The Office of Public Works Estimate usually draws a long and interesting debate from Deputies. The principal point which I had intended to raise was raised by the last speaker. I was principally concerned with the River Shannon, but now it is hardly necessary for me to repeat what has already been so ably said by Deputy Boland with regard to the expert advice which was obtained by the previous Government. Shannon flooding, and the complaints relating thereto, have been under debate in this House for very many years, and it would be interesting to know if the Office of Public Works has any concrete proposals that are likely to supply a remedy. Nobody knows better than the Deputies representing the constituencies affected by Shannon flooding that this is a problem which has existed for many years, but it cannot be allowed to exist for ever. It is a problem on which an outside expert was asked to express an opinion. He did express an opinion and I feel, just as Deputy Boland feels, that the decision to obtain the best advice in the world was a practical one.
Whilst I do not claim to criticise the skill, ability or efficiency of our own engineers I feel it is no harm to obtain the advice we have obtained. Now that a certain amount of advice has been given and a report has been made, we should be interested to know what action the Office of Public Works propose to take. We should be glad to know if the engineering staff of the Office of Public Works have had an opportunity of studying in detail all aspects of the report submitted by the American expert. We should also be glad to know what action, if any, they propose to take.
The people living on the banks of the River Shannon in Offaly, Westmeath, Roscommon and other affected areas are anxiously awaiting a development of some kind. If the Office of Public Works or their engineering staff tell the people that the flooding must continue year after year and that the only alternative is to leave the district and go elsewhere I assure the House that that is something which the people are not prepared to do. There is an old saying that the savage loves his native land. I do not wish to describe the people living along the Shannon in that fashion but it is true that they have the same love for the moist and marshy land surrounded by the Shannon as the savage has for his native land. It would be unfair and unreasonable that the county councils concerned should ask them to pay rent and rates on land which is flooded practically eight or nine months of the year and, in the few summer months, the grazing on it is not up to any kind of standard. It is well known from the reports of agricultural instructors in those areas that live stock there suffer from fluke and other diseases caused by water-logged lands. The people in those areas have suffered unknown inconvenience. For us to express lip sympathy here with them for a week every 12 months is little or no solution for them.
The question is: has this House confidence in the Office of Public Works? If we are to criticise the Office of Public Works, let us have some foundation for our criticism. I remember that, during the years when I was a Parliamentary Secretary in the inter-Party Government and applications were made for piers, break-waters and other facilities required by fishermen, the applications were referred to the Office of Public Works for reports. The engineering staff of the Office of Public Works was never able to submit a detailed report within any reasonable time. The explanation always given was that the engineering staff were kept busy elsewhere, that some of the engineering staff had either retired or died and that more of them were examining proposals submitted to them some years previously.
I should like some details of the full extent of the engineering staff of the Office of Public Works—the number of engineers; the length of time, if any, the Office of Public Works give their engineering staff to submit a report; whether the procedure is that they are given a particular job and told to come back when it is done or whether they are told to do it within a certain time. People who are not engineers are not qualified to go into the pros and cons of an engineer's report. You will be told immediately that it is a profession that carries a good deal of responsibility and skill and that the ordinary lay person cannot express an opinion on it. However, the ordinary lay person can express the opinion that the engineering staff of the Office of Public Works should be given some limit of time in which to report on a particular work. The Shannon is one particular instance in which I feel something should and must be done.
It has been suggested that the chief cause of the continuous flooding of the Shannon is the fact that the River Brosna was drained and that there was, therefore, a bigger flow of water from the midlands of Offaly and Westmeath into the River Shannon. I consider it a wrong expression of opinion to say that the River Brosna should not have been drained before the River Shannon. Before the River Brosna was drained, one could stand on Ballycumber railway bridge and look around and see a vast ocean of water over areas in Offaly and it was there for months and months of the year. That has all gone now. I have wondered whether the drainage of the River Brosna has worsened the position of the river Shannon. We see now that, after heavy rainfalls, it is as it was years ago. Extensive flooding took place on the River Shannon in 1954 but it must be remembered that not for almost 100 years before that had there been such severe and heavy rainfall as there was at that time.
I feel the Commissioners of Public Works are men with drive in so far as the initial and commencing stages of schemes are concerned. I do not know if, during this debate, for the records of this House, any tribute was paid to the memory of the former chairman— the late Diarmuid Ó hÉigceartuigh. On an occasion such as this and particularly as the man has passed to his eternal reward since the last Estimate for this Department was before this House, I feel a tribute should be paid to the fine service he gave, to his ability and efficiency and to the capable manner in which that gentleman discharged his duties as chairman of the Office of Public Works. As a member of this House for close on 16 years, I always found him courteous, helpful and practical—and, indeed, to be practical is the principal attribute of any engineers or of any commissioners who hold the high office entrusted to those gentlemen.
This House passed an Arterial Drainage Bill some years ago. Is that not correct? Apart from the drainage scheme carried out on the Glyde and Dee, the drainage of the Brosna, the Feale and the Corrib, are we to take it that, since the Arterial Drainage Act was passed in 1945, only these four important and extensive drainage schemes were carried out? If that is so, it means that, under the Arterial Drainage Act, it will take about 200 years before most of our rivers are drained. That may be slight exaggeration: it may take 150 years. However, that is little consolation to people who are anxious to have extensive drainage schemes carried out.
I have been pressing to have the drainage of the River Nore examined under the Arterial Drainage Act. That river drains the centre of the Country of Laois and the entire of the County of Kilkenny, including Kilkenny City. The Nore must be looked upon as one of our most important rivers in these days. In parts of North Kilkenny and South Laois there are portions of the River Nore where, if you are any kind of an athlete or sprinter, you can jump from one bank to the other. It is easy to walk across the river because of the huge logs or trees that have fallen into it and across it from time to time. I have often wondered why, as a preliminary to a major scheme of arterial drainage, the Office of Public Works do not undertake the removal of obstructions from rivers if only to allow the free passage of water. There are defective bridges on the Nore where the eyes are completely closed. I know of a couple of instances, and I am sure the Office of Public Works is aware of them, where after heavy flooding or rainfall, instead of the water going through the eye of the bridge it flows over the bridge and there is a traffic chaos and county council obstruction as well. That is only the River Nore. Deputy Griffin mentioned places in County Meath and I suppose every Deputy could raise cases in his own constituency.
The Arterial Drainage Act is on the shelves of the Office of Public Works, covered with dust and surrounded by cobwebs. It is nearly time the dust was shaken off and the cobwebs removed and some practical steps taken to do something on the more important rivers. There is no use whatever in getting engineers, in asking for surveys and the taking of levels, with the very limited engineering staff there at present. It is so limited that if one of the head engineers becomes ill there is a standstill. It is all very fine for Deputies to ask that important works be carried out without delay, but there must be staff to do so. If Deputies expect the work to be carried out effectively, it must be recognised that there must be staff or it cannot be done.
Many might say that the Office of Public Works is overstaffed or that the staff should be drastically reduced, but I think what is needed is reorganisation, as there is too much overlapping. The Parliamentary Secretary might ask me to give an example. The overlapping is there in the shifting of responsibility from one to another. There is no such thing as a time limit there for the submission of reports. It looks as if everyone is his own boss and there is no one in charge. I am not casting a serious reflection on the ability of those in authority there, but to me it looks as if the whole institution is running amok, with everyone his own boss, everyone doing his best and too much overlapping. I feel it needs a drastic overhaul.
The engineers may be asked from time to time to report on old Government buildings. There are offices which are housed entirely in ruins. I have known cases where the engineering staff have condemned public buildings in this city for almost 25 years. I can distinctly recall that when I was Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Agriculture I occupied an office in an old building in Kildare Street. I understood it was reported about 25 years ago as being in a dangerous condition. For 20 years there were continuous complaints. I can distinctly recollect—and it is on the files of the Office of Public Works—that one morning the building trembled completely and in 48 hours it had to be evacuated. I feel there are many other old offices in this city in which Government officers are expected to work under extremely horrible conditions.
I do not know how many of the Board of Works people ever visited the public offices known as "100 Amiens Street", in which there are customs officials and, I think, officers of the Department of Posts and Telegraphs. I had occasion to pay a visit to these offices recently. I see in this Estimate that there is a section of the Office of Public Works called the Furniture Branch. In that office there were chairs with three legs, some of the most ancient furniture I ever saw, which would not be put on a low class scrap heap. If this branch is responsible for furniture I would like to know that and I shall make it my business later on to have a chat with the head of that section. The furniture in some Government offices is so bad that it would hardly burn and it is a disgrace to the name of a Government office.
