asked the Minister for Local Government when he received proposals from Meath County Council in relation to the extension of water supplies from Ashbourne village to the Nine Mile Stone; and when he proposes to sanction them.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Water and Sewerage Schemes.
126.
Proposals for this extension were received in my Department on 8th February, 1971, and are under consideration. Certain problems in connection with it are being examined and, when these are settled, I shall convey a decision to the local authority.
Would the Parliamentary Secretary not agree that this is a relatively minor matter, that it is utterly scandalous that it should be waiting in the Department for nine months and that it is only now the Parliamentary Secretary is discovering the problems which he alleges exist and that sanction should have been issued long before now?
My information is that this extension is pretty low on the local authority's priority list.
Is it not a fact that if it was all that low, it would not have been submitted to the Department as long ago as February, 1971 and you should have given sanction long before now?
This is tied up with a number of extensions including Laytown, Bettystown, Julianstown, Donnycarney and a number of others.
This is the only extension being made from Ashbourne.
Deputy Bruton is quite right. This is not a priority question at all and the extensions he is referring to were carried out years ago. He must have come across them only now and I do not know why they were included in the file. The only one involved in this is the one to Nine Mile Stone which is a logical extension of the Ashbourne scheme in that a considerable number of new houses have been erected and they have no supply. Arrangements have been made for septic tanks to deal with sewage and they have not got the water to work them. It will be a health hazard if it is not dealt with quickly and it is pretty rough that it should be in his Department for so long. It would cost a relatively small amount of money.
The information I have is that while the scheme is too recent to be listed on the Meath County Council priority list, in planning it would appear that they do not regard it as having a high priority in their water and sewerage schemes.
Why did they submit it as long ago as February 1971?
That is a separate question.
Who made the report— the inspector? I will take it up with Meath County Council. I am a member of the council and I was present when they decided to do that job.
Could the Parliamentary Secretary tell me the cost of the proposed scheme?
£4,000, is it? Yes, extension involving the laying of 1,900 linear yards along the main Dublin road at a cost of £4,200.
In relation to such a minor scheme, the technical difficulties could not be anything as great as would warrant a nine months delay.
Deputy Tully has promised to raise the matter with the local authority and clarify the priority aspect.
Surely it is a matter for the Department to get action?
If a local authority does not believe that a scheme is of sufficient merit to include it even in their priority list why should the Department of Local Government worry about it?
I do not think they ever said that. I do not know where the Parliamentary Secretary got that information but they most certainly did not say that. The Parliamentary Secretary is saying it.
I said it, actually.
127.
asked the Minister for Local Government whether the Ardfert water scheme which is in progres at present will be adequate for the proposed group water schemes for north and south Ardfert, County Kerry.
While a surplus of water will be available on completion of the scheme referred to, I understand that there are no group development proposals within the area which it is designed to serve.
Will the water scheme in progress in Ardfert at present be adequate to supply a group water scheme at Banna, Ardfert, which is quite near?
I do not know. A number of places are listed here which this scheme could possibly serve but Banna is not among them. I cannot say what the position is.
128.
asked the Minister for Local Government the present position in regard to the Aherla-Kilcrea group water scheme, County Cork.
A design based on a mains extension has been prepared for this scheme. It is necessary, however, to have certain pressure readings rechecked, the results of which may necessitate revisions in the design. My Department have requested Cork County Council to confirm the pressure reading at the proposed point of connection to the public mains.
129.
asked the Minister for Local Government if there are any plans in his Department for sewerage in Riverchapel, County Wexford; and, if so, if he has given sanction to them.
I have approved the Wexford County Council's preliminary proposals for the first stage of the Riverchapel sewerage scheme.
130.
asked the Minister for Local Government when he will sanction the sewerage scheme for Cardington, Athy, County Kildare.
Proposals for an extension of Athy sewerage scheme to serve houses at Cardington were received in my Department on the 29th September and are under examination. I cannot say, at this stage, when a decision thereon is likely to issue.
131.
asked the Minister for Local Government the reasons for the delay in sanctioning a scheme for pumps submitted by Westmeath County Council in October, 1970.
Additional information which was required to enable this proposal to be examined in the Department and which was furnished on the 22nd July last is under consideration.
When was this additional information requested?
Further details, that is map locations of each pump and the areas which it would serve and also the areas of proposed schemes, were submitted to the Department on 21st July. The proposal is still under consideration in the Department.
The proposal originally went to the Department in October, 1970, and the Parliamentary Secretary says further information was submitted in July, 1971. I am asking when was the further information requested?
Application was made on 29th October, 1970. The relevant county engineer's report was received on 3rd December, 1970. Further details were requested and received on 21st July, 1971.
When were they requested?
I presume shortly after 29th October.
I want to put it to the Parliamentary Secretary that it is a scandal that this scheme to supply pumps in County Westmeath in areas which cannot be served by group water or regional schemes—these points were taken into consideration by a very competent assistant county engineer in preparing the scheme—is in the Department for 12 months, involving actual hardship for people who have to go to pumps, particularly in Twyford and Churchland in another part of the county where women with large families have to carry two buckets of water on a round trip of over a mile two or three times a day. I ask the Parliamentary Secretary to sanction this scheme.
We appreciate there can be areas where group water supply schemes are not possible but there are very few such areas. We do not encourage pumps if there is any possibility of having even a small group water scheme.
This consideration weighed very strongly and was taken into account by the chief assistant county engineer in preparing the scheme. He is satisfied that group water schemes cannot be provided in the areas for which he has recommended pumps and this matter has been fully examined by the county council.
We shall endeavour to get a decision made as soon as possible.
132.
asked the Minister for Local Government if he has sanctioned a contractor other than a person (name supplied) for Killarney, County Kerry, main drainage contract No. 1; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Kerry County Council's proposals in connection with acceptance of a tender for this scheme were received in my Department on 29th November, and are being examined. I hope to be in a position to issue a decision thereon shortly.
Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that the man who submitted the lowest tender was recommended by the council's consulting engineer? Will he state why the county manager overruled that?
To which contract is the Deputy referring? Actually there are three contractors involved in this.
Mr. Séamus O'Connor.
Two of them were considered but could not come up with bonds. The contract was readvertised and the council has now submitted a proposal to accept a further tender.
With all due respect, the Parliamentary Secretary is misinformed. Mr. Séamus O'Connor supplied the bond as requested within the time limit. I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary to have another look at this.
On 27th October, 1971, the council stated that Mr. O'Connor's tender was no longer being considered as he had failed to produce a bond and the county manager was not satisfied that he had sufficient experience.
Could the Parliamentary Secretary repeat that?
The person in question was not able to produce a bond.
Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that legal proceedings are now going ahead?
I am not so aware.
133.
asked the Minister for Local Government at what stage on the priority list the mid-Kerry water scheme stands; if he is satisfied with the priority given to this scheme in view of its extreme urgency; and when the necessary money will be allocated.
Section 1 of the mid-Kerry water supply scheme has now reached position No. 1 on Kerry County Council's priority list of water supply and sewerage schemes in planning. However, this list does not include schemes for the urban areas in the county where a number of major urgent projects are also in planning. The relative urgency of this scheme and those to serve the immediate needs of the urban areas is being examined in the light of the overall needs of all areas, urban and rural, in the county.
The question of the allocation of moneys for a water supply scheme does not arise until a tender for the scheme has been received.