Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 13 Feb 1952

Vol. 129 No. 3

Private Deputies' Business. - Adjournment Debate—Maine Valley Survey.

Mr. J. Flynn

The Parliamentary Secretary's reply to a question that I put down for the 30th January was not satisfactory as far as I was concerned and, therefore, I asked permission to raise the matter on the Adjournment. In his reply the Parliamentary Secretary said that the priority list, which is the subject of our main argument with his Department, was not rigid, in other words, that it was not adhered to rigidly. I should like to inform him at the outset that it was rigidly adhered to up to 1947, with one exception, namely, the Maine valley drainage project. Every other main drainage scheme has been surveyed and carried through. The priority list was made out in the following order: the Brosna (No. 1), the Clyde and Dee (No. 2), the Feale (No. 3), Maine catchment area (No. 4), the Corrib (No. 5), and the Moy (No. 6).

That was made out by the Drainage Board established by the then Government, and it was regarded by the Department as the principal priority list up to 1947. The Maine valley drainage district was surveyed and the upper reaches were drained in 1932 and completed in 1933, approximately 20 years ago. While the upper reaches were being drained a survey of the lower reaches of the Maine was carried out and three tributaries of that river were surveyed. It was assumed at that time that the Board of Works would complete the scheme. Twenty years have elapsed and the scheme is still incomplete and at the moment we do not know what the position is with regard to it.

In 1948 the Maine drainage scheme was deleted from the list and I find that it is not mentioned in the major drainage list or in the minor catchment areas list. I understand that the Board of Works scheduled two lists, one dealing with major catchment areas and the other dealing with minor catchment areas. Strange as it may appear, the Maine drainage project, which was deleted from the major priority list, was not included in the minor catchment areas list. During that period the Nenagh River and the River Rye, in Kildare, have been surveyed. I submit to the Parliamentary Secretary and his Department that, in regard to the urgency and importance of drainage, there is no analogy between those rivers and the Maine.

The Government established a Drainage Board to collect evidence and data in connection with all drainage districts in the Twenty-Six Counties and a priority list of major and minor catchment areas was recommended for urgent consideration. The order was as I have given.

Owing to serious flooding in this valley in 1946 a report was forwarded to the Land Commission and to the Minister's Department. A list was included assessing the loss of crops, live stock and farm buildings at £7,000. The recent storm and floods caused, in cattle, horses and equipment, a further loss of £3,000.

A letter was sent to the Secretary of the Department by the Secretary of the Firies branch of the River Maine Drainage Association. Deputy Donnellan was informed about the meeting and, if I am not mistaken, Deputy Donnellan visited the district subsequently. The letter that I have referred to is in the following terms:—

"At a meeting of the Firies Branch, River Maine Drainage Association, held on 4th March, I was instructed to communicate with your office as the responsible authority for implementing the Arterial Drainage Bill, 1945. Pursuant to said Bill a priority list of rivers in Eire most in need of dredging was compiled and the River Maine was placed fourth in this list. Work is in progress for some time on the first and second of those rivers, namely, the Brosna and the Glyde and Dee, and will begin shortly on the third, the Brick and Cashen. On behalf of the members of our Branch, who are much perturbed, I would respectfully request an explanation as to why the final survey of the Maine has not been undertaken, considering that said river is next in the priority list and the fact that it was promised by your Department that it would commence in the summer of 1948. Another factor that has not tended to allay their uneasiness is that the final survey of the River Rye in Meath and Kildare, never recorded in any priority list, is nearly completed. The same would apply to the Nenagh River, where a final survey is being carried out.

To explain why our members are so disturbed, and they have a very good reason, I will briefly refer to the alarming position that confronts them."

An Ceann Comhairle

What is the Deputy quoting from?

Mr. J. Flynn

I am quoting from a letter sent to the Department of Public Works on the 7th March, 1951. Shall I proceed?

An Ceann Comhairle

Yes.

Mr. J. Flynn

The letter refers to the drainage of the Maine in the years 1932-33:—

"A big number of bogs at the upper end of the river were opened during the emergency and all the minor drainage schemes were under taken by the Kerry County Council during the past few years. Broadly speaking, four-fifths of the river remaining to be dredged is tidal and embanked. Most of these embankments were constructed in 1750, more than 200 years ago, and are crumbling to decay under the stress of years. Nearly every flood makes a number of breaches, allowing the tide to flow over the lands, often for years, until the Land Commission comes to the rescue and repairs those breaches. This is a costly business to the local landowners, who not only suffer damage by flooding but who also have their annuities increased in order to pay part of the cost of repairs. Just one example of the enormous losses suffered by the people living along the tidal portion of the river. After the August floods in 1946 an assessment was made of their losses. It amounted to over £4,000, and the details were forwarded to the Land Commission. This assessment was incomplete and an under-estimate. A separate one was made of the middle and upper reaches of the river, and not included in this total. Costs were based on the current prices of agricultural produce in the summer of 1946. When replacement was made in the spring of 1947 prices had increased threefold owing to the inclement harvest and winter.

From the following I think you will understand the unenviable position in which all those living along the tidal reaches of the river are situated and how they view any delay or infringement of their rights in regard to dredging with very serious apprehension. In this matter, the Board of Works, charged with the implementation of the 1945 Drainage Act, has grave responsibilities as regards its just administration. Public statements as regards drainage, recently reported in the Press, have had a very disquieting effect on our members and to allay what may be unnecessary fears on their part I would be very much obliged if you would be good enough to forward me information on the following points at your earliest convenience:

(1)On what date will the final survey of the River Maine be undertaken?

(2)Does it still occupy its original position, fourth place, on the priority list and what steps are being undertaken, if any, to implement this position?

(3)If the river has been removed from fourth place on the priority list, please state by whom, when and why?"

This is signed by Mr. John Moriarty, secretary of the association. I should like to make it clear to the Parliamentary Secretary that the position there is very serious. Some of the people concerned are homeless as a result of the recent floods. Their stock has been destroyed and subscriptions have been invited to a local fund for their relief. We believe that a great injustice has been done to the people concerned. I understand that the Parliamentary Secretary is guided in this matter by his officials who state that a resurvey must take place. I should like to remind the Parliamentary Secretary that this area was surveyed on two occasions away back in 1933 and that there is no real necessity for a resurvey.

As proof of that, I would instance the Corrib where previous surveys were used in the final arrangement and were accepted by his Department. I understand that his chief engineer insists on a resurvey as the survey of the Maine catchment area was originally carried out under the 1925 Drainage Act and that, as it is now being completed under the 1945 Drainage Act, it is imperative to have a resurvey. My answer to that is that even with a resurvey the old data should be utilised. The old data which was compiled after an exhaustive and extensive survey should be utilised and accepted. It has been proved in the case of the Corrib and in other areas that a new survey brought about the same result as the old survey and that the data was similar. The rivers in these areas had not changed very much in ten or 15 years.

If my contention is accepted by the Department, it will expedite our scheme inasmuch as even if a resurvey were carried out at the earliest possible date, use of the old data would shorten the period and would give a final result in half the time generally scheduled by the Department. The data compiled in the case of the Corrib gave similar results to those obtained from earlier surveys. When the survey of the Maine was carried through originally, three tributaries of the Maine were included.

I should like to ask why should any Minister or any Department, after adhering to this list for five years, suddenly delete the Maine drainage scheme from the list. I do not want to make any charges against the Minister's predecessor, Deputy Donnellan, nor to make any debating point at Deputy Donnellan's expense. I can win my case, I hope, without being personal in any way, but I do say that this injustice, as we term it, happened in 1948 and we must assume that Deputy Donnellan was influenced in some way, because the Corrib was the fifth on the list while the Maine was fourth on the list and in the end the Maine was deleted altogether from the list. It was bad enough to have that occur but there was no question of the Maine catchment area being mentioned even in minor catchment area schemes. It is not mentioned anywhere.

That is what we are fighting against; that is what our people will protest and agitate against. The farmers down there are quite determined on this matter. They have held public meetings and they have informed me that, if necessary, they will agitate against payment to the Land Commission or to any other authority. We have advised them that saner counsels should prevail and that they should listen to reasoned argument in the matter before any drastic action is taken.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy is conscious of the clock.

Mr. J. Flynn

I wish to emphasise finally that a grave injustice was done when this project was deleted completely from the list in 1948. Even after that, other rivers were taken on and surveys carried out while this important scheme was deleted altogether. I know that the Parliamentary Secretary is sympathetic and that he will do his utmost. I desire to emphasise, however, that the people in the areas I have mentioned have suffered in the recent floods as no other people in Kerry or in Munster have suffered, and that we are determined to fight on their behalf. I trust that the Parliamentary Secretary will see that justice will be done.

Mr. Donnellan

I appear to be the culprit in this matter even though Deputy Flynn did not say so outright; he merely hinted it. Deputy Flynn said that the Maine arterial drainage scheme has been deleted. It was not deleted in my time and, though I do not know what has happened since, I do not believe that there has been any change whatsoever. I believe that it still has its priority. When I was in charge of the Office of Public Works a survey of the River Feale in County Kerry was completed, and they were going ahead with the drainage scheme. As a matter of fact, I think it would be impossible to start another arterial drainage scheme in that county.

I found a whole province without any arterial drainage scheme at all. The officials of the Office of Public Works—I was not responsible for this —felt that the River Corrib should be considered, but that scheme did not in any way interfere with the Maine scheme in Kerry. I should be long sorry if it were so. It was just a matter of giving an opportunity to all parts of the country to participate under the 1945 Arterial Drainage Act. I think Deputy Flynn is under a misapprehension in this connection. The Maine scheme was not deleted in my time and I am certain that it has not been deleted since as, I am sure, the Parliamentary Secretary will inform us.

I do not know where Deputy Flynn got the priority list from which he quoted. However, I should like to stress that the priority list drawn up under the Arterial Drainage Act of 1945 was not rigid in any way and that I think that any slight change that may have been made as regards the Maine will not have any ill effect.

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

This question was put down by Deputy J. Flynn but, of course, almost similar questions were asked on previous occasions by Deputy Finucane and by Deputy Palmer. They got replies from my predecessor in office to the effect that the priority list was not a rigid list. The difficulty in regard to staff and machinery was also explained. I have great sympathy with Deputies from rural Ireland who are interested in drainage. I realise how harassed they are by their constituents who believe that by creating an agitation they will force the Commissioners of Public Works to undertake their particular scheme of work.

Great stress has been laid on the matter of the priority list, but it must be borne in mind that comprehensive arterial drainage is new in this country. We had partial drainage but we had not comprehensive arterial drainage. The Act of 1945 provided for comprehensive arterial drainage. That was as a result of the findings of the Drainage Commission, who reported that partial drainage had been tried for over a century in this country and found to be a failure and a waste of money.

We must throw our minds back to the time when the Arterial Drainage Act came into operation, and even to the years previous to it after the Drainage Commission had reported. At that time a war was in progress and the amount of machinery at the disposal of the Office of Public Works was very small. The engineering staff was equally small. They were to undertake a big job of work at that time, prior even to the enactment of the Bill. It was not possible for the commissioners or the engineers to say with any degree of certainty when normality would be restored to the world and when it would be possible to get the machinery that would enable them to undertake certain schemes. Therefore, this priority list was made out in a provisional way. In my opinion the engineering staff made out a list in such a way as, in the first instance, to undertake the drainage of catchment areas which would present the least difficulties or engineering problems. The Brosna covers a very wide area but, even so, it was regarded as a river that presented less difficulties than any other in the country. The same applied to the Glyde and Dee. A chance was taken in regard to the Feale—and it is even a chance to-day. Bear in mind that even yet there is not any certainty, because of the tidal vagaries, that the scheme will be a success. At any rate, the machinery was being built up and the staff was being added to. The machinery was put on the Brosna and afterwards on the Glyde and Dee and special machinery was got for the Feale. Were it not that special machinery was got for the Feale that scheme could not have been undertaken. The Corrib comprises a very considerable area of flooded lands. I believe that when the commissioners saw that the machinery was becoming available they decided they would go on with the survey of the Corrib. However, we could carry on surveys for a long time but that would not get over the difficulties that might be experienced on the various schemes.

It is not correct to say that the Maine scheme has been deleted from the list. By a very slight margin, the Maine has qualified as a major arterial catchment area. It comprises an area of 101,000 acres. There are a number of rivers in the country that are three or four times as great as the Maine— including one which is pretty near to my heart, the Suck. The Suck is about 319,000 acres in extent and a considerable amount of damage is done there too. Likewise, there is a considerable amount of damage on the Moy, on a river in Clare, and in other places.

Mr. Donnellan

On every one of them.

Mr. Beegan

I have great sympathy with Deputy Flynn and with the other Kerry Deputies who are interested in this matter. The position is that I have not got the staff to go on with the work and, when they are engaged on another survey which will take them a considerable length of time, sympathy is not of much use when I cannot translate it into immediate action. The Moy is due for survey. In fact, an inventory has been taken of the damaged lands and the survey is due to start in the spring. I had hoped, and I still hope, to have two survey staffs put on the work, but it is not so easy to build up these survey staffs. My predecessor in office tried, with a certain degree of success, to build up the survey staffs. On the whole, however, the response is most disappointing. You publish an advertisement in the newspapers announcing vacancies for so many engineers for a particular job. Then you receive applications, interview the candidates, select a number of them for the posts and, after all that, some of the successful candidates refuse to accept the posts.

Mr. Donnellan

And some who accept them leave almost immediately.

Mr. Beegan

That is so. We must try and finish the jobs we are working on before we can undertake any others. The Brosna is in its fourth year and a half, and perhaps it will take another year and three months. The scheme for the Glyde and the Dee is there. I am sure that, with the best will in the world and all the machinery which it will be possible to put on it, the Feale will take another three and a half years. The Corrib has been surveyed: the designs have to be made out and all the other work done. It is likely that further special machinery of a different type will have to be procured before we can undertake the outfall of the Corrib.

Deputy Flynn mentioned surveys made in connection with the Maine and the Corrib, and how they greatly facilitated this matter. They may facilitate to some extent the Corrib but, at the same time, the recent Corrib survey took three and a half years. Any surveys carried out before that were carried out in respect of what are known as drainage districts, not catchment areas. Catchment areas comprise more than one drainage district, and as many as three or four drainage districts in some cases. Consequently, a fresh survey has to be undertaken because the whole catchment area must be embraced. What would be a sufficient survey for a drainage district, taking the contour of the land and the different gradients of the tributaries and so forth of a catchment area into consideration would not suit a comprehensive drainage scheme. Consequently, all these matters must be considered.

I shall not make any foolish or false promises here. I could go down to County Kerry and play petty politics of a short-term character. I could represent to the people there that due to the efforts of Deputy Flynn I was having that survey carried out within six months or a year. I am not going to act like that because I cannot carry out such a promise. I have not the staff to do it, and what staff I have are engaged on other work. There is no hope of augmenting the staff to such an extent as to deal with the Maine immediately. When it comes to the time to decide what rivers will be surveyed, I shall take advice from the people who are competent to advise me. I shall not take the responsibility of giving priority to the Maine, the Suck or any other river. I shall be advised by the people who can give a detached and an unbiassed opinion on matters of that kind, and I shall act accordingly.

The Dáil adjourned at 11.5 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Thursday, 14th February, 1952.