bill to do what was described here would be done by the local authorities? These are, naturally, questions to which this House should be given an answer. I am not going to raise them in any obstructive sense but from the point of view of the individual's right, before that Bill becomes law, I shall certainly insist upon answers. When I look around me I see on my right Deputy Cogan. He has been seeking, in a different respect, the protection of the law for farmers. He is concerned because he thinks that the law has made encroachments upon the owners of land that it should not have made. I am going to see, in regard to this drainage problem, that there will be no encroachment. I am anxious to see that individual rights will be protected. I am not a lawyer and I have no legal knowledge of these matters but I cannot see how such action could be regarded as constitutional.

As the Parliamentary Secretary and other speakers have stated, attempts have been made to make this problem a political one. Nobody with any sense or knowledge would ever dream of doing so. The Government that preceded us introduced in a hurry a Bill that became an Act. It was the 1924 Drainage Act, and I admit that it was designed to give employment at a time when it was necessary to provide employment. I went into the Office of Public Works only a few years ago, and looking impartially at the result of the 1924 Act, and looking back on the records of that Office, I had no difficulty in coming to the conclusion that the work done under that Act, and I am not blaming anybody for that, was a dead loss. The 1925 Act was an improvement. To some extent it more or less gave the local authority responsibility for taking the initiative in the introduction of a scheme under which, as the members of the House know, the State contributed 50 per cent. towards the cost of drainage. If the scheme was regarded as 15 per cent, 20 per cent., 25 per cent. or 30 per cent. economic the local landowner was supposed to pay that percentage and the local authority the balance.

Deputy T.F. O'Higgins complained —and here again I do not mind whether you make political capital out of this or not—that the previous Government did nothing about drainage. I am sure that the records will show that it was we who in 1932, seven years after the passage of the 1925 Act, really implemented that Act.

Mr. O'Leary

You did not.

Mr. Smith

We most certainly did. I was then chairman of a county council. I can say that in my own county we carried out more works under the 1925 Act than any other county in the Twenty-Six Counties.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

Is it not one of the worst counties in Ireland?

Mr. Smith

There you have the answer to piecemeal drainage. Anyhow, it is all very well for Deputies here who are members of the local bodies and who see, under the 1945 Act, an opportunity of getting this work done at State cost but I would point out that in those days the local authority as well as the local landowner were involved in the cost. There was not as much enthusiasm for carrying out the 1925 Act under these conditions but in my county, while I was chairman of the county council, we carried out the largest scheme that was carried out, with one exception, from 1932 to 1935 under the 1925 Act. I say, looking at the result of that £75,000 to £80,000 scheme, when wages were only about one-third of what they are now and when general costs were only one-third of what they are now, that while some good resulted from the carrying out of that work it certainly could not be described as a successful scheme because it was piecemeal in character.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

Because it was not maintained.

Mr. Smith

No such thing. You saw no action in Cavan County——

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

By decree of the Cavan County Council, time and time again.

Mr. Smith

There was action at one time of a different kind, but the records of the Board of Works will show, unless they have changed since I left, that we have carried out every year our full legal maintenance. I will go further and say that from the point of view of our record as a drainage authority we were well in the front, with the exception perhaps of Kildare. Anyhow, that is only a side issue. My point is that Deputies can talk about drainage now because it has been made a State charge but they were not half so vigorous in their demand for drainage work when the local authority had to make a contribution in addition to what the local landowner and the State contributed. Some of these Deputies would not trouble themselves to go back to 1925 and go on to 1930, 1937 and 1938 to see to what extent their local bodies attempted to use the Act of 1925. We have the 1924 Act, the 1925 Act and the 1928 Minor Drainage Act which was introduced for the purpose of giving local bodies an opportunity of dealing with drainage schemes costing £1,000 and under and in respect of which—speaking subject to correction—the Government gave a grant of 40 per cent. There was only one county which made use of that opportunity and it was never re-enacted because, apparently, it was not favoured by the local bodies for whose purpose it was designed.

When it became apparent, after the operation of the 1925 Act, that things were not satisfactory, the course that the Parliamentary Secretary has described was taken of setting up a body composed of technical and practical men. The present Act is based on their recommendation. The matter on which I seek information—if I do not get it now, I hope I will soon get it— is that if there is now something being done that seems to run counter to or to be in conflict with the piecemeal drainage that the Parliamentary Secretary described as harmful——

Mr. Donnellan

I would ask Deputy Smith to wait until he sees the Bill. I can assure him of one thing, that it will never interfere with the operation of the 1945 Arterial Drainage Act while I am Parliamentary Secretary. It will only help it.

Mr. Killilea

That is not the information that Deputy Smith wants.

Mr. Smith

That is a very general sort of statement.

Mr. Donnellan

On a point of order, is a Deputy entitled to spend 25 minutes criticising legislation that has not yet come before the House and which he can spend weeks criticising when it comes, if criticism is necessary?

Mr. Smith

May I put a counterpoint to you, Sir?

An Ceann Comhairle

No. The Bill was mentioned and the Deputy is entitled to find out what is the nature of that Bill and how far it would affect the Arterial Drainage Act of 1945.

Mr. Donnellan

I am giving the guarantee that it will not interfere, that it will help.

Mr. Smith

Yesterday the Dáil, as a deliberative Assembly, was invited to vote against a motion that was tabled affecting local authorities to the extent of £2,000,000 on the strength of proposals which I am now told I cannot refer to.

Mr. J.J. Collins

And it is only going to be a three-line Bill.

Mr. Killilea

Sufficient time is not made available for everybody to speak.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy will have an opportunity when the Bill comes.

Mr. Smith

Yes, Sir. On this point of the drainage and reclamation of land I would like information on aspects that have occurred to my mind and for which I cannot provide a satisfactory explanation. It is all right to talk about drainage and land reclamation and it is all right to ignore the question as to whether it appears to be an economic proposition or not, but there are limits to the extent to which you can ignore that question. I see land being sold every day in the week, not the best of land, but fairly good land and, costly as land and property are, you can buy the best of it at from £25 to £60 an acre.

Mr. Rooney

It is a long way from the Land Commission fiver.

Mr. O'Leary

They are looking for £150 an acre for land required for housing sites at the moment.

Mr. Smith

The Deputy may have a heart of gold but he has a dome of ivory.

Captain Giles

He is lucky to have it.

Mr. Smith

I ask those who are talking so loudly and so glibly how the expenditure of, say, £50 or £60 per acre on the reclamation of land that can never be other than inferior can be justified.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

How is this relevant?

Mr. Smith

Because Deputy O'Higgins in moving this motion talked about the productivity of the land.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

I never mentioned reclamation.

Mr. Smith

How can land that is water-logged be made productive unless it is reclaimed?

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

It can be drained.

Mr. Smith

What is the intention of drainage? Has not it been pointed out by the Deputy and others that reclamation cannot take place while land is saturated? I do not mind making the case that reasonable risks from the point of view of the economic value of drainage should be taken by the State but there is a point at which we must stand and ask ourselves whether or not it is wise policy to reclaim, at a cost of £80 an acre, bad waste land that will need constant attention and that will revert to its original condition if not constantly attended. With wages at the point at which they are, one can imagine how costly it will be to maintain such land. It is no harm to put the question as to whether it is wise to go to the extent of spending the amounts that Ministers have admitted have been spent in recent months in reclaiming poor land that must be poor, no matter what effort is made to improve it, while fairly decent land can be bought out at a lesser figure.

Captain Giles

Too cautious.

Mr. Smith

I agree entirely with Deputy O'Grady's recommendation to every member of this House who regards this as a serious problem. I remember when I was in the House defending the 1945 Bill I went out of my way—as the records of the House will show—to warn Deputies of the time it would take to deal with this problem. I did that, not because it was a pleasant duty. It was one that I need not have carried out. I might have allowed the world outside to think that drainage was going to be dealt with following the passage into law of those legislative proposals. I knew there were people who were being seriously affected by flooding and I wanted to give them fair warning that with whatever enthusiasm a person might proceed it was going to take a fair amount of time before many of these areas would be touched upon. Whether it is this Government or some other Government is in office, any man who conveys to the people any other impression than that will be misleading the people.

There is no doubt that in normal times, such as I hope we are getting into now, much greater progress could be made than was possible during the war years, even if the legal position was such that we could proceed with drainage. But even with the most ideal conditions and with special machinery, it will still be a considerable time before you can catch up with the drainage problems that are to be found in the 100 catchment areas to which the Parliamentary Secretary referred and to which I referred on previous occasions when the responsibility for that office was mine. It is because I have had experience of office and know the problems that are there that, whether in opposition or otherwise, I am not going to get up in this House and say that by some wave of the hand this can be done. Certainly I am sceptical about believing that the passage into law of a three line Bill will solve this problem in the course of a few months. More luck to those who think they can solve this problem in that time. If they do, I will not hesitate to stand up and say: "Good luck to you; you did it well." But, do not blame me for saying in advance of the introduction of these proposals that if you attempt to do the things I have described, if the passage of this legislation results in what I have described taking place, then you will be doing some people an enormous injustice and certainly going very far away from a real solution of the drainage problems as they were approached in the report of the Drainage Commission and in the Act which is based upon that report.

I do not want to make any political capital out of this because there are nothing but complications and problems in connection with drainage, no matter from what angle you approach it. It is with the fullest understanding of these that I am making these remarks. You have not heard from me since the change of Government, nor will you hear for many years if the Government remain in office, a critical word if I see what I regard as a reasonable effort being made to approach the problems of drainage along the lines on which I know from my experience in office they should be attacked. I warn the Government that when the proposals which appear to me to be thought of merely to plug a hole or stuff a gap and would appear to have arisen in their minds in a very frivolous fashion come before the House we will need to get a great deal more information as to the proposals and their effect than the Dáil got when it was asked yesterday to accept them as an alternative to employment that was provided otherwise for men all over the country.

Minister for Lands (Mr. Blowick)

I expected a helpful contribution from Deputy Smith, as he occupied for a fairly considerable time the office of Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance and had in his charge the Board of Works and the Special Employment Schemes office and must have accumulated a reasonable amount of experience and knowledge of the problem under discussion. He seems to have a very gloomy outlook. His whole speech was devoted to warning the Government of the pitfalls ahead: "Do not be too optimistic that you are going to do great things. I am telling you that you will not." That is a very gloomy outlook. If that was the mentality that the Deputy had when he occupied the position that Deputy Donnellan occupies now, it is no wonder that the drainage of the country was as forgotten and neglected as it was.

This motion was put down shortly after the present Government was formed and that showed that there was a desire on the part of some Deputies to tackle the problem of drainage, because it is a pretty huge one and an urgent one. There was only one little atom of knowledge in what Deputy Smith said. He mentioned that some 20 years ago the question of flooding was not as serious as it is to-day. That is the case, but the Deputy did not say why. He warned us that when what he referred to as the three-line measure comes before the House in the near future proposing to give certain powers it will not solve our problems. I hope that the measure that is to come before the House will enable local bodies to do exactly what the old boards of trustees did in days gone by, namely, give an annual cleaning or scouring to the main channels, starting at the outfall. The Deputy was perfectly correct when he said that if an attempt were made to do work on the small drains in the upper catchment areas, leaving the outfall as it is, it would only mean transferring water from one place to another.

I am quite sure that the Minister for Local Government and the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance will examine this whole prolem very carefully with the help of the skilled advice and experience of the experts in each of the Departments. The obvious thing to do is to start at the outfall. Even children would not dream of tackling the problem in any other way. We might have been opposed to the old boards of trustees who were in charge of the rivers, but no matter what their affiliations were from a national point of view or otherwise, they did a fairly good job of work in connection with the drainage of the country. They kept the main channels open. Every year since, however, they have fallen into disuse. The drainage problem has become an acute one and is growing worse each year. It has now been brought home to us very forcibly that the annual cleaning or scouring the old boards of trustees gave the rivers and drains at least kept the water on the move and let it out and flooding did not exist then to the same extent as it exists to-day. This trouble is growing day by day. I have no proof of what I say, but I have not the slightest doubt that the experts in the Board of Works and the Department of Local Government are aiming at giving local bodies the same power and authority as these old boards of trustees had to do the work which they did without trying to do piecemeal arterial drainage in any shape or form.

Deputy Smith strikes me as being a man who, now that he is not in a position to do anything, would do great things. He strikes me as a man who feels that if he were back again in power he would do the things which he is very sorry he did not do. Useless regrets like that will not get a person anywhere. In my view, it is a warning to those in charge that if they want to do a job the only time to save the hay is while the sun shines. The only time for a Government or a Party to do the work the people elected them for is when they are in power and have the authority in their hands. Vain regrets like those of Deputy Smith come a little late in the day.

Mr. Killilea

We gave you the 1945 Drainage Act all the same.

Mr. Blowick

In reply to Deputy Killilea, the Deputy's Party came into power in 1932 and 1945 was 13 years later. Did the country not want draining during that period or why was the Bill not introduced until 1945? Was it not rather in the evening of Fianna Fáil day that the Bill was introduced? When it was introduced it cannot be denied that it was a good thing—I want to give merit where merit is due—but no serious attempt was made to implement the Arterial Drainage Act which was a good measure in itself when it could be implemented. Certainly very little attempt was made by the Deputy's Party when it was in power to put it into operation. That is one of the causes which contributed very heavily to putting that Party on the other side of the House.

Mr. J.J. Collins

What Christmas box is the Minister giving?

Mr. Blowick

The Christmas box which the Deputy refers to is now about to produce results. If the Deputy were in the House to hear the statement of the Minister for Local Government——

Mr. J.J. Collins

I was

Mr. Blowick

——he would know that local bodies are to be empowered to remove major obstacles from rivers and get on with the work which the old board of trustees did.

Mr. J.J. Collins

Can the Minister tell the House——

An Ceann Comhairle

The Minister must have an opportunity to make his own speech. The Deputy will have the opportunity to have his say later.

Mr. Blowick

I do not think it can be proposed under the new Bill to allow local authorities or ask local authorities to engage in arterial drainage. Such is not the case. They are not equipped for it and they have not the machinery for it. The one body that is capable of doing that is the drainage section of the Board of Works.

Field drainage does not come into this motion at all although it was mentioned by some Deputies, but field drainage will play a very important part in the future in two ways. Deputy Smith seems to think that land reclamation and field drainage is going to be a serious thing and poses as the champion of the farmers. He says that the farmers have their rights and he talks about the river Anna Lee up in County Cavan. The rights of farmers are in perfectly safe hands when they are in the hands of the present Government. The present Government will not alone keep a watchful eye on the protection of their rights, but will try to give them the right to live and give them assistance to live and not alone to live but to help the country by producing more on the land which is now not capable of production.

Deputy Collins seems to be very interested in this problem but he was not in the House earlier and I will not address my remarks to him but to his Party. I wonder could it be calculated how much damage has been done for want of foresight in developing bogs in many areas before clearing the rivers and letting vast floods of water into the fertile lands in the plains underneath without using some of the money to make an open channel. That happened in the Deputy's county.

Mr. J.J. Collins

It never did.

Mr. Blowick

The Deputy may take himself easy. There was flooding of the Maigue due to bad management in the development of bogs before making a channel in the river to take the water. It is an excellent thing to drain bogs. Deputy Smith talks of the rights of farmers, but to talk of their rights is only humbug when the river channel was not cleared to take away the water before the bog was developed. A bog of some hundreds of thousands of acres is a very big sponge to drink up a lot of water. I do not want to see farmers flooded out because people rush in in a thoughtless and rash manner to develop bogs without taking the precaution of providing a main channel for taking the water away.

Donnchadh Ó Briain

Where is the bog round the Maigue? There is not a perch of it there.

Mr. Blowick

Perhaps if the Deputy mixed with the people around Adare who had four feet of water in their houses or perhaps if he visited his constituents he would find out. It is a Deputy's duty to know about the conditions of his constituents.

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputy Ó Briain will have his say later.

Mr. Blowick

I am not blaming Deputy Collins. The Government that was in this country displayed a good deal of thoughtlessness, contempt and bad management in the way they handled the drainage problem of this country during their period of office.

I do not care what Deputy Smith says. He may talk until he is black in the face, but we will make the attempt. Perhaps we will make mistakes. Perhaps our scheme will not work out, though I hope it will. The man who never made mistakes never made anything. We hope, acting on the expert advice of the Departments, to reclaim land in this country and I hope we will get it done pretty soon.

Deputy J.J. Collins rose.

Mr. Blowick

The Deputy will be able to speak later and I will leave the House when he does for fear I would be tempted to interrupt him.

We are making an attempt to get on with drainage and we are not steeped and saturated in the gloomy views that have been put forward on the other side of the House. They say that it is no good no matter what schemes are prepared. They say that it is full of pitfalls, legal pitfalls; they say "keep back, do not touch it. Sit down and let the flood waters rise year after year," but we will not act as if we were helpless cripples. I believe that this work will go ahead. I believe that a scheme such as that which will come before the House in a very short time will come into operation and bear fruit inside a few months. I think that is not a bad record for a Government that came in hampered by the pretty bad mess that our predecessors left us here.

Mr. Lemass

Hampered, anyway.

Mr. Blowick

I will not talk to Deputy Lemass. In spite of all the gloom and pessimism from the other side of the House and in spite of the distilled knowledge and wisdom of those who tell us that we cannot get on with the job, we will see, we will make an attempt. I do not believe that the experts in the Board of Works and in the Department of Local Government are such a crowd of dunderheads as we are led to believe or that they are leading the Government up the garden path. We have men there who are capable of tackling this job and carrying it out with the goodwill of the Government behind them and with plenty of finance. We will succeed, and if we go out of office to-morrow or this day week, in three years, five years or in ten years, we will not come in here whinging and crying: "Let us back and we will work wonders; we will pull down the sun, moon and the stars; we will improve the country and make it a garden of Eden." We are fully aware that you must make your hay while the sun shines. It is for a Government, while in office, to put its policy into operation. That is what we are doing, and will do, no matter what amount of pessimism or gloom we see coming from the other side of the House.

Mr. Cogan

I know there is a time limit on this debate and hence I shall be very brief. I agree with the Parliamentary Secretary that arterial drainage is a serious matter and ought to be tackled seriously and with determination. I was also glad to hear from him that the drainage authority had turned their eyes towards the West. Now that they have made their survey there I should like if he would turn their eyes towards the East. There are very grave problems in connection with arterial drainage in the Leinster counties that ought to be tackled actively. It may be said that Wicklow is a county that least requires arterial drainage on a large scale, inasmuch as the rivers there are, in the main, fast flowing. Nevertheless, there are very large areas in the county which are water-logged, and which call for the carrying out of drainage schemes on a large scale. I am in the happy or unhappy position that not only do I represent one constituency in the Dáil but that I represent another constituency on a local authority. As a member of the Carlow County Council, the woes of the people in Carlow, Leighlinbridge and other towns in that county have been brought to my notice, due to the effect of flooding by the River Barrow. I know, of course, that that ancient river did cause a great deal of worry and anxiety to the Board of Works in the past, and that large sums of money were expended on it. I hope it will again come under review, and will be tackled not at the upper end, as was done at the first attempt to remedy the defects there, but at the outfall, so that something will be done to remove the water which is causing such destruction there.

I should also like to endorse what the Parliamentary Secretary said on another matter because it confirms a view which I have held for a considerable time. He said that every engineer is not suitable for drainage work. In other words, engineers have to become engineering experts if they are to make a good contribution to this problem. This has a bearing on a question which puzzled, amazed and worried me yesterday, and is still worrying me. The question is, why was it decided to divert the engineering staffs of the county councils to drainage work? Would it not be better to employ the engineers in the Board of Works on all works of drainage, large and small, because they are experts in that work? We all know that the engineering staffs of the county councils have two big jobs on hand at the moment, namely, to provide houses for the people, and, secondly, to provide roads leading to those houses. These two jobs ought to be able to occupy 100 per cent. of their time for many years to come. I know that, in the case of the Carlow County Council, it has been a rather hefty problem to try and build up an efficient engineering staff to tackle housing. The men who are on that staff are competent, and I believe have settled down to dealing with the problem. They have made their estimates and their plans and, in my opinion, it would be a disastrous thing to take them away from that work and put them to deal with a problem of which they cannot have an expert knowledge. There was a good deal of grumbling amongst the engineering staffs when they were diverted to the bogs for the production of turf. I can see them being faced with much the same difficulty if they are now to be called upon to carry out drainage work.

I realise quite well that there are very grave difficulties to be faced in carrying out even small drainage schemes. There are engineering difficulties and difficulties in regard to property ownership. There was, in my own immediate neighbourhood, a rural development scheme which was an admirable piece of work to which all the affected landowners agreed to contribute. They were very anxious to get the work done, but it was found that at the outfall of the stream, that which they proposed to clear, flooding would take place upon another farmer's land farther down the stream. The engineering staff were brought to inspect the land. They confirmed the view of the landowner that flooding was likely to occur farther down, and in view of this the scheme had to be abandoned. Water is not a thing you can put in a heap. You have to make arrangements for its disposal. If you divert it from one place it has to go somewhere else. You must see that it does not adversely affect the property of other people.

These are all matters of very great importance. In my opinion, all this drainage work is of a specialist character. I think that the Parliamentary Secretary should build up a drainage staff of engineers sufficient to deal not only with the larger river areas, but also with the smaller areas, and thus leave the engineering staffs of the local authorities to do the job that they have been specially trained for, a job that urgently requires to be done.

Mr. Palmer

I think that the real object of this motion when it was first put on the Order Paper was that a much more urgent and active implementation of the Arterial Drainage Act should be carried out. Listening to Deputy Smith's speech, I was reminded of what has often been said, namely, that when a speaker uses the personal pronoun, "I," it is a sure sign, and is symbolic of the fact, that he is an egotist.

Mr. Lemass

Did the Deputy ever hear the Minister for Agriculture talk?

Captain Giles

He heard Deputy Lemass.

Mr. Palmer

Deputy Smith to-night was inebriated by the exuberance of his own egotism, and his contribution to this debate was null and void. We had another side of his egotism when he said of himself that, even though he had good technical knowledge available to him during the time that he was responsible for the Office of Public Works, he sometimes went against the advice of his own technicians, and so carried out schemes which he now knows to have been wrong. He has only to go down to Kerry to see a scheme of his which was carried out there, a scheme which it was thought, by whoever implemented it, would drain the river Maine. The drainage began at the source of the Brown Flesk, a tributary of the Maine, and it was done for about two miles down the river. Ever since then the people of one of the richest valleys of this country are drowned with water. I have seen it quite recently. When about ten square miles of beautiful land are flooded the temporary lake formed is known as "Smith's Pool," so evidently he must be considered responsible for all the destruction that was caused.

Donnchadh Ó Briain

When was it done? In what year?

Mr. Palmer

In the summers of the years when Fianna Fáil was in power.

Donnchadh Ó Briain

Name the year.

Mr. Palmer

There was another instance which occured while the last Government was interested in drainage. The people of Kilkenny had to leave their homes and suffered a great deal of damage. Yet Deputy Derrig, who is Deputy of that area, did absolutely nothing and nothing has been done since to carry out the drainage scheme there, until Bishop Collier, of course, forced him to do something in order to comfort the people who lost their homes. That was the only thing that was done by the Deputy for Carlow-Kildare.

I do not want to delay the House but I should like to refer to these small drainage schemes that would be introduced in the three-line Bill and which gave such anxiety to Deputy Smith and perhaps to other members of Fianna Fáil, too, because they now realise that if they had done something like that, perhaps they would be on the side of the House that we are now on. Instead of spending millions of pounds in the purchase of aeroplanes glittering in the skies that were going to fly over the Atlantic, if they had devoted that money to carrying out the drainage schemes since the cessation of the war perhaps they would still be on this side of the House. If the three schemes of drainage could be co-operated we should begin with arterial drainage, which is the most important of all, because we must not do as Deputy Smith did in the case of the Brown Flesk. We must begin with the main rivers and then continue with the tributaries of the main rivers. The officials of the county councils can then operate this new drainage system when all small rivers and streams are cleared. We can then deal with farm drainage, the drainage of the fields and lands. I think that is the system of drainage to be carried out.

The only grievance I have against the Parliamentary Secretary is that I am afraid he put the drainage necessary in various parts of Kerry too far back. I should like to remind him that quite recently there was serious flooding there. I happened to be in the vicinity of the place and met one of the farmers there. In the course of the discussion of all the destruction that was caused he mentioned to me that he was a bachelor. I asked him how that was as he seemed to have a good farm. He said: "The only woman I could expect to marry here would be a mermaid." So I hope that Deputy Donnellan will be able to get more machinery and send a whole lot of it down to Kerry. I feel perfectly sure he is quite anxious to carry out the scheme and to accelerate it in every way. In years to come we hope that millions of acres of beautiful land will be reclaimed in order to produce more stock not only to feed the people of this country but also to help feed the people of other countries whose lands are not as fertile as ours.

Mr. J.J. Collins

I should like to say a few words on this question of drainage as it is one which affects us very much down in Feoholagh where we have two very small but important catchment areas. I think that we gave an example to all Ireland in a scheme that was organised quite recently. Some time before Christmas two Deputies and myself were invited by the organisation responsible for that work to a meeting. We were hoping that the responsible Minister for drainage would be there but instead we had Mr. Blowick, the Minister for Lands. He received a deputation from the area of the lower Deel and the upper reaches of the catchment area of the Maigue of something like 24 square miles or more. I am sorry that he made such a faux pas. He told us that the flooding of the Maigue catchment area was due to floods in the bogs. There is not a bog within 24 miles of the Maigue catchment area. When he came to the upper reaches of the Deel he afterwards attended a meeting in West Limerick where he made a statement to the effect that we should hear on the following Tuesday night a very important announcement from the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance, Deputy Donnellan. As I mentioned before it was to be a kind of Christmas box for the farmers who had suffered there for years. We tuned in but for some unexplainable reason we did not hear anything from Deputy Donnellan as regards this scheme and now we are being told that it is going to be a three-line Bill. That is all right. We in West Limerick understood from the Arterial Drainage Act of 1945 that we should wait our time and our turn as regards the drainage of the Deel and the Maigue because we were far down the list. However, when I heard the Minister for Industry and Commerce tell us here yesterday that a three-line Bill was about to be introduced by the Minister for Local Government and that the drainage of the rivers and streams in West Limerick could be effected by men with picks, shovels, spades and horses I should like to hear from the Parliamentary Secretary if Mr. Blowick, the Minister for Lands, was acting on his behalf when he came down to County Limerick to supply us with excavators and so forth and, if possible, blasting machinery, because we have rocks and weirs in the upper reaches of the Maigue that men with picks, spades and shovels would not remove in the next thousand years.

It is important to us and we should like to see this Bill coming into operation if it is of such a nature that it is going to be of any value to the farmers of Limerick. If, however, under this three-line Bill this very difficult situation which we have in the upper reaches and the lower reaches of the Deel is going to be approached by men with picks, shovels and horses I can tell the Parliamentary Secretary and the Minister for Local Government that they are simply making themselves ridiculous in the eyes of the people. We have layers of limestone rocks, weirs and so forth that have to be blasted out of the way in order to reach the upper reaches of that particular catchment area.

I should like to refer to a point that Deputy Palmer has mentioned in regard to the drainage of part of Southeast Kerry. I think that if Deputy Palmer would examine his conscience a little he must admit that whatever drainage was effected in that particular area of South Kerry was done under the 1924-25 Acts. Unless I am mistaken Deputy Smith did not take over responsibility until about 1943 or 1944. The Deputy mentioned that the flooding in this fertile valley in South Kerry is known as the Smith Pool. I expected more from Deputy Palmer. Deputy Smith brought out some important points in the course of his speech. He made a speech which was educative, constructive and instructive— instructive for the Parliamentary Secretary. He made some telling points and I feel it was very unfair of Deputy Palmer to hit back in the way he did as regards Deputy Smith.

Mr. Donnellan

I hope there will not be a Donnellan Pool.

Mr. Lemass

We will find you one if you are looking for one.

Mr. J.J. Collins

The Deputy from Kildare may laugh at the points I am making. He may be entitled to do so. I would not like to be in any way offensive or insulting, but if the Deputy wants to draw me I might be insulting in a way that might not be for his own good. Will the Parliamentary Secretary implement the promises made by the Minister for Lands in West Limerick some time before Christmas, or was it merely window-dressing or a false Christmas box that he offered the people of West Limerick?

Mr. Killilea

I rise to support this motion because of its importance. In so far as we on this side of the House are concerned, we have always been strongly in favour of drainage. I noticed that the Parliamentary Secretary made at least two appeals to the House to-night to keep this matter out of politics. Deputy Smith, in the course of his speech, did his utmost— and so did Deputy O'Grady—to be most helpful to the Parliamentary Secretary. They pointed out the difficulties that lie in the way of drainage. But if the Parliamentary Secretary's colleague, the Minister for Lands, did not try to twist and turn every word uttered by Deputy Smith, I do not know what he did. He told us Deputy Smith was sorry that when he was in office he did not do greater things. He pointed out how Deputy Smith made no effort from 1932 to 1945 to do anything.

I think Deputy Smith made the position quite clear as to his efforts in those days. Deputy Smith pointed out quite clearly that when he came into office he had to examine the position that existed prior to Fianna Fáil coming into office. We had the 1924 Drainage Act and, to put it as mildly as I can, that Act could not be counted as anything other than a disgrace to any Government who would try to implement it or put it on top of any county council or any body other than a county council because of the type of work to be carried out under it. Deputy Smith passed over that very lightly and he came on to the 1925 Act and he pointed out that during the years that the Government prior to Fianna Fáil held office they made no effort to give effect to that Act or to see whether or not it might work out satisfactorily. He said he was prepared to try to give effect to it and to see exactly what could be done.

Mr. M.J. O'Higgins

After 16 years.

Mr. Killilea

Not after 16 years or six years or even six months, but just after he took over office.

Mr. M.J. O'Higgins

When was it?

Mr. Killilea

Do not always act as a jack-in-the-box. Give someone a chance to make his case. Those tactics will not get you very far. Deputy Smith was not 16 years in office when he tried to give effect to the 1925 Act. Deputy Smith pointed out quite clearly that when he came into office he tried to ascertain the value of that legislation. Communications were sent out to the different county councils and they were given an opportunity of submitting schemes. They did so, and when the people who would benefit by the drainage were asked to sign a document that they would contribute a certain sum, they were prepared to sign. The county councils also were prepared to put up their portion, but after a number of these schemes had been carried out it was found that the people were not able to bear the burden. The Parliamentary Secretary is as well aware of all this as I am, because he is a member of a public body that tried to give effect to that drainage scheme in an effort to benefit the district that he represented at the time.

When a number of these schemes were given effect to it was found that the people were unable to bear the burden placed on their shoulders and that something else would have to be done. It was decided that the responsibility of sharing the burden that was previously shared by the people concerned with the drainage that was done, as well as the local authorities, would have to be shifted if the drainage was to be a success. The Drainage Commission was then established and they went out to examine the job, which the Parliamentary Secretary has admitted was a tremendously big job —and for a long time to come it will still be a big job. They examined the whole position to find out exactly what could be done and they made certain recommendations. Immediately the recommendations were made the Fianna Fáil Government gave effect to them through the medium of the 1945 Drainage Act.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy realises that Deputy O'Higgins must conclude.

Mr. Killilea

If Deputy O'Higgins had not interrupted me so often I would have finished my few words in a much shorter time.

Mr. M.J. O'Higgins

It was 16 years, Deputy, not 20.

Mr. Killilea

The other jack-in-the-box is at it now. I was referring to the Minister for Lands and his intervention to throw droch-mheas on the peat schemes—the schemes that have been murdered by the Fine Gael Party and the Parties who support them in the present Coalition. He now realises that it was a mistake and he says that the drainage that was done in the bogs caused extra flooding in the rivers. If that is so why is the present Government carrying on the same policy in relation to drainage? If I had sufficient time to do it there are a number of aspects into which I would like to go and I am sorry that more time was not allocated to this particular motion because I think it is a very important one.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

It is, of course, limited by Standing Order.

Mr. Killilea

I could say a good deal about drainage in my part of the country. Deputy Smith to-night tried to save the Parliamentary Secretary in regard to statements made in days gone by. I think we can all remember statements made telling us how drainage might be speeded up all over the country and the extent to which it should be done. To-night the Parliamentary Secretary made it quite clear that when some of these schemes are put into operation he may be dead and gone.

Mr. Donnellan

I have done more in 12 months than you did in 16 years.

Mr. Killilea

You did when the ground had been prepared for you and when there was machinery there for the purpose. You had no war to excuse you.

Mr. Donnellan

The war saved you.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

It is not surprising we should have had contributions to this debate such as those made by Deputy Killilea. It is typical of the mentality of the Opposition that Deputy Killilea's contribution should be one of their few contributions to an important debate like this. Deputy Killilea, in so far as he said anything in this debate, repeated Deputy Smith's speech but did not make the points as well as Deputy Smith made them. As far as I could understand Deputy Killilea's defence in relation to inactivity on the part of Fianna Fáil in respect of the drainage problem, his defence rested on an attempt to explain to the country that it took Deputy Smith a period of 13 years to read the Arterial Drainage Act of 1925. I do not know how long it took Deputy Smith to read that Act; nor do I understand or know how long it took him to digest it.

Mr. Killilea

I made no such statement.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

I do not think it would have taken a man of the ability of Deputy Smith very long to appreciate the difficulties and the shortcomings of the Arterial Drainage Act of 1925. But the fact remains that from 1932 to 1942—a period of ten years —no single step was taken by the previous Administration to deal with the problem of drainage.

Mr. Killilea

That is absolutely untrue.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

Not a single step was taken by the previous Administration.

Mr. Killilea

That is not true.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

In 1942 a Drainage Commission was set up. That took away the problem of drainage for three years. Ultimately, with complete solemnity and much deliberation, Deputy Smith walked into this House to ask the House to pass the Arterial Drainage Act of 1945. From the passing of the Act of 1945 onwards nobody saw any evidence of that Act being implemented while the last Administration was in office. I am somewhat surprised that we have heard so little of a useful nature from the Opposition in this debate. If there is one thing clear it is that under Fianna Fáil administration not a single acre of land in this country would ever have been drained.

Mr. J.J. Collins

Nonsense.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

Deputy Collins comes from Limerick. In that county 1,500 people had to club together in order to get some work done. Deputy Collins and his colleagues were very silent about that work when Deputy Smith and his successor were in charge of the Office of Public Works. They were too busy then telling the people of Limerick not to bother about the water—"A little water always washes you".

Mr. Killilea

That is not true.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

Deputy Killilea comes from the much-flooded West. When the previous Administration was in office not a word was heard from him about drainage.

Mr. Killilea

Look up the records and you will find that you are telling a falsehood.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

I would not be bothered about reading the Deputy's speeches. In my opinion, the inactivity of the previous Government in connection with drainage was not the fault of successive Parliamentary Secretaries or of any member of the Government who might have had responsibility for drainage. The fault lay—and this is perfectly obvious now—in the tight-fisted attitude of the previous Administration to constructive work of any kind in the country. It did not require a tremendous amount of money——

Mr. Killilea

It is easy to understand why you put down this motion.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

It did not require a tremendous amount of money, comparatively speaking, to start arterial drainage in this country. The money that should have been spent on drainage was spent on aeroplanes, luxury tourist hotels and other matters of that nature. For 16 years not a single penny was forthcoming for constructive work in connection with the reclamation of land. I know that a matter like this must cause concern to the Opposition.

Mr. Smith

It makes us laugh.

Mr. Killilea

We are supporting this motion and we are now being criticised for supporting it.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

I choose my company, you know.

Mr. Killilea

I know you do, and damn bad company you keep.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

I was not surprised at Deputy Smith's speech here. I think he made his speech with the best intentions in the world—the best intentions anyway towards the present Parliamentary Secretary and the best intentions so far as he and his Party were concerned. If there was a single word of criticism from Deputy Smith or a single word of optimism in relation to drainage, Deputy Smith nevertheless damned himself and damned his Party. He had to be gloomy. He had to say that the problem was a terrible one and that any scheme this Government might propose was bound to fail. He had to say that in exculpation of the record of his Party while in office. I do not know much about the technical end of drainage. Possibly I know considerably less about it than Deputy Smith. But I have some experience of the damage caused in different parts of the country because of lack of drainage. I have some experience in that respect of Deputy Smith's constituency. Time and time again when Deputy Smith occupied the position now occupied by the present Parliamentary Secretary I played my part in getting compensation for people who were injured or suffered damage through neglect of drainage.

Mr. O'Leary

Deputy Smith would not believe that.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

I appreciate the reason why drainage in this country was neglected during the years when the Party opposite was in power. Deputy Smith has approached both the schemes which were mentioned in this House yesterday with the long face of the wise man who knows that something cannot succeed — the gloomy prophet of gloom, as all members of the Party opposite are inclined to be. It is no good, he says, endeavouring to do what I have called the in-between scheme — it cannot be done and can never succeed. Deputy J.J. Collins represents a constituency where the decent people, despite Deputy Smith's Party, have succeeded in solving some of these problems.

Mr. J.J. Collins

Only in a small way.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

No matter how small it may be and no matter how insignificant it may be, if you multiply it 20,000 times, you will be getting something done for the country. That is something Deputy Smith could not understand.

Mr. J.J. Collins

There is no analogy at all.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

The in-between schemes—clearing away of obstacles, dealing with bridges where obstructions are caused and work of that kind— can be done and will be done by this Government. It may be—I am sure it is so—that, in order to enable schemes of that type to be carried out by local authorities, statutory powers are necessary, and Deputy Smith has referred to a three-line Bill. He can never get away from the fact that the Arterial Drainage Act comprises about 200 pages and he can never get away from the fact that it took him or his Party 13 years to prepare.

Mr. Smith

Because it is not true.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

Let him remember that Fianna Fáil is not now in power, that there is in power a Government consisting of men of action who are prepared to get the wheels turning and get the work going, despite all the Fianna Fáil talk about gloom.

Deputy Smith was also very gloomy about the other scheme mentioned last night—the scheme of reclamation. Again, that is something of a constructive nature, irrespective of Deputy Smith's views as to its success. It is a proposal of a constructive nature— reclaiming land and making sour or flooded land fertile.

Deputy Smith appreciates the impact of a scheme like that, if it is successful, on his Party and his Party's fortunes, and particularly on himself in flooded Cavan. Of course, again, it cannot succeed and will not succeed, according to him, and the very cost of it is going to be more than the value of the acre of land which is reclaimed. That is the type of mentality that looks at everything of a productive nature from the point of view of its cost in L.S.D. which prevented anything of that nature being done when Deputy Smith occupied the office of Parliamentary Secretary.

Mr. Smith

I thought we were throwing money down the sewers when we were in power.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

You were throwing it down the sewers, precisely. There is scarcely a sewer you did not stuff pound notes down and scarcely an acre of land you did any good work for.

Mr. Smith

I thought we were supposed to be tight-fisted, too.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

You were. Indeed, if Deputy Smith wants to talk about throwing money down sewers, there is a certain place called Santry Court not far from here that swallowed up a bit of money.

Mr. Davern

There is a place called Downing Street that swallowed up a bit of money as well.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

And Deputy Davern was trying to sabotage this country not so very long ago. This debate has been useful in illustrating the escape which the farmers of this country had from the mentality that obsessed Government Departments until 14 months ago—the gloomy outlook that nothing is possible because it might be difficult or might involve a little reading of Acts or of law. I am glad that that has been changed and I can guarantee from what I know myself that the schemes mentioned here in the past two days will be tackled and tackled with enthusiasm. They may be successful or they may not, but at least the people realise that something is being done to tackle this problem. They also know that there is no shortage of money at present for work of a productive nature under this Government.

Mr. Davern

Except for road grants.

Mr. M.J. O'Higgins

What about the Argentine wheat?

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

Deputy Davern has mentioned road grants. The Deputy, of course, always imagines that productive work begins at one end of a road and finishes at the other; but we know that there is land on both sides of the road and on that land much work will be done.

Mr. Smith

You made sure not to be on it—you are a professional man.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

I travelled the roads long before Deputy Smith and, I suppose will travel them long after Deputy Smith. Deputy Smith may get annoyed with what I am saying. He is entitled to do so, and, as was said here before, I should be very annoyed if I were in his position. I was glad to hear the Parliamentary Secretary to-night paying a tribute to the Minister for Finance when he said that not a single penny asked for in respect of this important work was grudged or refused, and that in fact more money is available than can be spent in getting together the materials and the machinery for an extensive drainage programme.

Mr. Smith

He paid me a tribute, too. Why will you not be generous?

Mr. M.J. O'Higgins

You still dislike having to give up the car.

Mr. Smith

I wanted to see you get a job as a lawyer in the Post Office or some such place, and that is why I was prepared to give up my car. I knew that the O'Higgins were anxious to get something worth while and therefore I gave up my job.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

I welcome the contribution made by the Parliamentary Secretary and particularly his assurance with regard to finance and his assurance that, under his control in the Board of Works, this problem will be tackled with enthusiasm and energy. I know that other schemes which will be implemented in legislation shortly will be welcomed by the country, if not by the Party opposite.

Motion put and agreed to.

The Dáil adjourned at 10.30 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Wednesday, 2nd March, 1949.