Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 20 Feb 1952

Vol. 129 No. 5

Private Deputies' Business. - Shannon Drainage—Motion.

Mr. Finan

I move:

That Dáil Éireann is of opinion that the drainage of the River Shannon should be undertaken in order to relieve the great plight of the many landowners who cannot use their lands and that pending the completion of the scheme and in view of the grave hardships caused to farmers concerned suitable compensation should be paid to the landowners who cannot use their lands owing to continuous flooding in the area.

I want to say at the outset that Deputy Oliver Flanagan was primarily responsible for having this motion placed on the Order Paper and I became associated with him. It was the intention that Deputy Oliver Flanagan should speak first and move this motion. Unfortunately he cannot be present and, in order to facilitate the business of the House, I have agreed to do so.

I am sure it will not be denied that the River Shannon is the most important river that we have in this country, important from different angles. It is the longest river in the country, travelling a distance of 224 miles from its source to the sea. It is also the source from which we derive light and power and, for that reason, one would think when arterial drainage was being introduced that, from these two angles, it would be No. 1 on any priority list.

I regret to say that that has not been the case and that it has been pushed very far down on that list. As a result of that, thousands of pounds of valuable food and property have been lost to this State over a long number of years. Farmers living along the Shannon and in the vicinity of the bank lose, year after year, what should be the reward of their labour throughout the summer months. Their potatoes, oats and other grain crops, their hay and in many cases their turf have been swept away by the annual flooding of this river.

It seems strange that any Government, having any serious consideration for the people whom they call on in every emergency, ignore the terrible destruction that is being done, year after year, by the flooding of the River Shannon. I am in the happy position in speaking to this motion that the Parliamentary Secretary to the Department of Finance, Deputy Beegan, is even more intimately acquainted with the devastation done by the flooding of this river than I. There is no need for me or for any other Deputy in this House to remind the Parliamentary Secretary that it is one of the most urgent national problems we have. I have no doubt either that if it lies within the power of the Parliamentary Secretary to carry out the terms of this motion, he will do so. I am afraid he will be handicapped by the fact that the mind which animated the drawing up of that priority list under the Arterial Drainage Act will militate against the Deputy because it definitely has been the policy of the Fianna Fáil Party and the Fianna Fáil Government that there are three types of land in this country when they consider the question of drainage, that is to say, there is the good land, and, as the Taoiseach has said recently, there is the marginal and the submarginal land. Evidently, it was decided that the land along the River Shannon bank belongs to the third class. Good arguments can be put forward to justify that point of view. If you want quick results it is natural that you would develop and look after the good land first.

I see the merits of that argument, but I think there is another point of view that should bear more heavily with the Government and with the Parliamentary Secretary and that is the need of these people who suffer from the flooding of the Shannon. That should be a very important factor and should weigh heavily. I think it is right to say that the people who live along the Shannon would and do make far more use of their few acres than those who are in possession of the good lands in this country. They are not people upon whom any form of compulsory tillage must be brought to bear to produce food. Almost every arable acre that can be found is put under the plough in order to produce food. If there is any real intention on the part of this Government they will give immediate attention to this matter.

One has only to stand on Shannon bridge on almost any day of the year and witness with one's own eyes the colossal losses which those people are suffering. I am informed, and I believe rightly so, that, on one occasion when representations were made to the Taoiseach in regard to the flooding of the River Shannon, and it was pointed out to him that the maintaining of the high level of the river by the Electricity Supply Board was causing serious loss to the farmers, his reply was that if it could be proved that that was so the matter would be looked into. Now that is a rather difficult thing to prove. A thing may be obvious and yet may be difficult to prove. I feel that that was an unfair onus to throw upon the deputation. But even if it were not so, and if the damage and losses sustained at the present time were no greater, is it suggested that nothing should be done to relieve the victims of this flooding? I do not think that is a proper attitude towards this matter. I feel a duty devolves upon the Government to tackle this problem, and at once, and to give the Shannon the place it should have got when the priority list for the drainage of rivers was being drawn up. On almost any day of the year, taking up the newspaper, one will see glaring headlines as well as photographs of people struggling for existence in the vicinity of the River Shannon. One will see pictures of ricks of turf, of cocks of hay and of stacks of oats being swept away, and pictures of flooded pasture lands. I do not understand how anybody shouldering the responsibility which devolves upon a Minister can look with indifference on such destruction and injustice.

In my constituency we are particularly interested in the drainage of the River Shannon because we find ourselves in a dilemma which we cannot overcome, not as the result of the flooding of the Shannon but of the flooding of one of its tributaries—the Suck. Our engineers tell us that until the level of the Shannon is lowered it is impossible to tackle the problem of the Suck. Indeed, it does not need any engineer to tell one that there is no sense in draining a tributary if the surface of the main river is higher than the waters of the tributary. The people in the vicinity of the Suck are suffering in the same way as those in the vicinity of the Shannon. I know that it may not be strictly in order to deal with this matter now, but I would like to give figures in connection with the Suck to the Parliamentary Secretary. It drains an area of 16,500 acres, I rood and 14 perches, the number of parcels of land affected is 2,200 and the number of people affected 10,700.

Mr. Beegan

You mean the Suck, Deputy?

Mr. Finan

Yes, I am dealing with the tributary alone. I have not at my disposal the number of people affected by the flooding of the Shannon, but they must be considerably greater. If one combines those figures one realises it is time some Government tackled this problem. If there be vested interests standing in the way I say the time must have arrived, after 30 years of native Government, when vested interests must be swept aside in the interests of the ordinary people of this country. If freedom was worth anything, if freedom was worth fighting for, vested interests must not take priority over the interests of the ordinary peasantry of our country. Those who are in a position to judge in a technical way state, and I believe are prepared to back their arguments, that you could lower the surface level of the Shannon without reducing in any way current output. I am sure that it is not beyond engineering skill to ensure that, while the requisite power will be maintained, the level of the water can be reduced so as to prevent the damage that is taking place at present. As I said at the beginning, I am quite confident that if the decision was left to the Parliamentary Secretary the matter would be attended to. I do not want to labour the point too much, but I believe that, as far as he is concerned personally, I am pushing an open door. Now that the Parliamentary Secretary is a responsible member of the Government, I am exhorting him to use his influence and his knowledge to bring to bear on the Government as a whole that they have a duty to the people in the affected district and that they cannot in any justice stand idly by and allow these unfortunate people to be robbed year after year of the fruits of their toil, and still maintain that they are doing their duty by the country. I do not propose to say anything further at this stage. I will leave it to others to deal in a more detailed manner with the flooding down the lower regions of the Shannon.

Mr. O'Hara

I second the motion.

Captain Cowan

I know that Deputy McQuillan is very anxious to speak on this motion. He has been in the House all the evening, but I do not see him now. I am sure somebody will inform him that the stage has been reached when he could contribute to this particular motion which, it seems to me, has been spoken of in a very sound and sensible way by the mover. Undoubtedly, the flooding of the Shannon has caused very extensive damage for years and, perhaps, for centuries. In the past, during the many years during which I was associated with the particular locality around Athlone, I saw very extensive damage being done to crops and to people's property in the locality, and I often wondered whether something could not be done to ease the position. To some extent, I feel the Shannon scheme has not eased the situation at all. If that scheme is to be a success there must be a considerable storage of water in the upper reaches above Athlone. If we have that storage, then the danger of flooding increases. Suggestions have been made from time to time as to what might be done to ease the situation. Questions have been asked. Debates have taken place. I think it is fortunate for the mover of the motion and those who are interested in it that the Parliamentary Secretary has not only a personal knowledge of the situation, but has been intimately connected with the problem for many years.

Everybody realises that a problem of this magnitude cannot be easily solved. Its solution will require considerable expenditure. Its solution is really a matter for experts. The problem is sufficiently important to be raised by way of motion, and it is big enough to call for the placing of complete knowledge at the disposal of the Government and the responsible Minister as to what can be done, if anything can be done, to deal with it satisfactorily in a reasonable period.

I do not think it is necessary to deal with the heavy losses sustained year after year by farmers in that area. Losses have been sustained by their forefathers over many generations. It has almost come to be accepted that damage from flooding is inevitable in these areas. I have seen this flooding and the damage that results from it. I am not in a position to make any constructive suggestion, but I think it is a problem for which, with goodwill and determination on the part of everybody concerned, some solution can be found. I have intervened for the purpose of supporting the motion and I hope that my intervention will encourage the Parliamentary Secretary to contribute to the debate from his wide store of personal experience apart from the knowledge at his disposal as the responsible authority and tell us what, in his view, will ease the flooding situation on the Shannon.

Notice taken that 20 Deputies were not present; House counted and 20 Deputies being present,

Mr. O'Higgins

Is it unreasonable to expect some statement from the Government at this stage?

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

Deputy O'Higgins knows a good deal about this and I would like him to give us the benefit of his knowledge. I have met him at conferences on various occasions.

Mr. O'Higgins

You are afraid of Deputy O'Higgins, are you not?

Mr. Beegan

Not a bit.

Mr. O'Higgins

Then why are you not on your feet?

Mr. Beegan

I have been taken at somewhat short notice in regard to this matter, because there were two or three motions on the Paper before this one. It was only late this evening I was notified that this was coming on. There is a good deal of data over in the Office of Public Works in connection with this matter, but I have not got access to it because the office is closed. Consequently what I say now is impromptu. I have nothing prepared. I can only speak about the position from my own personal knowledge.

This question of the Shannon drainage is one that has been before at least three native Governments.

It was also before the Drainage Commission and Deputies who put down a motion of this kind should first of all, I think, read very carefully the findings of the Drainage Commission and the report that they made on the Shannon. The Drainage Commission did make certain recommendations about carrying out certain works to give partial relief from flooding, but at no time did the Drainage Commission admit that flooding, after abnormal rainfalls, could be relieved, and that any attempt to do it would entail the spending of a colossal sum of money, which the benefits accruing therefrom would not justify.

The Shannon is the largest river in this country anyhow and, I believe, in what was one time known as the British Isles. It is 130 miles in length from Lough Allen to the tidal waters at Corbally, near Limerick. It has a catchment area of 4,020 square miles. In the 117 miles above Killaloe there is a fall of only 55 feet, and the fall from Killaloe to the tidal reach, a distance of 14 miles, is from 90 to 100 feet. Since 1930 the Shannon is under the direct control of the Board of Works and the Electricity Supply Board. Everybody understands what the Electricity Supply Board did by virtue of the 1925 Act, when they raised the level of the Shannon for a considerable distance, back almost as far as Meelick, below Portumna, at any rate. You would have a very big problem as regards undertaking the draining of the Shannon if it were possible.

Deputy Finan mentioned that he understands that the Electricity Supply Board levels, which are being maintained, are the cause to some extent of the flooding. The experts of the Electricity Supply Board and also the Drainage Commission hold that what was done on the reservoirs at Lough Allen and Lough Rea, and also at Lough Derg, if anything has helped in some small degree to mitigate flooding.

The question of the removal of obstacles was also mentioned in the Drainage Commission Report. There were certain obstacles in the stretch of river between Athlone and Meelick. I was down there myself with the commissioners in August. We met the lock keeper at Meelick—a very intelligent man. He pointed out and actually showed us the gauge where, at that time, he had kept the level of the water at least two inches below the navigation level. He pointed out to us that while this was all right in the summer and in the dry period of the year, no matter how the level was reduced or lowered or even if the lock were taken away altogether, when you have abnormal rainfall, it did not matter in that case and it would give no relief whatsoever.

According to the Drainage Commission Report, the record of the flow at Killaloe in the summer of 1904 was 52 cubic feet per second. In January, 1915, during the heavy rains, it was 32,500 cubic feet per second, which shows the great variation between the normal summer flow and the abnormal flooding in winter periods—not in every winter but periodically, once in every five years.

I am quite well aware of the great losses that have been sustained by the farmers along the River Shannon, particularly from Meelick to Athlone. That is the portion with which I am most conversant. The question is, would this or any other Government be prepared to spend anywhere between £10,000,000 and £12,000,000 to carry out a comprehensive drainage scheme on the Shannon? I attended conferences both during the period of office of Fianna Fáil, prior to 1948, and also during the period of office of the inter-Party Government—I think Deputy O'Higgins was present at one conference at least in Shannonbridge— and I do not take advantage of being a member of the Opposition to try to throw over responsibility on the then Government which, I believe, they could not undertake. I made it quite clear to the people in Shannonbridge on that occasion that unless the plight of the people along the Shannon banks could be relieved by methods other than drainage they would never be relieved by drainage. I am still of that opinion.

I firmly believe that no Government would stand up in this House and justify an expenditure of £10,000,000 or £12,000,000. That is the estimate that has been mentioned to me by the chief engineer and the assistant engineer as the likely minimum figure it would take, according to present-day costs, to carry out a comprehensive scheme on the Shannon.

The total acreage that the Drainage Commission estimated as being affected by flooding in their report was 24,000 acres. When divided up, it would be 5,000 acres between Lough Allen and Lanesborough; between Lanesborough and Athlone, 2,550; between Athlone and Meelick, 9,260; and below Meelick, 7,190. These are the figures they were given.

It has been suggested by Deputy Finan that nothing has been done to relieve the plight of those people. To my own knowledge, a certain amount has been done by the Land Commission to remedy their plight, but it has only had partial success. I mean by migrating people from the area, but the difficulty was to get people to migrate, bad and all as their conditions there were. Away back in the days of the old Congested Districts Board in 1914 or 1915, I know that a number of people in the townlands of Reask and Cartagh were given a portion of land in a place called Abbeylands, near Eyrecourt. They were not asked to give up their old holdings, but could retain them. They signed for the land and took it over. The position is that, instead of going out and building houses on the portion of land which was given to them a distance away from the floods, almost every one of them, in fact, I think every one of them, applied at a later stage to the Land Commission for permission to sell the land they had got, and they continued to live in the flooded area. In 1944 a survey of that particular area was made by the Land Commission at a time when the floods were there. If I had access to the data I could bring into the House I would show clearly what the surveyor's computation of their losses and conditions was and what he suggested doing about it. Then the Land Commission did take action, and acquired the Waller Estate at a place called Moystown, near Shannon Harbour. What they proposed to do, and did, was to take five or six families from the townland of Reask and give them extra holdings there, with new houses, while leaving them in possession of the old holdings across the Shannon.

It is all very well for Deputy Flanagan to put his name to this motion pointing out the plight of the people in the flooded areas, but when the Land Commission were proposing to do that Deputy Flanagan was one of the Deputies who were very vocal in their agitation against taking those people across into Offaly. That creates a precedent for the people of Westmeath if at some later stage an attempt is made by the Land Commission to take the people out of Clonowen and Derrycahill and take them where land is available in Westmeath. If that were decided for the people in Clonowen and Derrycahill and in villages in or near Athlone I am prepared to bet a penny to a penny anyway that they would migrate only a short distance east of Athlone because of the case they have made to the Land Commission inspectors that they want to be near Athlone market town and the very fine schools that are there for their children.

Mr. McQuillan

You cannot blame them for that.

Mr. Beegan

I am not blaming them either but just pointing out the precedent that has been established for the Westmeath people to object to those people going across. One of the people who started that and egged it on was Deputy Flanagan who has put his name to this motion.

As far as the Shannon area is concerned around Lusmagh, Ballymacoolaghan and other townlands there, the difficulty is for the Land Commission to get land in the immediate vicinity whereby they could take away some of the people and have a proper rearrangement of their holdings. That is very badly needed because in that particular district you have land holders or tenants with smallholdings in several different patches.

Mr. O'Higgins

Quite right.

Mr. Beegan

I am here to speak the blunt, brutal and candid truth as far as the drainage of the Shannon is concerned, and my belief is that it will not come in our generation and that all expert advice is against it. But what I would like to see is a motion asking that a solution of those people's difficulties be found by some other means and that they be treated as a special entity like the undeveloped areas and so on. To that end I have put up a memorandum to the Land Commission asking them to make an economic survey in conjunction with engineers of the Office of Public Works of the whole Shannon area to see if something can be done. I believe that the only solution for the Shannon area is to take the people who are prepared to migrate and give them holdings elsewhere, and when the rearrangement is carried out to provide the people whose houses are periodically flooded with new houses on sites which will be safe from a recurrence of flooding in future. That, in my opinion, is the only solution that could be found.

Other things could be done as well, however. Along the Shannon we have a number of small towns and the pretty big town of Athlone, which is going ahead well industrially. If we could secure industries for the other towns I believe that the lot of the people along the Shannon basin would be relieved in a much better way than by going ahead with the comprehensive drainage of the Shannon, which would cost millions and millions of pounds. If a quarter or even one-fifth of the money it would take to drain the Shannon were expended in that way even over a period of years it would be of greater benefit to the people concerned than an attempt to carry out a drainage scheme which would never give an economic return. Remember that we have a number of catchment areas and that everyone—and, I suppose, rightly so—is pressing for the drainage of the catchment in his constitutency. They are pressing for a survey to be made in that particular catchment and drainage proceeded with.

The Brosna is, I hope, nearing completion.

We have the Glyde and Dee and the Feale, the Corrib and the Moy, all of them pretty big catchment areas. They have to be dealt with now anyhow. That decision was come to. In at least one instance the decision was come to by my predecessor. In another he had it on the stocks and I was not going to take the responsibility of altering that and putting it back. That has to be gone on with now. It is the River Moy. I cannot make any promise, nor do I propose to make any promise, as to what other rivers or catchment areas will be taken after the survey of the Moy is completed. It would be premature to do so and I shall not do it. When the time comes, if I am still here, as I stated in the House the other night, I will have recourse to the advice and judgment of the people in my office who are capable of deciding in a very detached way the schemes that should be proceeded with when the Corrib and Moy are completed.

Mr. Finan

Would the Parliamentary Secretary direct their attention to the Suck?

Mr. Beegan

The Suck will come in for consideration in conjunction with others at that time.

Mr. McQuillan

Can the Parliamentary Secretary tell us this—could a scheme for the Suck definitely be carried out whether the Shannon is drained or not?

Mr. Beegan

The only reply I can give to the Deputy in that case is that the Brosna has been proceeded with and is being drained into the Shannon. The people in the Shannon basin hold that it will deteriorate the position. The people in the office maintain that it will not and are hoping that it will not. I believe that, if it does not, it will probably make the problem of the Suck easier to be faced. That is all that I can say on that.

I have given an outline of what the Land Commission attempted to do. Since the Waller estate was divided there was a large estate taken over at Clonfert demesne, the estate of J.A.B. Trench, and a big number of uneconomic holders from Reask and Cartagh are being provided for there and they are also being permitted to retain their old holdings. Indeed, I could term them nothing but bog holdings and cutaway bog. Nobody else would take them and it was just as well to leave them to the holders.

The position in the two townlands that have been most affected and that have always been first affected by abnormal flooding has been almost fully remedied. There are, possibly, a couple of families there yet and some of them, I think, would not migrate. We are told that flooding has rendered the land almost useless. It could be possible that, owing to the nature of the land, if a comprehensive drainage scheme were carried out, the land would be much worse and that the callow land along the Shannon would be aerated to such an extent and become so dried that the grass that would grow on it would be much inferior to the grass and hay that grow on it now. Last year, an acre of callow land that was allocated to a tenant—a number of tenants got an acre each of callow land not far from the Shannon some years ago—was put up for public auction by the owner, and a neighbouring farmer bought it. He did not seem to consider it valueless. He paid the handsome some of £135 for a statute acre.

We hear people talking of relieving those people of annuities and rates. It cannot be done under existing legislation unless it can be proved that the land is submerged for 12 months of the year. That would not bring very much relief and I do not think a very strong case could be made for it because any of the callow land along that area is valuable land, perhaps not so valuable now as it was in years gone by because of the fact that there is so much mechanised transport in the country. Years ago, the callow land of Clonburn was very valuable land and the hay coming to Athlone and Ballinasloe commanded a higher price than rye grass of the uplands. That may not be the position now but valuable hay is got there yet.

Deputy Cowan hinted that something should be done to find a solution. I believe the only solution that can be found is on the lines I have indicated. If a number of people are prepared to migrate and if the Land Commission settle down to it and provide land not very far away from where the people are at present domiciled, that is part of the solution. The second part is that those who remain behind and whose houses are periodically flooded should be given generous grants and, if necessary, sites should be acquired, compulsorily if necessary, in order to enable them to erect houses that would be immune from flooding.

Some Deputies would ask that this matter would be considered in conjunction with consideration of the undeveloped areas. The greater part of the area concerned is in the undeveloped areas. If there is local initiative, I am sure the board that has been established under the recent Act will be prepared to give every assistance.

I do not propose to say any more on this motion. Before it is put to a division, I would like to hear something more constructive as to how we can solve the problem of the people affected than has been yet brought out in this debate.

Mr. O'Higgins

I should like to congratulate Deputy Finan on tabling this motion, and I should like to chide the Parliamentary Secretary for his reluctance to tell the House of his undoubted experience over a number of years of this extremely difficult problem.

I do not think there is anyone on any side of the House who could imagine that the arterial drainage of the river Shannon, by far the biggest river in Great Britain or Ireland, is an undertaking that could be accomplished by any Government overnight. It is not. It is one of the largest arterial drainage problems that could face any country. Undoubtedly, the magnitude of the problem must be considered by any junior Minister who is responsible for drainage. I do not propose to say to the Parliamentary Secretary that he should direct his policy towards the arterial drainage of the river Shannon because I do not think that that could be accomplished.

The Parliamentary Secretary has told us that the drainage of the Shannon would cost between £10,000,000 and £12,000,000. That may or may not be correct. It may be an estimate made at the time the Drainage Commission sat, or it may be an up-to-date figure. Apart from cost, the actual engineering problem would be stupendous. Accordingly, the position may be, as the Parliamentary Secretary has put it, that we will not see the arterial drainage of the Shannon in our lifetime.

Accepting that, as I think we must, we still have to face the fact that all down the banks of the Shannon, particularly from Meelick to Athlone, there exists what is undoubtedly a desolated area—thousands of families living on the very brink of disaster, existing on land subject to flooding, and incurring perennially hardship and loss. Those are facts that will not be disputed. There is no member of the House more keenly aware of them, I think, than the present Parliamentary Secretary.

The problem is there. It is correct to say that, since the Shannon scheme was initiated, there are farmers living along the Shannon who will tell you, who told me, and I am sure told the Parliamentary Secretary, of splendid patches of ground which grew potatoes and that were tilled in the early twenties which to-day will grow nothing. They are convinced that the initiation of the Shannon hydroelectric scheme has undoubtedly contributed to the flooding of their land. It is no good telling them, as I witnessed representatives of the board of works telling them, that statistics show that there has been no increased flooding of the Shannon since the initiation of the Shannon scheme. That just will not be accepted, and I am sure the Parliamentary Secretary will agree that there is all down the Shannon banks a widely-held belief that their troubles, if they did not start in the late twenties, certainly were considerably increased by the Shannon hydro-electric scheme. That is one matter that must be considered in relation to this problem. I know that down near Lusmagh, not far from Banagher some years ago, when the Shannon was in full spate and considerable damage was being done, there was nearly a minor rebellion because one of Guinness's barges overturned and its cargo was thrown into the water, but, lo and behold, in a matter of hours the flooding was controlled through the operation of the sluice gates and Guinness were able to recover their stout. The farmers who found their turf and their hay being swept away and their homes being flooded found it very hard to understand——

Mr. Beegan

In what period of the year did that happen?

Mr. O'Higgins

I think it was in the year 1941.

Mr. Beegan

At what period of the year?

Mr. O'Higgins

I do not recollect.

Mr. Beegan

Was it in summer or in winter?

Mr. O'Higgins

I think it was in the early spring but I am not quite certain. In any event, a considerable volume of discontent has grown up over a number of years because the people along this area feel that they have been neglected. I do not say that they were neglected only by the former Fianna Fáil Government. I think that this problem did not get the attention it should have got from the inter-Party Government. I said that here, I have said it in conference and I have said it publicly, because I do not think that, up to now, the Office of Public Works had in charge of it a person who understands and appreciates the problem as intimately as the present Parliamentary Secretary. I have said that there is this volume of discontent, suspicion, indeed, amongst the people of the area, believing as they do that the Electricity Supply Board has in some way contributed to their misfortunes, believing, as they do, undoubtedly, that there is no one in the Government or outside the Government prepared to do anything on their behalf.

Added to that discontent, unfortunately, along the banks of the Shannon, there is also the further uneasiness created by the drainage of the River Brosna. The Parliamentary Secretary has mentioned that, and I do not think there is anyone who has witnessed the work carried out on the Brosna who can praise it sufficiently highly. The scheme is a magnificent one; it has undoubtedly relieved the callows from Pullagh right back into Banagher and has opened up acres and acres of land formerly subject to flooding. That is to the credit side of the scheme, but the people between Meelick and Athlone are firmly convinced that the water taken off the Boora bog and the callows is being sailed down right on top of their land. They ask what is the sense in draining a huge catchment area and turning a neglected river like the Brosna into a well-banked watercourse, a watercourse that carries undoubtedly a much greater volume of water than it did in the past, and bringing all that down into the Shannon. They feel that the drainage of the Brosna will add to the hardship of their lot in the future. I do not know whether that is correct or not. It is undoubtedly an engineering question and an engineering problem, and I am quite certain that engineering advice would not have permitted the drainage of the Brosna to be initiated if damage or increased flooding were to result along the Shannon, but there, undoubtedly, is the local belief.

I mention these matters because I do not want the Parliamentary Secretary who has lived with this problem for a number of years to allow familiarity to breed contempt. I am certain it will not but it is well for him to appreciate that all along the banks of the Shannon the years of inactivity that have gone by have added considerably to the local problem and to local grievances. To-day farmers who at the moment are flooded along the Shannon hear appeals by the Government for increased tillage, for more production and more food, and they undoubtedly feel that the situation is far from right and that the Government would be better served in assisting them in some way to deal with their own perennial production problems. That being the situation and accepting, as the Parliamentary Secretary has said, that a complete comprehensive drainage of the Shannon is not feasible, I should like to suggest to the Parliamentary Secretary—he is himself a member of the Shannon drainage committee — that the Government should give urgent consideration to the recommendations of the Drainage Commission of 1940 in relation to the limited drainage of the Shannon. Undoubtedly, a considerable amount of work could be done on the Shannon, short of arterial or comprehensive drainage — the removal of obstacles, the repair of fallen-in banks in certain areas and other works within the definition of drainage. That course was suggested and recommended when the Drainage Commission considered the drainage problem of the country.

About 12 months ago the Shannon Drainage Association went to considerable trouble to prepare an engineering plan for the carrying out of such a form of limited drainage and obstacle removal on the Shannon. That plan was submitted to the Office of Public Works, bedecked by the signatures of Deputies, including the Parliamentary Secretary, Deputy McQuillan, and other Deputies. We urged the point of view that consideration should at least be given to the removal of the major obstacles and the freeing of the flow of water on the river.

I am sorry that the Parliamentary Secretary did not deal in more detail with the possibility of carrying out that limited form of drainage work. I do not know what the cost would be, but the cost which was estimated at that time by our committee was, if my recollection is correct, something in the neighbourhood of £500,000. If the expenditure of £500,000 on the Shannon will reduce in some way the danger of flooding—in view of the large acreage at present subject to flooding—I think such expenditure would be well worth while. Money has, unfortunately, been misspent from time to time as a result of bad information or bad advice and certainly the expenditure of £500,000 on the Shannon—even if the work were of a highly experimental nature—is an expenditure which I should regard as an investment. If that cannot be done or if the Government are unwilling to do it, they will still have the problem of the desolated areas to deal with.

I was glad that the Minister for Lands was in the House for portion of this discussion because undoubtedly the conditions along the Shannon are conditions which must primarily be the concern of the Land Commission. Apart altogether from any help which the Land Commission may be able to give, I should like to know whether the Government has considered the possibility of buying all the land within a certain distance of the Shannon, and which is now included in the acreage subject to flooding.

Mr. Beegan

I am afraid you would not get agreement on that from the people concerned.

Mr. O'Higgins

It would depend on the price. It might be that, if the land were purchased at an attractive price, sufficient capital might be made available to the people concerned to enable them to purchase land elsewhere or to purchase lands as they came on the market. If the people concerned had the capital, they might be able to find suitable land in their own area far quicker, perhaps, than the Land Commission might be able to find it. However, that is only a suggestion, and it may not be practicable. Certainly, the Land Commission would have my support in any effort it might make to ease the intolerable situation that exists all along this area.

As the Parliamentary Secretary mentioned, quite a number of men who are termed "landowners" own a bit of land at one end of a field, another bit of land at another end of the field and have, maybe, little patches of land all along areas near to the Shannon. I suppose the problem is a social one but considerable assistance could be given by the Land Commission to ease the lot of these people. I urge the Parliamentary Secretary to give immediate consideration to some form of limited drainage along the Shannon. The Parliamentary Secretary has now absolute knowledge of the problem. He has more machinery than was available two or three years ago. He has the goodwill of all sections of this House in tackling the problem, even on a limited scale. Even if he feels that the problem is too big to be tackled, I do not think he need fear any unfair political opposition provided he can give some token to us that his appreciation of the problem will be translated into action.

Mr. McQuillan

The tone of this debate has been very gentlemanly. I must say that I am rather surprised that a more vigorous approach was not made to this problem both by the Parliamentary Secretary and the other Deputies who have spoken. So far, most of the Deputies who have spoken on this matter are very closely in touch with the Shannon drainage problem through various deputations they have introduced to different Governments and also by reason of the fact that many of the members of the House are also members of different drainage committees within the vicinity of the Shannon. I believe the Parliamentary Secretary is as anxious as anybody in this House to do the best he can. I do not agree, however, that the problem is beyond solution. It would appear from the remarks of Deputies that there is no hope of a comprehensive scheme for the drainage of the Shannon catchment area being undertaken in our lifetime. That is the sum total of the remarks passed here to-night on this motion. At any rate, that is news of a sort for the people who are so vitally concerned. The people who live in the flooded areas along the Shannon should at any rate be told what the position is, whether there is any hope of relieving the hardships they have been suffering for the last 40 or 50 years. I am glad that, so far as lay in his power, the Parliamentary Secretary has cleared the decks and pointed out that there is little hope of this problem being tackled in our lifetime.

I have already said that I believe the Parliamentary Secretary is sincerely anxious to do the best he can. Whether people in this House like it or not, I say that I do not believe the engineering staff behind him are as anxious as the Parliamentary Secretary to carry out this essential work. Without introducing any personalities, it is quite evident in all walks of life that the older a man gets the more he is inclined to take a conservative view. I believe that the conservative view or the easy way out is being taken by many of those whose responsibility it is to this State to carry out essential drainage works. That lack of energy or enthusiasm may come from lack of confidence in their own ability to carry out such essential works. I do not deny that.

There is evidence to support my contention in this respect. We all know that the first real approach to arterial drainage was taken when the Arterial Drainage Act of 1945 was passed. That was really getting down to brass tacks. Owing to the fact that the war was on and that it was difficult to get machinery, etc., it was not possible to get the first scheme under way under the 1945 Act until 1948. In 1948, the first scheme under the Act was commenced on the River Brosna. Most Deputies will remember that not so long ago in this House we were given the reasons why the Brosna catchment area was undertaken first. It might be no harm to have it on record again that one of the reasons why the Brosna catchment area was put first on the priority list was that, so far as the engineering section were concerned, the Brosna presented a less difficult proposition than any of the other catchment areas and that, as far as they were concerned, they were starting off on new ground and were undertaking a type of drainage work which they had never hitherto envisaged in this country. Consequently, I think we cannot blame them for picking what, to their mind, was the easiest scheme. Nobody can blame the engineering staff for tackling the Brosna because it was an easy scheme so far as they were concerned. Naturally, as it was their first dive in the dark, they were anxious not to come up against the tricky or intricate problems they might have to face on arterial drainage schemes on the Suck or the Corrib or many other large catchment areas that will have at some time to be dealt with. I want to bring it home forcibly to Deputies that lack of confidence is apparent in the engineering section of the Office of Works, lack of confidence in their ability to tackle a scheme of the magnitude of the Shannon.

The Parliamentary Secretary under the inter-Party Government, Deputy Donnellan, found himself in the same boat as the present Parliamentary Secretary. Deputy Donnellan showed the same anxiety when he had responsibility as Parliamentary Secretary as Deputy Beegan has shown to-day. But all the good wishes in the world and all the enthusiasm are not enough to break down the prejudices of the engineering staff. Therefore, we must accept the position in our lifetime—the Shannon is a closed problem as far as drainage is concerned.

The position along the Shannon, as far as the people there are concerned, is that, for years past, they have lived in hopes that something would be done. Year after year, deputation after deputation went to the different Ministers of the various Governments in power, hoping for success in their efforts either to have a drainage scheme carried out on the Shannon or else that they would be recompensed for the loss they suffer owing to flooding every year. Every time there is a general election hope runs high in the breasts of those dwellers along the Shannon, but I think the day has come at last when little or no political capital can be made out of this drainage problem.

I am glad that this motion is on the Order Paper, if for no other purpose than to get a statement from all sides of the House, a statement giving information, at any rate, as to what can be done for those people who live along the Shannon. I think that the motion is useful in so far as it will give definite proof to those unfortunate people that there can be no hope held out to them of a major arterial drainage scheme being undertaken in our lifetime. Now, having satisfied them on that, and I think it is a useful thing to have satisfied them on it, we might be able to get down to an alternative solution. As long as you have people living in hope that some major work would be carried out along the Shannon, and as long as that hope existed, then it was only with reluctance that you could get any assent from those who are being flooded out to move elsewhere if suitable holdings were made available. Once that little spark of hope was held out to them, that, at some date, be it in the near or distant future, a major scheme would be carried out, and that there was the possibility that their lands which are now flooded for six months of the year would be once more fit to be utilised for tillage purposes, then the people living in those areas hesitated to give their consent to change elsewhere.

Deputy O'Higgins made a suggestion which has been made before, both by deputations and by Deputies in this House, to the effect that a limited drainage scheme be carried out on the Shannon. The Parliamentary Secretary himself is well aware that such recommendations have been made before, and I am sorry at this stage that we have not an opportunity of hearing from him his views in that respect. I think myself that if you consider the results of a limited scheme, you will find that the cost of it, according to the information that is available, at any rate, will be out of all proportion to the amount of land that would be reclaimed and brought back to productivity. In other words, the same argument can be put up against carrying out a limited drainage scheme as can be put up against carrying out a major arterial drainage scheme—the cost was prohibitive for the return which would be achieved. I would prefer if the Parliamentary Secretary would let us know to-night for certain whether or not it is envisaged at some stage in the near future to carry out a limited drainage scheme on the lines that have often been suggested to the Board of Works in the past.

So far, to-night, no Deputy put up the case that drainage, even a major drainage scheme on the Shannon, might not be as useful as all would expect. I have heard people who are interested in the drainage of the Shannon suggest that, if it is considered impossible to carry out a major scheme, steps be taken all along the Shannon valley to carry out a proper afforestation scheme. I do not know how that suggestion would appeal to the Parliamentary Secretary, but I propose to enlarge upon it in this connection. If we assume now, once and for all, that the drainage of the Shannon is to be cut out, then the next thing we should do is to get down to the problem of offering alternative accommodation to the people who at present exist along or are in close proximity to the Shannon, as well as to those people who try to make a living near the various tributaries of the Shannon. I think mention was made by Deputy Finan of one particular tributary of the Shannon, the River Suck. That is a river with which both the Parliamentary Secretary and myself are very familiar. I think we have good cause to be familiar with that same river. Now, the Suck flows into the River Shannon, and the Suck is another headache for the drainage section of the Board of Works.

The Brosna scheme has been under way for a considerable time and, I believe, is now almost completed. Opinions vary as to whether the extra flow of water from the Brosna catchment area into the Shannon is going to affect adversely the people who live along the Shannon itself. That is a problem that has yet to be resolved. No doubt, if the question of carrying out a drainage scheme on the tributary of the Shannon known as the Suck arises, and if that scheme is tackled similar worries will face not alone the Board of Works engineers but the people likely to be affected along the Shannon valley.

I am not too happy about the reply given to me by the Parliamentary Secretary in connection with the proposed drainage of the River Suck. A promise was given to me by his predecessor that a survey party of engineers would be on the River Suck around July or August of 1951. We will not feel the time slipping by until July, 1952, is upon us and, so far, there is no sign of any engineering or survey party that I know of coming to tackle the initial problem connected with the drainage of the Suck. The reason I mention the River Suck is that it is a tributary of the Shannon and the very same problem faces the authorities, when they tackle the problem of flooding on the Shannon, as face them on the River Suck. There are villages along the Suck which at times of the year are practically surrounded by water. The very same problem exists along the Shannon, so that it would only be common sense if the problem of the Shannon and its tributaries were all tackled at the same time. In other words, it would be much better, when dealing with these people whose land is flooded along or near the Shannon, if steps were taken at the same time to solve the problems of the people whose land is flooded along the River Suck and other tributaries of the Shannon.

In connection with that problem, I believe that the only solution, barring arterial drainage, is to remove these people from the flooded areas. The Parliamentary Secretary mentioned that objections had been raised by Deputies and by people outside because unfortunate flood sufferers were removed from one side of the Shannon to the other, but the Parliamentary Secretary is big enough and courageous enough to ignore what I believe to be unchristian tactics on the part of these people. There is a danger, however, that if alternative holdings are offered to people along the Shannon, and if these holdings are 50, 60 or 70 miles away from the areas in which they were reared, the people may not be inclined to go, but that danger can be got over very easily. So far as the Clonown area, with which I am familiar and which is really the main problem along the Shannon, is concerned, if steps were taken by the Land Commission to carry out a proper survey of the flooded area, and if the people whose lands and houses are affected by the floods were interviewed, I believe it would be found that a majority of these people are willing to move out of that locality, provided they get decent holdings elsewhere.

It is suggested that they want to move only a short distance from their present position, that they want to be near the town of Athlone, and so forth. That is perfectly true, and it is only natural that it should be so. People do not like to tear up their roots and move many miles away from the areas in which they were born, and, especially in the case of the Clonown area which is very near Athlone, the people have very close ties with that town. They have traded there for years; many of their children have secured work in the factories in Athlone, and the youngsters attend first class schools, national, secondary and vocational, in Athlone. Naturally, they cannot be expected to feel anxious about moving up to Kinnegad or on to some portion of Meath. I do not think that presents any very great difficulty at all, because, to my own personal knowledge, there is plenty of suitable land available for distribution in County Westmeath within a reasonable distance of Athlone.

I had a question on the Order Paper to-day with regard to one farm—the Talbot farm at Garry Castle, outside Athlone. I have been after the Land Commission for the past couple of years to interest them in acquiring this farm. I do not know at this stage what purpose the Land Commission will put this farm to, but I believe it would be an ideal farm to give to some of the Clonown people who at present suffer from flooding. Nobody in this House is in a position to say what the Land Commission will do at any time, but it is no harm to impress on them the necessity of making available as much land as they possibly can acquire in Westmeath to solve this Clonown problem. I know that it is the desire of the people in these areas to get land as near as possible to a town such as Athlone. That is only natural. All their ties are connected with the town, and it would be too much to expect them to start out anew in fresh territory where they have little or no contacts or connections.

Many well-intentioned people have suggested that the land in question along the Shannon and the Suck should be de-rated, that it should be given at a nominal cost to the people who are flooded. I think that type of suggestion does more harm than good. I do not believe for a moment in allowing people to use those lands at a nominal cost. The suggestion has been made also that houses be built further back, so that the actual dwellings themselves would be free from flooding. I do not think that suggestion would be a solution to the difficulty.

I hesitate at this stage to suggest in a big way what would deal with the whole Shannon basin, but I wonder if the Parliamentary Secretary has ever considered that the Shannon itself, from the point of view of fisheries and of the tourist trade, could be made a very attractive proposition. I know, for a fact, that a little over a hundred years ago the catch of salmon from the Shannon was in the region of £300,000 in a year. That was over a hundred years ago, and that was a time when salmon sold at 1d. a lb. In that river alone there is to-day, if properly developed, a first-class means of balancing our payments.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

This motion has to do with the drainage of the Shannon, not its development.

Mr. McQuillan

If the Leas-Cheann Comhairle will allow me an opportunity, I am going to relate this to the question of the drainage of the Shannon. The suggestion has been made here that the Shannon cannot be drained in our lifetime.

Captain Cowan

The Deputy knows that they were not allowed to feed salmon to their servants more often than twice a week in those days?

Mr. McQuillan

The return from the fishing alone was tremendous. There is no need for me to emphasise what a similar catch would mean to the people as a whole here to-day. That is only one aspect of the matter. A large number of tourists would be delighted to go on the Shannon every year, provided that facilities were made available for them, including boats and what I might describe as hunting lodges.

In order to make a proper success of the Shannon itself from a fishing and a tourist point of view, I think it would be essential, first of all, for the people there to understand that there is no hope now of a comprehensive drainage scheme being undertaken and that the best thing for them would be to accept a change of holding or suitable compensation from the State. Having got the decision from the people that they are willing to leave, the Shannon problem should be handed over to a special body and the first move that could be made along it—in so far as it is possible at the moment; how far it is possible I cannot say—would be a thorough examination to see what afforestation schemes can be carried out there. It is not necessary to emphasise to the members of this House the tremendous aid that afforestation is to drainage. One of the main causes of the tremendous flooding in recent years is mainly the lack of afforestation in this country.

I know perfectly well that the Parliamentary Secretary has no responsibility for the afforestation programme. That, of course, is the responsibility of the Minister for Lands—but I do think that in a matter of such importance as the drainage of the Shannon or the problem that arises from lack of drainage of the Shannon the Parliamentary Secretary would have the assistance of his colleague, the Minister for Lands—that is, in connection with the afforestation side of it. I think he would also have the assistance of the Minister for Industry and Commerce, so that between them they would be able to put up a strong case to the Minister for Finance. In my little experience of this House, I have found that there is no use in approaching the Department of Finance unless you have the backing of several other Departments which may be interested as well. I think that a case could be put up for the Department of Finance to tackle, first of all, the problem of removing those people whose land is flooded along the Shannon area to suitable holdings elsewhere and then making good use of the land which they leave behind. I move the adjournment of the debate.

Debate adjourned.