asked the Minister for Finance the present position on the drainage of the River Nanny, County Galway.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers (Resumed). - Galway River Drainage.
10.
Policy on arterial drainage is under review. Pending the outcome of this review I am unable to say when drainage of the River Nanny, County Galway, might be undertaken.
Could the Minister give the current cost for completing this drainage? Could he also state the number of staff, if any, allocated to the completion of this work?
That seems to be a separate question.
As the Deputy is aware, planning of arterial drainage has been suspended pending the outcome of a review of arterial drainage policy.
In other words, nothing is being done.
The decision to undertake such a review was announced in this House.
Can the Minister confirm that it is feasible to do this work without interfering with the water supply for Tuam town? Can he indicate if any work will be done on the planning of this scheme in 1986?
The question of the water supply for Tuam town held up this scheme. Galway County Council objected to the scheme in 1964 and relieved us of that pressure only in 1984. It took them 20 years to agree that it would not interfere with the town of Tuam. Unfortunately for that project, in 1984 all planning for arterial drainage was stopped pending the outcome of the review.
The Minister has confirmed that it is feasible to complete this drainage work. Only a small part of the river is involved. Will he confirm that some work will be done in 1986?
The drainage of this river is——
In mid-air.
I do not find Deputy O'Kennedy's remarks very funny.
Deputy O'Kennedy should not be butting in on every question. He should reserve the big ones for himself.
He might be put out one of these days.
The projected drainage scheme was cleared by Galway County Council in July 1984 after a delay of 20 years. At that time by Government decision all planning for arterial drainage was suspended. A few matters would have to be clarified before work could be started.
The Minister of State is wasting our time. The scheme has been suspended.
I was asked for an explanation and I am proceeding to give it. I would ask the Deputy not to interrupt. The design and estimate of the cost would have to be brought up to date. Then a cost-benefit analysis would have to be carried out and found to be satisfactory. The scheme would also have to be exhibited in accordance with the provisions of the Arterial Drainage Act.
That was all done 20 years ago.