asked the Minister for Finance if he is aware that a deputation from Ballyheigue district recently met Kerry county council in connection with repeated flooding on the main Ballyheigue-Tralee Road, which compels the people to make long detours each time flooding occurs; and if he will now consider having the cause of this flooding investigated by an inspector of his Department.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Kerry Flooding.
5.
This road traverses the Akeragh Lough Drainage District. Works in the district were carried out under the Arterial Drainage Act, 1925, and are now maintainable by the county council. The Commissioners of Public Works are advised that with regular maintenance, supplemented by additional attention to the outfall channel after storms, the works function satisfactorily.
Further drainage works could be carried out by the Commissioners only by way of a comprehensive scheme for the Akeragh Lough Catchment under the Arterial Drainage Act, 1945. That catchment is not likely to be reached at an early stage in the arterial drainage programme because of the extent of existing commitments.
6.
asked the Minister for Finance if he is aware that a deputation appeared before a recent meeting of Kerry county council in connection with the breaching of the protective wall on the holding of a person (name supplied) at Kerries West, Tralee; and that this deputation claimed that if the breach is not repaired all holdings in the district, subject to flooding from time to time, are in danger of becoming useless; and if he will now consider having a grant made available to the local authority to have the protective wall restored.
There is no fund available from which a grant could be made to the local authority to carry out this work.
What about implementing the Coast Erosion Act, 1963?
There is a process under that Act which Kerry county council can follow if they so desire. This job was one of a list of 18 submitted by Kerry county council to the Commissioners and it was not by any means first in their order of priority.
Would the Parliamentary Secretary not agree that we are spending money on land that does not produce even £1 extra?
I would not agree.
This is good land and there is a danger of three or more holdings being completely flooded over the next two years. This job could have been carried out some years ago for a few pounds and now it will cost much more. Would the Parliamentary Secretary reconsider it in view of the fact that there is a danger of three or four good holdings being completely flooded in the next few years?
I have already informed the Deputy of the real position.