asked the Minister for Finance the plans his Department have in relation to the drainage of the Dunkellin River in County Galway.
12.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Canal and River Drainage.
11.
asked the Minister for Finance the present position in relation to the drainage of the Dunkellin river, County Galway.
13.
asked the Minister for Finance if he intends to continue with the cost-benefit survey on the Dunkellin River, County Galway, which was started by his predecessor.
I propose taking Questions Nos. 11, 12 and 13 together. The preparation of a design for the drainage of the Dunkellin catchment is proceeding and has in fact been expedited since my arrival in the Office of Public Works. The cost-benefit studies were not commenced during the term of office of my predecessor but I am arranging to have them carried out immediately to appropriate stage is reached in the design work and I hope that this will occur in 1982. In the meantime preliminary work in this context is in hands.
With regard to the Minister's statement about when the work started I should like to tell him that the engineers visited the area before the last Government left office. However, I am pleased to know that work is still going ahead. I should like to know when the survey work will be completed so that work can commence on the drainage of that river which is an eyesore? I have been expressing my concern about that river since I was first elected to this House and I am sure it was mentioned on many occasions by many representatives from this constituency.
I realise the importance of the Dunkellin river to the Deputy's area. It is on the priority list of minor catchments to be considered. The design work is going ahead but there are problems in the sense that the Department of Fisheries and Forestry have to be consulted about the matter. There is an oyster bed at Clarenbridge and a wild life habitat at Rahasane Turlough and they will have a bearing on the cost-benefit analysis. When those studies are completed we will be able to finish the design but we will have to consider the effect on the wild life habitat and the oyster beds of the drainage of the river. It is not a simple matter.
Is the Minister aware that a predecessor of his indicated that work would start on this scheme as far back as 1972? Is the Minister of State aware that his predecessor, who is present in the House, visited the catchment area prior to the last election and made a promise that he would instruct the Department to do something about it?
I am not aware of what promises were made but I am aware that a visit was made to the area in the company of an engineer. What I am saying is this: it was implied in one question here that the cost/benefit survey was going on. That was not the case. I am saying that the cost/benefit studies were not commenced during the term of office of my predecessor. The preparation of a design is now being undertaken. I indicate that there are problems there, creating special difficulties. I am not saying that they will not allow us to drain that river. I am saying that there is a wildlife habitat and an oyster bed close to it and we must consider the effects of the drainage on those and of those on the drainage. I have commenced consulation with the Department of Fisheries in regard to the oyster beds. That is all I am saying. I am not concerned with promises or anything of that sort.
I asked the Minister of State the present position. I was hoping he would tell us about the cost/benefit survey on which the previous Minister made a decision and issued an order for work to go ahead. I cannot understand why the cost/benefit survey could not go ahead. Is it a problem of finance, personnel, or what is the reason the Minister of State is giving for delaying this cost/benefit survery into 1982?
The Deputy will understand that the cost/benefit survey cannot be properly undertaken until we reach a certain advanced stage of design. We must consult with people like Fisheries and with several others who will want to know exactly — before they can decide on their involvement — what we are going to do with the river. Therefore the design must be at an advanced stage before we can progress to the cost/benefit. I am in a position to say that I hope — I stress the word "hope" because I will not be accused of making promises that are not fulfilled — the cost/benefit survey will be undertaken in 1982.
I have given a considerable amount of time to this question. A last supplementary from Deputy McEllistrim.
No, there are three questions on this matter. I have asked only one supplementary.
At one time I met a deputation of farmers whose land adjoined the Dunkellin river. At that time the design plan was almost complete. That was May last. When I returned to the Department I made an order for a cost analysis to be started before Christmas; as far as I can remember October was the month mentioned. The Minister of State should admit that the order was left in the Department, that the cost/benefit analysis would be started before Christmas——
Would the Deputy kindly ask a question?
Is there an order in the Department and why was the cost/benefit analysis not started when the guarantee had been given?
I should like to remind the Deputy that the cost/benefit analysis was not started during his term of office——
I did not say it was——
——and it is not possible to start it until a certain advanced stage is reached in the design.
That was finished in May last.
Excuse me, that advanced stage has not yet been reached.
A cover up.
No, it is not a cover up at all. The facts are here and they are stubborn things. I am now three or four months in this office but they have been there for a long time. Since I assumed office I can honestly say I have expedited the design of this scheme.
The Minister indicated earlier that the oyster bed would have an effect on the cost/benefit analysis. Could he tell the house how the oyster bed would have such an effect?
It would have an effect in that the Department of Fisheries have been consulted. I have commenced consultation with them. There was no consultation with them until I took up the matter. They have an input in this respect as to what effect the drainage will have on the oyster bed, as they have also with regard to the effects it may have on the wildlife habitat in that area. These are things that would have to be seriously considered by any government in the design of a drainage scheme. Of course they will have an effect because the people concerned will be worried about the effect the drainage of this river will have on the oyster bed.
An Leas Cheann-Comhairle
Question No. 14.
On a point of order, I have sat here throughout Question Time. There are three question down in regard to this and I have Question No. 13. I only wanted to ask a supplementary on it.
An Leas Cheann-Comhairle
The Deputy was given the first supplementary question which elicited the information given. The deputy will appreciate that we have now given 16 minutes to these three questions.
I will obey your ruling, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, and sit down when I have finished. But it is most unfair that I should not be allowed ask the Minister a final supplementary on these three questions of vital importance to the west on a matter which has been a thorn in people's sides for years.
An Leas Cheann-Comhairle
The Chair has called Question No. 14.
I protest; it is unfair.
14.
asked the Minister for Finance the present position in relation to the drainage of the River Nanny, County Galway.
15.
asked the Minister for Finance the plans the Government have in relation to the drainage of the River Nanny at Tuam, County Galway.
I propose to take Question Nos. 14 and 15 together.
I am having the question of draining the Nanny River re-examined in the light of developments since the remainder of the Corrib-Clare catchment drainage scheme was completed some years ago.
I do not know how to deal with the question of re-examination because I am somewhat wary of that word. In view of the fact that engineers from Galway County Council and the Office of Public Works have agreed that the drainage is feasible — and I have this in writing from the Minister's predecessor — can the Minister now tell me whether the checked surveys are now with the Department of Finance and if the necessary money will be provided to complete this drainage, because we are talking about a scheme that has to be completed, not a new one?
The Nanny river is in the Corrib-Clare catchment, a scheme which, under the Arterial Drainage Act of 1945, was carried out between the years 1954 and 1964. The river Nanny was included in the scheme, as confirmed by the Minister for Finance. But, because of the possibility of damage being caused to the Tuam waterworks by silt, the work projected did not go ahead at that time. That scheme ended in 1964. While the scheme was still in progress Galway County Council indicated that a new water supply was being considered. When, in 1964, all other works on the drainage scheme were completed and there was no prospect of an early decision on the proposed new water supply, a certificate of partial completion was issued for the Corrib/Clare scheme.
Would the Minister not accept that when the Corrib scheme finished officially in 1964 part of the Nanny river was drained at that time? Would he not agree that it is now time the Office of Public Works did something about it? Is the Minister further aware that there is now an alternative water supply in operation in Tuam and that there is nothing stopping the Office of Public Works from going ahead and completing these drainage works? Might I ask the Minister also whether this drainage scheme has to go back on the priority list or, with the goodwill of his offices, can it be done without being replaced on the priority list?
The Galway County Council completed the installation of a new water supply for the town of Tuam earlier this year. That is when it was done. The council are in discussion with the Commissioners of Public Works to ensure that the new water supply will not be affected by the drainage scheme. A decision as to whether or not to proceed with the drainage of the Nanny river will have to await the final outcome of the deliberations.
It has nothing at all to do with the Nanny. It is completely independent of it.
The Minister of State said the waterworks have been completed. I have it in writing from his predecessor, as I said earlier, that it would be feasible to do this drainage and will he provide the money now to drain the Nanny?
I understand from recent information I have received that this is technically possible now.
Correct.
May I be allowed to reply? I am doing my best to be helpful. The major scheme in that area finished in 1964, a scheme of which the Nanny was originally part. I cannot accept responsibility for delay now since I have only been four months in office. There was considerable delay in carrying out this scheme and I have explained the reasons for that delay. I understand as a result of discussions with the county council that the scheme is now technically possible and am expediting this river drainage to the utmost of my ability. I do not think it will be necessary to put it on a list again. That is definite. I understand the problems of the people in the area.
Will the Minister provide the money for next year?
I am calling Question No. 16.
16.
asked the Minister for Finance the present position in regard to the drainage and restoration of the Ballinamore-Ballyconnell canal under the EEC proposals for the Erne catchment area.
The Commissioners of Public Works are continuing with the technical investigations necessary to assess the feasibility of restoring the Ballinamore-Ballyconnell canal.
Could the Minister tell us how much work has been carried out this year and how much money has been spent?
A field survey on portion of the canal within the Twenty-six Counties has been completed. The Border area stretches remain to be surveyed. Isometric data is being collected on a continuing basis and the amount of land which will benefit has been ascertained and surveyed.
Could the Minister tell us how much land will be waterlogged as a result of this scheme? Could he tell us what efforts his office is making with regard to the authorities in Northern Ireland in connection with examining the northern section of the canal? This project has been laid down as a priority programme for cross-Border development by the EEC.
When the surveys and so forth have been brought up to date progress will be made. This has to be done in co-operation with the Northern Ireland authorities. I believe that co-operation will be forthcoming. A specialist consultant has been appointed and has commenced work on an investigation into the stability of the types of clay along the waterway and the feasability of dreding and maintaining channels through a number of lakes.
Would the Minister like to say when the consultant was appointed, when the survey was started and what connection has this with the projected linking of the Erne with the Shannon?
I have not got that information in my brief. If the Deputy puts down a question I will get the information for him. The survey is taking place and the next major step will be a hydrological study of the problem. It is not possible to say at this stage when that will finish.
When did it start?
I have not got that information.
One final supplementary.
I am calling Question No. 17.