Vol. 395 No. 5
23 Mr. Browne (Carlow-Kilkenny) asked the Minister for Finance when the Office of Public Works sanctioned the placing of a weir fully across the River Slaney at Rathvilly, Carlow; the reason sanction was given; the consideration, if any, which was given to the raising of water levels because of the weir; and the name(s) of the person(s) responsible for the resulting flooding of adjoining farmlands upstream.
The Commissioners of Public Works were not consulted when the weir in question was originally constructed in 1982 in connection with local fish farm operations and they received no complaints of flooding as a result.
In November 1986 the commissioners consented, under section 47 of the Arterial Drainage Act, 1945, to alterations to the weir which had been carried out earlier that year. In giving consent the commissioners had regard for assurances given by the owners of the weir that the alterations, which involved lowering the crest level, would not raise water levels upstream and would in fact improve the existing situation in times of high flows.
The commissioners explicitly pointed out that consent was given for the purpose of the 1945 Act only and did not absolve the developer from liabilities to third parties. Accordingly, if there is any dispute in relation to flooding it is a matter for the developer and the affected landowners.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): Did the Minister say the commissioners had not been consulted?
The commissioners were not consulted when the weir was originally constructed.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): Then it would appear that later on they gave a decision on an illegal weir, because they had not given consent originally. Has the Minister any information on that? Who had given permission for the existing weir on which they were then ruling?
As I said in my reply, the Commissioners of Public Works were not consulted when the weir was originally constructed in 1982. This is a very complex issue, one which has been——
(Carlow-Kilkenny): I accept that they were not consulted originally, so the weir was illegal. Am I right in thinking that they then made legal something that had been illegal from the beginning? If they were not consulted then who gave permission for the construction of the original weir which they agreed to accept?
The commissioners were consulted about this weir in 1986. They gave consent at that time. I am aware that this is a very complex issue because I have been involved in another aspect of it. I might suggest that if the Deputy would like to discuss this matter with me I will be available to go into detail because I do not believe we will advance the matter further here. It is a very complex matter likely to be the subject of legal proceedings.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): Perhaps it is complex because of political interference long ago.
I have no evidence of any political interference.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): I might give the Minister such evidence.
Any politician who would become involved in this issue would be very unwise.
