asked the Minister for Finance what is the cause of the delay in removing the weir on the River Glyde at Killanny, County Louth; whether the delay in removing it has caused operations to be suspended on the drainage of that part of the river from Ballymaskney to Monalty Lough, Carrickmacross, County Monaghan; and whether he is aware that serious flooding occurred in the area in 1954 and is likely to recur in the coming winter unless the weir is removed.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - County Louth Weir.
The flooding to which the Deputy refers in the last part of the question was due to the exceptionally heavy rainfall of last winter. Conditions in the area will be improved by the removal of the rock shoal above the bridge at Ballymaskney, but the removal of this rock shoal can only be undertaken in low flow conditions which were not available last season or so far this year. It is hoped, however, that it will be possible to have the work done before next winter. The suspension of drainage operations between Ballymaskney bridge and Monalty Lough arose from the absence of the low flow conditions needed for the removal of the rock shoal and not from the weir at Killenny. I might add that it has not yet been decided to remove the weir; the alternative of sluicing it is under consideration.
Arising out of that reply, the Parliamentary Secretary is, I am sure, aware of the seriousness of this flooding. Deputies can bear me out when I say there was very, very serious damage in that area last year. The people are now becoming very uneasy because they fear they will have a repetition of that flooding in the coming winter. A deputation came to my house the other evening threatening to hold a protest meeting. I advised them against such action and said I would raise the matter here.
The Deputy is not asking a question. I do not want to interrupt the Deputy, but he should put what he is saying in the form of a question.
The question I wish to put is: is it intended to remove the sluice gate which is causing a great amount of damage in that area?
The fact of the matter is, as regards the removal of the sluice, there is a certain claim for compensation, and we made an offer to the owner who disagrees with our offer. We think our offer is quite a reasonable one and at the moment we are considering another method by which the work will be done just as well and will save us the compensation and, perhaps, the wrath of the Deputy.
May I ask the Minister if he can give me any assurance that the work will be undertaken in this present season?
Can the Deputy give us any assurance that the rain will stop, because that is what is causing the trouble?
The cause of the delay as the Minister has just indicated is in the flow at the present time. As the Deputy is aware, last year was a very bad year with flooding all through the summer. So far this year we have been in the same position. If the Deputy could guarantee that the rain would stop I would guarantee that we would do the work this year.
If you allow me—I would like to make it perfectly clear that I am not asking this question in any sense of criticism of the Parliamentary Secretary. The people of the area want to know why it is that the upper reaches of this river for many miles have been cleaned thoroughly and a splendid job has been done, but why have the waters been allowed to come down to Moynalty while there is one mile of the main river untouched up to the present? It can be understood that serious damage may be done if unfortunately we have another wet winter——
I suggest the Deputy should reserve his statement until the Estimate.
There is just one question I would like to ask: will we get that mile cleared?
Yes.