Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 26 Nov 1958

Vol. 171 No. 8

Private Members' Business. - Shannon Valley Flooding—Motion (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:—

That Dáil Éireann is of the opinion that ameliorative measures of a permanent nature for the relief of farmers in the flooded area of the Shannon Valley should be initiated immediately by the Government.— (Deputy McQuillan.)

Mr. Wycherley

Coming from an area which suffers very much indeed from flooding year after year, I cannot but have the greatest sympathy with this motion. I have the greatest sympathy for the people in the Shannon Valley because I appreciate the great difficulties under which they have to make an honest living because of the serious flooding which occurs annually in the Shannon River. I know the great loss sustained because I have seen in my own constituency this year several acres of corn swept down by several rivers and that is trivial compared with the damage which is done annually in the Shannon Valley.

The Arterial Drainage Act was passed in 1945 to alleviate flooding by major rivers. It is, indeed, a cause for worry that more work has not been done under that Act in the past 13 years. Farmers tell me that they would almost set the dogs after engineers in future when they see them traverse the banks of a river, they are so tired and so sick of the system which has been going on—so many surveys being made, so many engineers coming with maps, but very little work being done. I know that in Cork not one river has been drained under the Arterial Drainage Act. I hope that position will not continue much longer. In County Cork, there are 50,000 acres of land flooded annually by rivers which should have been cleaned long ago under the Act. The Shannon Valley comprises much more land than that and I know that the Commissioners of Public Works were more interested in the larger areas, areas of perhaps 100,000 acres, but, in spite of the surveying that has been going on no practical work has been done and, unfortunately, a good deal of the money has been frittered away in surveys.

If we could get even £10 an acre for the 50,000 acres in County Cork to which I have referred, which would be a mere £500,000 it would add tremendously to the wealth of the country. The same applies in the Shannon Valley. The Shannon scheme is of such great importance and such a big scheme that the engineers find it very difficult to get a unanimous decision as to how they will go about it.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy is very effectively bringing the Shannon down to Cork.

Mr. Wycherley

I am just making the point that, while the engineers are disputing over reports and surveys in connection with the Shannon, much useful work could be done on smaller rivers. I understand that under the Arterial Drainage Act power could be given to county councils to do some of that work and I feel that it would be a good thing if there were more co-operation between the Commissioners of Public Works and the local authorities in applying the Arterial Drainage Act. The local authorities are fully conversant with drainage problems in their areas. The Shannon is not confined to one county. That makes it all the more interesting for the county councils concerned, namely, the county councils of Galway, Roscommon, Limerick and the various other counties through which the Shannon flows. Greater co-operation should exist between the commissioners and the county councils concerned and a combined effort should be made to alleviate flooding.

It is much easier at the present time to clear a stream or river than it was when the Arterial Drainage Act was passed. Thirteen years ago, there was not the modern machinery which is available to-day. By the use of dragline excavators, an immense amount of work could be done in short time. Boring plant could be used to blast rocks out of rivers and other machinery could be used to clear the beds of rivers. In that way, the flow of water could be freed effectively in a very short time. As a result of land reclamation work, a good deal of silting has occurred in major rivers, which has the effect of stopping the free flow of water. That will get worse year by year.

An Ceann Comhairle

I do not wish to interrupt the Deputy, but he clearly is not applying himself to the motion on the Order Paper. The motion is very specific. It deals with the flooded area of the Shannon Valley.

Mr. Wycherley

I appreciate that, a Cheann Comhairle, but I am just drawing attention to the fact of land reclamation work being responsible for silting along the river and islands being created as a result of the silting.

An Ceann Comhairle

This is not the occasion on which to do so. The Deputy should apply himself to the flooding of the Shannon Valley.

Mr. Wycherley

That is happening in the Shannon Valley.

An Ceann Comhairle

I know, but one may not travel over all drainage administration on this motion.

Mr. Wycherley

I will confine myself how to the Shannon Valley. The point I wish to make is that, as a result of land reclamation in the valley, there is more silting up in the river and islands forming. If they were cleared, there would be a freer flow of water. The river can be lowered, the rocks blown out of the river and there will be a freer flow of water.

I have shown my interest in the people of the Shannon Valley because of my sympathy with them and because of my knowledge of the problems confronting farmers whose land is flooded year after year. Instead of spending too much money on surveys, machinery and men should be put to work to get the job done.

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

It is not easy to deduce from the wording of Deputy McQuillan's motion whether he had any particular Department in mind when he gave notice of it. The motion states:—

"That Dáil Éireann is of the opinion that ameliorative measures of a permanent nature for the relief of farmers in the flooded area of the Shannon Valley should be initiated immediately by the Government."

That might equally appropriately be directed to the Office of Public Works, to the Department of Lands or to the Government as a whole. Deputy McQuillan and many other Deputies who have spoken on this matter seem to have come to the conclusion that the particular problem of Shannon flooding below Athlone is one for measures which can best be carried out by, say, the Department of Lands or the Department of Agriculture rather than by the engineers of the Office of Public Works. The magnitude of this problem seems to have percolated to the minds of those who have given it any thought—that no adequate protection of the farmers in that stretch of the Shannon can be achieved at any figure of cost which any sensible person could recommend.

I think Deputy MacEoin was quite unfair when he suggested that there had been neglect and unnecessary delay on the part of the present Government in dealing with this matter. It was the previous Government, of which he was a Minister, which invited an American expert to come to Ireland to investigate the Shannon problem. On the 20th August, 1956, the final report of Mr. Louis E. Rydell was received. That report was not submitted to the Government until the 17th April, 1957 and, as Deputy MacEoin knows, the Fianna Fáil Government was then installed. The report was considered by the Government on the 26th April, 1957, and it was decided that the report should be published. Approval was given to the proposal of the Minister for Finance that a preliminary engineering investigation of Mr. Rydell's suggestions for additional lake storage, river diversions and Shannon improvements, should be undertaken.

On the 2nd May, 1957, the decision of the Government was conveyed to the Commissioners of Public Works by a minute of the Department of Finance on that date. Hydrometric work and devaluation of flood flow data in connection with the preliminary investigations was put in hands by the commissioners shortly afterwards. The Rydell report was released for publication on the 2nd July, 1957. I think these dates indicate quite clearly that any charge of negligence which may be made in respect of this problem cannot properly be laid at the door of the present Government.

Deputy McQuillan also leaves himself open to the criticism that he did not regard the problem of being as immediately urgent as the wording of his motion suggests. I find that he had an opportunity of moving this motion on the 6th November, 1957, and he did not move it. It was next reached on the 19th February, 1958, and he did not move it on that date either. Therefore, I fail to see the sense of urging the Government to initiate steps immediately, when, by his neglect of the opportunities to press his case on the Government, he himself was not convinced of the great urgency of this question. Now, we in the Fianna Fáil Government are not of that opinion; we are of opinion that it is urgent. For that reason, the Department of Lands has been giving very close and persistent attention to this problem. Because of the magnitude of the engineering problem involved in the banking or arterial drainage of the Shannon Valley, this Government has decided that in any event some ameliorative measures will be taken pending the outcome of the work directed to be undertaken by Major Rydell.

I have here a statement from the Minister for Lands indicating what these measures are, and I think that it will save time if I read it verbatim. He says:—

"This motion recommends that ameliorative measures of a permanent nature for the relief of farmers in the flooded areas of the Shannon Valley should be initiated immediately by the Government. Some Deputies who have spoken on the motion have emphasised the necessity for immediate remedial measures in the form of migration and rehousing and to that extent I want to say straightaway that they are pushing an open door, because, as I will explain in a few moments, the Land Commission scheme is actually on the eve of implementation. Deputies will understand that the Land Commission scheme is not a scheme for the control of flooding: it is, in fact, aimed at securing relief from flooding as far as this can be done.

I can state briefly the facts regarding the projected Land Commission scheme. Following the extensive flooding caused by the River Shannon in the Winter of 1954, the then Government asked the Land Commission to consider formulating a scheme of relief, by migration or otherwise, for farmers in the Athlone/Meelick area whose lands were inundated or whose buildings were affected by the floods. Investigation disclosed that in the area over 100 farmers had their lands inundated or their buildings flooded. It was considered that sufficient land could be made available to provide dry-stands for stock and sites for houses, so that the affected farmers would have land and buildings above the level of floods of the previous winter's dimensions. An outline scheme was prepared by the Land Commission, envisaging the migration of a number of tenants, the construction of new dwelling-houses and out-offices, raising of yards and approaches, provision of haybarns and other minor matters.

In March, 1955, a provisional allocation of £100,000 was made from the National Development Fund to provide

(1) for the cost of a survey and a report by an American expert and

(2) to enable the Land Commission plans to be proceeded with but it was indicated that no expenditure could be incurred under (2) until the expert's report at (1) was to hand.

The final report of the American expert was received in August, 1956. He had been supplied with particulars of the Land Commission draft scheme and in regard to it he stated in his report that (and I quote): ‘It is recommended that, except for actions already initiated, relocation of farm buildings, roads, etc., be undertaken only to the extent found practicable and desirable after engineering studies are sufficiently advanced to permit evaluation of effectiveness of such works as may appear feasible of adoption.’

That was the position obtaining when the present Government took office in March of last year. The present Minister for Lands had the matter reopened as an urgent issue and in November, 1957, the Government authorised the Land Commission to go ahead with their scheme.

Early this year, the Minister for Lands detailed a corps of inspectors to work exclusively on the Land Commission relief scheme. The position is that while the outline scheme which was prepared a few years ago laid down the general lines of the remedial measures, precise proposals had to be worked out in detail in the Shannon area immediately a decision to press on with the scheme was forthcoming.

Special arrangements have been made for co-ordinating the necessary detailed investigations and for solving the many problems that inevitably arise in a comparatively big scheme of this kind. The projected scheme is twofold, namely, the provision of (a) new buildings for those whose buildings were seriously flooded and (b) dry stands for stock for those whose lands were inundated. The question of reconstructing buildings, raising approach roads, the building of houses on rafts on non-mineral soil, etc., were incidental matters covered by the examination.

The Land Commission have already in their possession some convenient lands for their scheme and in addition dry land for buildings sites and stands for stock will have to be obtained also by the migration of farmers with land above flood level. Thus, to a certain extent, the success of the scheme as a whole will depend on the willingness of certain farmers to migrate. These migrants will be offered fair exchanges, but it must be clearly understood that the Land Commission cannot be held up to ransom by any individual who seeks to avail himself of the circumstances by demanding exorbitant terms from the Land Commission. The Land Commission can offer exchanges only in accordance with their existing powers and, if they cannot come to terms with any prospective migrant, they will have no alternative but to seek elsewhere the land needed. Such a course can only deprive the prospective migrant of a good exchange and result in a less satisfactory scheme for the flooded farmers. In the circumstances, it is to be hoped that when the scheme comes to be operated by the Land Commission, the necessary degree of co-operation will be forthcoming from all farmers concerned.

As over 100 farmers are affected by the scheme, there are, naturally, many problems, technical, legal and administrative, involving a large amount of preliminary work. The examination of these problems is well advanced and the Land Commission hope to be in a position to begin work on the ground as soon as weather and farming conditions permit, probably in the spring. Until precise details of the scheme have been finalised and presented to the beneficiaries, only the main features of the scheme can be disclosed. These may be summarised as follows:—

No. of farmers to be migrated	9
No. of new houses to be built	62
No. of existing houses to be reconstructed	22
No. of new outoffices to be built	76
No. of existing out-offices to be reconstructed	23
Est. Cost of these buildings and other incidental works	£100,000
Approx. amount to be recovered in cash or annuities	£11,000.”

That is the scheme of amelioration. As Deputies will see, the Government are not waiting for the outcome of the investigations directed to be carried out by the American expert. If, well and good, these investigations indicate drainage measures of a character likely to afford additional relief to the farmers along this section of the Shannon, which is particularly susceptible to flooding, then these measures will be carried out under the Arterial Drainage Act. I think the statement I have just read is in itself an adequate reply to the motion.

Mr. McQuillan

I want to deal first of all with the opening remarks made by the Parliamentary Secretary in connection with the statement in the motion itself that this was a matter of urgency. He said that I did not consider it an urgent matter when I held it on the Order Paper and on two occasions in the last 12 months did not move it. The Parliamentary Secretary should remember that, when moving this motion a fortnight ago, I said:—

"The Government have been in office since March of 1957. As soon as this Dáil came into session after the general election, I had this motion placed on the Order Paper. The motion had lain there since March of 1957 and it has been held there over the heads of the Government, in order to ensure that they would be reminded every month, while that motion remained on the Order Paper, of the conditions that obtain in the Shannon Valley. There were indeed a number of occasions on which the motion could have been discussed. I think it would have been unfair on my part to have sprung the motion on the Government after their first two or three months in office. No one will suggest that at this stage it is unfair, after almost two years in office, that the Government should be asked to state specifically what its programme is in connection with the Shannon Valley."

That was my opening remark on this debate a fortnight ago. Were it not for the fact that I held that motion on the Order Paper from March, 1957 the people in the Shannon Valley might be waiting for another five or ten years before the ameliorative measures announced to-night would be put into operation. I know perfectly well that Governments find it difficult at times to deal with such major problems. Whenever there is a difficult matter to be faced, a Government will evade, shelve or sidetrack their responsibility unless there is somebody there to force them along to tackle the difficult problem. A motion such as this on the Order Paper of the House, ready to be moved at any time to force the Government, is of great benefit to the community along the Shannon who have lived for the last 30 years in a state of misery due to the losses incurred in the flooding of their houses.

I am surprised at a man like the Parliamentary Secretary trying to make political points in connection with the wording of the motion. He said it was vague, in so far as it did not specify what Government Department was responsible, that any Government Department could have dealt with it. The motion specifically calls upon the Government to carry out these ameliorative measures. If I suggested that this measure should go through the Board of Works, it is quite possible they will say they were not responsible. If I put it to the Minister for Lands, it is quite possible that he would say that the Department of the Minister for Finance is involved as well and I would get nowhere with this motion, but I put the motion down to the Government in order that they would be pin-pointed themselves and thereby place the responsibility upon some section of the Government for dealing with this problem.

I had the experience three or four years ago in this House of asking a series of questions in connection with weeds. I addressed questions to the Minister for Finance, the Minister for Lands and the Minister for Industry and Commerce. I was told in turn each time that it was not the responsibility of any of these Ministers. I could not find out from the Government which Department had responsibility. They all tried to shelve it.

Does anybody think it would be reasonable for me then to frame a motion such as this in such a way that a particular Department could shelve its responsibility or sidetrack it? I think the Parliamentary Secretary has no grounds whatever for complaining about having this motion directed specifically to the Government.

The measures which the Parliamentary Secretary read out to-night will undoubtedly do a certain amount of good. We have reached the stage now where these proposals have been made in this House and are on the record of the House. In that regard, I think whatever measures are being taken are the responsibility of the Minister for Lands. Any good news we heard was through the Department of Lands. If that is the case, why is it that the Minister for Lands could not come in here and make the announcement about these proposals? Why could he not come in and tell the House what he proposed to do and let us discuss the proposals instead of sending in the Parliamentary Secretary so that we cannot make any constructive proposals in the absence of the Minister for Lands? He is not even prepared to hear suggestions at this stage to alter or improve the proposed scheme.

We find, for instance, that there are only nine people being migrated out of that area. There is a list available in the Department of people whose properties were flooded. These people must now, I presume, be satisfied with the reconstructed houses raised on piles in many areas and have the doubtful advantage, although the houses are raised high, that the area all round the house in winter will be surrounded by water. To my mind, that is not a satisfactory method of dealing with this area.

We find in the course of the Minister's written statement supplied by the Parliamentary Secretary that the Land Commission must work within its existing power, so far as the Shannon Valley is concerned. The Land Commission was never set up to deal with problems of flooding. The Land Commission was set up to solve congestion, to acquire large holdings and thereby put into economic units the maximum number of families. The Land Commission's powers are limited to these functions I have mentioned.

Is it fair then to deal with a special problem like the Shannon Valley by handing it over to the Land Commission with its limited powers? I know that the arguments put forward by the Parliamentary Secretary are not his own views, but the views of the Minister for Lands, that the people in the Shannon Valley will not be allowed to dictate to the Land Commission and that if farmers do not accept the transfers or changes they are offered, nothing will be done as far as those people are concerned. The reason the Minister states that is that the Land Commission has to work within its existing power. If necessary, a special body could deal with this problem and utilise the officials of the Land Commission to deal with it so that men who for years have been accustomed to a particular type of husbandry or farming will not be offered the normal smallholding that might be given to a transferee from the congested areas.

The type of farming in the Shannon Valley is unique and these people deserve the utmost consideration. It would be tragic to find them pressured into accepting certain terms put forward by the Land Commission which would not be fair to those tenants. I would ask that further consideration be given to that matter at this stage before the final plans are sanctioned.

With regard to the wider field of the drainage problem itself, there is very little use in my taking up the time of the House in dealing with it because the Parliamentary Secretary failed to put forward any case whatever in connection with the Shannon drainage problem, except to refer to the Rydell Report and point out that further investigations were taking place.

We should remember one thing with regard to the Shannon Valley. We should remember that a forestry scheme would be an ideal help in ameliorating conditions as far as flooding is concerned, if that scheme should be in the catchment area and embrace all the tributaries of the Shannon. Apart from the climatic advantages of a good forestry scheme in that new belt of country, the fact is that timber absorbs tremendous quantities of water and will prevent that vast runaway of water that causes the silting up in the river beds. I think that in the long-term, view the question of afforestation should be predominantly in the minds of the people who are charged with the responsibility of improving the Shannon Valley.

I am grateful that at last certain steps, even though they are limited ones, have been taken by the Government. I am sure that all members of this House appreciate the fact that some hope is being held out to a limited section along the Shannon Valley. Finally, I repeat my appeal to the Parliamentary Secretary and ask him to convey to his colleagues in the Department of Lands not to be harsh in connection with the administration of the scheme, not to hide behind the fact that the Land Commission itself has only limited powers when dealing with land division but to make this Shannon Valley problem one of special consideration and one where wider powers must be used.

I have not the slightest doubt that if it were found necessary to get an increase in power for such a major problem, this House would be unanimous in giving the necessary powers to the Minister for Lands.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.