Vol. 1049 No. 3
90. Deputy Rose Conway-Walsh asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform to provide an update on the Crossmolina flood relief scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5763/24]
107. Deputy Alan Dillon asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform for an update on the proposed Crossmolina flood relief scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5728/24]
As the Department of expenditure is the planning authority for flood relief schemes, the OPW issued that Department with a report that addressed the supplementary information it required. The OPW is still awaiting a response from the Department. Will the Minister please tell the people of Crossmolina when its scheme will start? He will know this has been going on since 2015.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 90 and 107 together.
I refer to the previous updates on this matter I have given to the House regarding the consent process for the Crossmolina flood relief scheme, the most recent of which was on 30 January. As the Minister for public expenditure, I am the consenting authority for flood relief schemes submitted under the Arterial Drainage Act 1945 and the Arterial Drainage (Amendment) Act 1995. In accordance with the European Union regulations of 2019, the OPW has sought consent for the Crossmolina flood relief scheme. Section 7E(4) of those EU regulations of 2019 mandates that there is access to sufficient expertise to examine an environmental impact assessment report. In accordance with these requirements, my Department has appointed an independent environmental consultant to carry out all necessary environmental assessments as required by these directives and to review the submissions received during the periods of public consultation.
An initial period of public consultation was held between December 2020 and January 2021 regarding the proposed flood relief scheme, after which my Department sought supplementary information from the OPW in line with section 7 of the regulations. This was supplied in July 2021. During this period, a decision to confirm the River Bride scheme in Blackpool was challenged under a judicial review. This had an impact on the process underpinning the consent process for Crossmolina, as the Department was required to consider the legal arguments at play to ensure ongoing compliance with the regulations. Following the conclusion of these proceedings in early 2022, the Department sought legal advice on the grounds raised and updated its procedures accordingly.
The supplementary information received contained sufficient and significant additional information in relation to the effects on the environment of the proposed scheme. That, therefore, led to a second period of public consultation, which was then held, that finished in July 2022. On foot of the advice then received from an environmental consultant retained by the Department, additional supplementary information was requested from the OPW in July of last year in order to reach a full, reasoned conclusion of the environmental impacts of the scheme as required by the regulations. The OPW submitted this supplementary information in November of last year and it is currently being examined by the environmental consultants retained by my Department. The supplementary information is being examined by the retained consultants in order to determine whether the information supplied is considered to be significant in line with section 7C(3) of the regulations. The information is also being examined to ensure that it is sufficient to allow a full, reasoned conclusion on the environmental impacts of the proposed scheme.
That is the crux of the problem. When is the Minister expecting information from the consultants to which the Department has given supplementary information for them to assess whether it is sufficient and significant? Will he assure me at this stage that we will not need to go to a third public consultation process once the Department responds to the information given last November? That is the real concern. I know the Minister has to adhere to the law. I would not ask him not to but, my goodness, we should not have to go to another situation where we have further consultation and push it out again. We are already ten years waiting. For a project of this size, we are probably talking about a period of three to four years to build it. We are looking at up to 2030 before this scheme is built, while we see an increasing number of floods all the time. Every time there is a flood or warning of a flood, it means the people in Crossmolina are living in fear and trepidation.
I, too, share deep concerns around ongoing delays to the Crossmolina flood relief scheme. It is completely unacceptable for the external consultancy firm not to commit to clear timelines for a project as serious as this. It received the supplementary information last November. I call on the Department to provide an urgent update on that timeline. While Deputy Conway-Walsh and I understand that consent under the Arterial Drainage Act regulation is very important, and we need to ensure it is done with diligence and meets all the consenting requirements, the length of time it has taken for the external services to make an assessment on this matter is certainly ridiculous. They have had two goes on this. The consultants sought supplementary information and have worked in hand with the OPW. We need to ensure that we assess the performance of this external consultancy firm and find a pathway to progress this project forward. It is very important that this project progresses to the tender process.
I thank the Deputies. I absolutely acknowledge the huge anxiety that the status of this project is causing to the communities both of them represent. It is only fair that I acknowledge that the Minister of State, Deputy Calleary, has also raised this issue on a number of occasions in the same way and tone they have.
The length of my answer and the references I made to the many consultations and the legal environment around these flood relief schemes show how complex it is and how prone it is to legal challenge. We have to recognise the right to take matters relating to these kind of schemes to the courts. For all those reasons, I have to recognise the independence of the consultants who are doing this work on behalf of the Department. They are currently evaluating whether the information they have received will reach the threshold that will require further consultation to take place. I am aware of the concerns all the Deputies have around this process. While respecting the independence of what is happening, all I can do is communicate to the House that I hope the next phase of this process will be completed shortly and that I will receive an evaluation from the independent consultants. However, this is a planning matter. I have to underscore the independence of the consultant in doing this work and the absolute imperative of ensuring that due process takes place regarding this issue.
I again acknowledge the concern the local community has about the status of the scheme, but I will not serve that community by saying anything that will in any way give an indication that I do not understand and fully respect the independence of the process that is under way, which I do.
I thank the Minister. I think people would ask that he does absolutely everything in his power to ensure that the sign-off time for the phase the project is currently at be cut as short as possible. The Minister can get it through to the consultants that this is an absolute priority scheme. He is right about Deputies Calleary and Dillon. There has been cross-party support and concern in equal measure for years on the need to deliver this scheme as quickly as possible for businesses and residents in Crossmolina.
I thank the Minister for his response. I appreciate he is continuously looking to ensure that this project progresses. As I said previously, the urgency of the matter cannot be overstated. The real issue is around the Department's outsourcing of consultancy services due to the lack of in-house expertise.
We need accountability to drive this project forward and to make sure the Department of Public Expenditure, NDP Delivery and Reform is effectively overseeing the transition and that outsourced consultancy services are performing to the standard expected. God forbid another flood hits this community before this scheme is implemented. The consequences would be devastating and there would be hell to pay. We need to see progress with this and I know the Minister and Minister of State will see that done.
I thank the Deputy and recognise that this has not become a political matter, as I said in my opening remarks, in recognition of the concerns local communities have about this. I fully understand the desire of both Deputies and of Deputy Calleary to see this matter brought to a conclusion. I am, in effect, representing the final planning authority with regard to this scheme. For that reason, I must take absolute care in the words I use. We have to ensure this work is carried out independently and effectively and that all the law in this area is fully and scrupulously followed. To do anything less than that, or to give any other indication would do a grave disservice to the communities that are anxious for this scheme to move ahead because it would just create further risk and challenge in the future. The independent consultants will fully complete their work. When it is brought back to my Department we will discharge our duties in line with European and national law in this area.
As I have said, I understand the points the Deputies are making this morning and the Minister of State, Deputy O'Donovan, on behalf of the OPW is doing all he can to move this scheme forward, as is the OPW. I will certainly keep on board the points made this morning.
92. Deputy Brian Leddin asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform his views on the recent ESRI report submitted to his Department, The National Development Plan in 2023: Priorities and Capacity, the steps his Department will take to address the limitation of data to evaluate investment in infrastructure projects for balanced regional development as indicated in the report; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5751/24]
I ask the Minister for Public Expenditure, NDP Delivery and Reform for his views on the recent ESRI report submitted to his Department entitled The National Development Plan in 2023: Priorities and Capacity. Will the Minister outline the steps his Department is taking to address the limitation of data to evaluate investment in infrastructure projects, in particular with a view to achieving balanced regional development on this island as indicated in the report?
I will give a short answer to the Deputy's question, but will hopefully cover all of the key points to facilitate an exchange of views on it. I have covered this matter in questions from other Deputies this morning, I will give a broad answer as to the steps we are taking with regard to the availability of data and information. I highlight three, which I believe can make a difference. The first is the publication of the regional reports. That has been underway for each year since 2018. Second, we have a digital map tracker, which is available to allow communities see the status of different projects. We finally publish a regular NDP tracker that again allows stakeholders to see the status of current and future projects. Those are the three different steps we take. I am well aware of the need to move forward the capital projects in a way that is consistent with the national planning framework that in turn aims to deliver regional balance.
I thank the Minister for his answer. I suppose he will agree with me that quality of data is critically important. When we are spending millions and billions of public money, whatever way we spend it, that will have an impact on this country for decades, if not centuries, to come. Acknowledging those impacts, and that we are shaping the nation when we make these decisions, it is imperative that the data we have is of high quality and reliable. Even small inconsistencies or inaccuracies can lead to us taking the wrong decision, and we will be left with those decisions for a long time. At the risk of upsetting the economists, it is not an exact science, and is less exact if it does not have quality data underpinning it. With respect to the economists, it is difficult for them to do their job and to help us do our jobs unless the quality of data is good. I am reminded of projects that were considered white elephants. The Minister of State, Deputy O'Donovan, will know about Ardnacrusha in our own neck of the woods. It was considered a white elephant 100 years ago, but it was not. The politicians back then were brave and took a risk with it in spite of the data.
If any economist thinks their science is an exact science they are probably worth upsetting. The amount of uncertainty and change that has happened in the economy in the past number of years means predictions and forecasts about what will happen have to be humble and acknowledge the degree of uncertainty and volatility in the global economy and the effect it can have in Ireland. We do our best, through the publication of the regional reports mentioned earlier, to provide relevant information on the status of individual projects. I know it is always the case, as the Deputy has said, that public representatives from each part of the country will make the case for more investment within their own community and counties. However, overall the national development plan and national planning framework have made great efforts to achieve regional balance. If we were to be successful in delivering the majority of projects, which I believe we will be, we will have gone a long way to deliver the regional balance we have acknowledged to be important for so long.
I agree with the thrust of the national planning framework and the national development plan and what we are trying to do. The ESRI report hints that we are not really on track and are not achieving the balance that is so critically important. If we want a greater and bigger economy, and a bigger country in terms of the wealth that will underpin the society we are trying to serve, balanced regional development is critical. At the risk of being parochial, my vision is not necessarily for a bigger Limerick or mid west or a counterbalance to Dublin. It is for a better Ireland that can be served by creating that counterbalance. I am sure the Minister of State, Deputy O'Donovan, agrees with me. We are ideally located to be that counterbalance to Dublin. Public investment needs to align with that vision and we need data to underpin the decisions to achieve that vision.
The Minister of State would absolutely agree. His ambition for the mid west is unbounded, as I am sure is the Deputy's.
More and more.
More and more. I agree with Deputy Leddin's point. I speak as a representative from the heart of Dublin. I am clear that development of the region the Deputy has just made the case for is absolutely consistent with, and a really important part of, our national economic development. It is not about looking to pit or divide different parts of our country against each other. It is about recognising that the city of Dublin is itself already facing into supply constraints. It is facing the challenge of many different pieces of land in different parts of the city. It is already facing competing demands. That is why Limerick has been so successful from an FDI perspective. That is why we have to find further ways in which we can accelerate the overall balanced development of our country.
I quickly highlight for the Deputy the huge importance of the national broadband plan and the impact that will make.
93. Deputy Pádraig O'Sullivan asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform for an update on the Blackpool and Glashaboy flood relief schemes in County Cork; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5519/24]
I ask the Minister for an update on both the Blackpool and Glashaboy flood relief schemes in County Cork.
I will again give some brief background on the planning environment relating to this. This scheme was submitted for confirmation by the OPW in August 2018 under the Arterial Drainage Act 1945.
In early 2021, the scheme received ministerial confirmation under section 7 of the regulations. It was then subject to judicial review, during which a stay was also granted on works being carried out pending the resolution of these proceedings. In early 2022 and acting on legal advice, my Department conceded the matter on a single ground related to public consultation procedures as part of the confirmation process and consented to an order reverting the evaluation of the Blackpool flood relief scheme to an earlier phase of the project. A request for supplementary information was subsequently made to the Office of Public Works under section 7B(4) of the regulations, to which the OPW complied by supplying information in October 2022. Following an examination of all material provided to date, the environmental consultants retained by my Department recommended that a further supplementary information request be made to the OPW. This request was made in November 2023 and the OPW is now progressing this accordingly. Once the information has been received, a further period of public consultation will be held.
Regarding the Glashaboy flood relief scheme for Glanmire, the Office of Public Works, in consultation with Cork City Council, is engaging proactively to progress the scheme. The scheme received ministerial consent in January 2021, is funded from the national development plan to 2030 and will provide flood relief and protection to some 100 properties. In April 2023, Cork City Council, following a successful tender competition, awarded the project to Sorensen Civil Engineering. I can provide the Deputy with a further update on that scheme in a moment, if he so wishes.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House
In July 2023, Sorensen Civil Engineering mobilised on site and carried out site investigation works, working with utility providers to agree diversions and engaging with stakeholders. The contractor continues to progress the flood protection works in a number of different locations throughout the scheme area. The construction programme is anticipated to take 32 months, with the works split up into several zones to minimise disruption to the public and businesses. A steering group with representatives from Cork city and county councils, the consultant engineers and the OPW meets monthly to review the progress in and performance of the delivery of this scheme. The schedule for the next three months of work is available on a dedicated web page on the project website, which has been set up to provide updates to the public throughout the works.
Following the significant flooding that occurred during Storm Babet, the Minister of State with responsibility for the Office of Public Works, Deputy O'Donovan, visited the area and met the local authority to discuss the impact from the storm event and progressing the construction of the scheme. The project team is currently considering all interventions or mitigations that may be beneficial to mitigate flooding until the scheme is complete. After Storm Babet, members of the project team met the Copper Valley Vue residents association and discussed proposals for temporary works prior to construction of the permanent flood relief scheme works. At the end of 2023, interim mitigation measures were installed to help protect homes on Copper Valley Vue until the flood defence scheme was fully completed in the area. These measures include a raised ramp at the entrance to Copper Valley Vue and temporary flood defence barriers within the estate. These interim works were completed by Sorensen Civil Engineering in December 2023.
I live in Glanmire, so I am more familiar with the Glashaboy scheme. The progress being made there is welcome. There are some traffic issues delaying people going to work, school and so on, but they understand that it is a necessary evil. The protection that the scheme will provide to many homes and businesses in Glanmire is something that I and, to be fair, other Deputies have advocated for for a long time.
My concern centres around the Blackpool flood relief scheme. I am familiar with all of the details that the Minister mentioned. I am just trying to stress the urgency of the situation for the people living in Blackpool. We are in February and, judging by today’s rainfall, there is still considerable risk to people living and running businesses in the area. They have been flooded four or five times already. The delays do not all necessarily lie at the Government’s door, but I need to once again stress the urgency in initiating the next round of public consultation as quickly as we can.
Absolutely. I fully appreciate the sensitivity of these concerns to communities, which are looking to get protection and to see the risk of flooding mitigated. The scheme has already been subject to judicial review and demonstrates clearly the sensitivity and legal care that needs to be taken in these matters.
I find myself in the position of speaking while my Department has a regulatory and approval role that is scrutinised and of which I need to be mindful. At this point, I will simply recognise for the Deputy the importance of this scheme. Were I to say anything that would indicate that any procedures could be undermined or could not be followed fully in future, it would do a great disservice to the community that the Deputy is representing. I am fully aware of the concerns that exist. To try to respond to that, I will ensure that the right processes are implemented in as efficient and timely a way as possible.
I thank the Minister. I would not want to undermine any process that is under way. Thank goes without saying.
Of course.
At the same time, though, I find myself dealing with many of these planning quagmires that we encounter and discuss. Blackpool aside, I will make a general point. We seem to discuss processes and respecting the process rather than the material subject at hand and the real difference it will make once undertaken. I am highlighting this issue once more so that the foot is not taken off the pedal. The scheme is urgently required, and the vast majority of people in the area recognise that.
Another flood relief scheme was mentioned in the media recently. The Midleton flood relief scheme finally seems to be moving. People elsewhere can see the quick progress being made on it. Midleton and the wider east Cork area experienced major flooding a couple of months ago, but people looking in at the progress it is making ask where their schemes are. I make this point to reiterate the urgency.
Point taken. For the purposes of complete precision, I recognise the Deputy’s full recognition of, respect for and understanding of the independent processes. What he is justifiably doing as an Oireachtas Member representing this community is making the case for urgency and for the scheme to be moved forward through the independent processes as quickly as possible.
I speak on behalf of the approval body, which is why I am being so careful about what I say. All of the processes in respect of this matter and the relevant legal requirements have to be, and will be, fully implemented. I recognise the concern that the Deputy has about this and the anxiety that the communities he represents have on this matter. That is only compounded when people can see progress being made on other significant flooding schemes in other parties of the county – flooding relief schemes that we know can and will work. I understand that fully.
I thank the Deputy for raising this matter.
94. Deputy Rose Conway-Walsh asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform if he plans to bring forward a revised national development plan departmental ceilings in order to account for the inflation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5764/24]
I have already discussed the recently published ESRI report and some of the important findings therein. However, the report ignored the elephant in the room, namely, inflation. The national development plan is at risk if the Government does not get serious about the impact of inflation. If the intention of the report was to inform decisions on the NDP ceilings, why did the Minister not instruct the ESRI to examine the impact that inflation has had on the NDP?
I asked the ESRI to give me an assessment of the implementation of the national development plan and the kinds of issue that I believed should be considered in its future. The ESRI is an abundantly authoritative organisation that is well capable of choosing what issues it wants to consider in replying to the mandate I gave it and the piece of work I asked it to do. It is not fully fair to say that the ESRI ignored inflation in this context, as I do not believe that is the case. The ESRI stated that, in an economy that had experienced inflation and now had many different supply constraints, it was not credible to be able to say that we could make progress on everything at the same time. The ESRI asked the Government to consider a number of decisions that could be made – in fairness to the Deputy, she recognised these in her earlier question to me – to shift economic activity around in our economy to better prioritise public capital projects. The ESRI gave some fair consideration to inflation and the supply constraints within the economy. I am now working with all Ministers on this matter to see whether we can make further allocations to capital spending plans in various Departments to try to progress important projects. By and large, we have been successful in ensuring that the majority of projects are still moving ahead despite the impact of inflation. We have been able to do so because of the strength of our public finances. They might not all be moving forward at the pace we would have wanted, but the majority are still moving forward. I am committed to ensuring the impact of the NDP this year and beyond.
We know of some projects that have been delayed, but my main concern is that we do not know the extent of those. Last September, Ministers warned that there would be a €14 billion deficit.
The Irish Fiscal Advisory Council then stated that it would be €19 billion and that €2.7 billion extra would be needed each year to meet the existing capital plans. I know that €250 million was allocated but that is only 10% of what is needed. Two years of record inflation means that the level of funding is nowhere near sufficient. My concern is how that will play out on the ground in terms of vital projects that are needed and that are not being delivered. I will talk about one of those in my next contribution. I refer here to projects relating to hospitals, roads and schools that communities have campaigned and waited for for years. Those communities have been left in the dark wondering why the projects they thought had been agreed are not progressing at the speed they need them to.
I thank the Deputy. The Irish Fiscal Advisory Council made that observation regarding its view on the deficit of capital funding in the time ahead. This is the same organisation that is making the case for the implementation of the 5% spending rule. On the one hand, it is arguing, understandably and I agree with it, that we need to move back to the 5% spending rule. On the other hand, it is saying that we need to increase the value of capital expenditure. That is fine; that is its job. What I and the Government have to do, however, is to try to reconcile those competing priorities. Likewise, the Economic and Social Research Institute, ESRI, is making the case for further targeted capital expenditure but it is also warning that the we are at full employment and that the economy is experiencing supply constraints. It is offering different recommendations to me which my colleagues in Government and I have to try to bring together and be consistent on.
I appreciate that there are some projects that are not moving forward with the speed that the Deputy and communities would want. The Government, by having a capital spending plan for this year of nearly €13 billion, is doing all it can to move projects forward across the country.
That is the concern. We talked about data earlier. We also discussed regional development and what needs to be done there. The data that is available from the EU Regional Competitiveness Index shows that in the context of infrastructure, the west is in the bottom 7%. That speaks for itself.
One of the projects I am very concerned about is that relating to Ballinrobe Community School. The Minister of State, Deputy Calleary, and I met with the relevant officials a couple of weeks ago, together with some local councillors from the Minister's party to discuss the absolute need to deliver this project because the school does not have the capacity to take on the students it is being asked to take on in the coming year. The school is asking the students to operate at a particular level when it does not have the resources that are needed to allow them to do so. As matters stand, it absolutely maximises the resources it has in order to make use of every square inch of available space. The school first contacted the Department about this matter in 2017 when it received projections relating to the number of students it would have to deal with in the future. Since then, members of new communities have come into the area. That is being embraced, but the school needs to be able to do as I have outlined. That is just one example.
In fairness, the Minister, Deputy Foley, is making the case very strongly for funding that will allow projects such as that relating to the school in Ballinrobe to which the Deputy referred to go ahead. She is also making the case for people to focus on the issues the Deputy mentioned. Understandably, I am not aware of the specifics of the school in question. Overall, the Minister, Deputy Foley, and I are working very closely together on a regular basis to see whether we can provide further funding to allow projects in the Department of Education to move ahead. It is not easy. The Deputy will have heard this morning of all of the different competing cases which are made for more funding. I am trying to get to a fairer and further allocation of funding. I take the Deputy's point, however, regarding that school. I am sure that the Minister, Deputy Foley, is well aware of the matter and will try to find a way to move it forward.
98. Deputy Brian Leddin asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform his views on the concern raised in the recent ESRI report, The National Development Plan in 2023: Priorities and Capacity, submitted to his Department to the effect that the eastern and midland region is experiencing a share of population growth beyond that envisaged in the context of the 2040 target; the steps his Department will take to address this; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5750/24]
This very much relates to my earlier question. I ask the Minister for his views on the concern raised in the recent ESRI report that was submitted to the Department, The National Development Plan in 2023: Priorities and Capacity, which states that the eastern and midland region is experiencing a share of population growth beyond that envisaged in the context of the 2040 target. Perhaps the Minister might outline what steps his Department is taking to address this and if he might make a statement on the matter.
As the Deputy is probably aware, the ESRI report notes higher than expected population growth and planning permissions in the eastern and midland region between 2016 and 2020. However, but it puts forward a caveat in this regard by acknowledging that the NDP is still in its early stage of development relative to the 2040 targets. However, this is an area of concern for myself and my colleagues as we work to achieve balanced regional development across the State in line with the NDP. We need to consider this issue further. As a result, the ESRI report points to the importance of the ongoing review of the national planning framework, NPF, in the context of the NDP and the need to ensure balanced regional development and compact growth.
In light of his work, the Deputy will be aware that the NPF is under review. That review is due to be finalised in quarter 2 of this year. The review will also update the demographic and econometric modelling work which underpinned the original NPF in order to make adjustments, as required, in response to the census of 2022. In addition, the ESRI report on the NDP notes that the planned issue of the sustainable residential development and compact settlement guidelines for planning authorities were published by the Minister, Deputy Darragh O'Brien, on 15 January. I hope that the issues the Deputy is referring to can be considered not just by me but also by the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, in the context of the review of the NPF.
I thank the Minister. The Minister, Deputy O'Brien, has a very important role to play here with respect to the strategic development of the country. What we are trying to do with the NPF is rebalance our island. That is the stated objective. To that end, we have to take the opportunity presented. The way to do this is by investing in the right kind of infrastructure. We have to be cautious and guard against embracing the predict-and-provide approach whereby we see a problem emerging and we react by adding another lane to a motorway, building a new road or whatever. That is where most of the political pressure comes into play. We are expected to react to what we see emerging. That pulls us away from taking a strategic approach which is more about deciding and providing. In other words, to look at the country we want to have in a few decades' time and decide where we want the demand to exist and where we want the people to live, and to make our infrastructure investment decisions accordingly.
I completely agree. The Deputy is dead right. That is why a strength of what we have tried to do so far is to integrate our capital plans and expenditure into the national framework and try to run both together.
On the Deputy's point about the need for more forward planning and the need to be more predictable, this is the reason why we have set out capital expenditure ceilings for the entire Government for a number of years in advance. As the Deputy is aware, these are done for a period of an additional four years every time we do the summer economic statement. I am now in the process of trying to confirm to individual Departments what their expenditure ceilings will be for 2026. We are doing all of that then be in a position to enable the kind of long-term planning which the Deputy has rightly made the case for.
I thank the Minister. He will probably agree that it requires political courage to make some of these decisions because the pressure is very much towards reacting to what we see around us rather than the long term. I was reminded of the of the courage of the late Séamus Brennan, a Minister in the 2007 to 2011 Government, who decided to reopen the Galway to Limerick railway line. At the time, many naysayers were of the view that it was a total white elephant and would never be used. Now, there is standing room only on the trains between Limerick and Galway. It was the right investment, and it Mr. Brennan displayed courage. If we had not had a Minister with the foresight of Séamus Brennan at the time, that piece of infrastructure would not have been reopened.
This is incumbent on all of us. I have been making the case in the last few days, and have raised it with my own party leader, for linking Shannon Airport to the national railway network, which is costed at €200 million in the strategic rail review. It would completely change how airlines and passengers view Shannon. It is critical to rebalancing this country.
The Government is currently involved in making decisions with regard to the allocation of additional capital funding. What we have coming up is a large selection of significant public transport projects. They are all about the long term and will take many years to build. They will all be complex and demanding but will be worth it in the end. With regard to the opening point the Deputy made about the need to make long-term decisions, particularly with regard to transport that can enable the sustainable development of communities and the integration of different forms of transport together, I completely agree. The really big things that can change a community and change a country take a long time to deliver and require political determination and courage.
With regard to the particular point made regarding the linking of Shannon Airport by rail, as the Deputy knows, the Minister, Deputy Ryan, is doing a lot of work on the strategic future of rail and I am sure he will want to give that matter consideration.
102. Deputy Pádraig O'Sullivan asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform to list all the flood relief schemes nationally, county by county, and indicate the stage of development each is at; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5518/24]
I ask the Minister of State to list all the flood relief schemes county by county and outline the stage of development each is at. He might give me the national figures and the stages they are at, and I can get the county-by-county list afterwards in the written response.
I will not read into the record the start of the response because I have done so three times already today. I will skip that and I ask that it be put on the record.
The OPW will reach a series of important milestones in climate adaptation in 2024, such as: continuing the construction of three major schemes at Glashaboy in the Deputy’s constituency, Morell River and Whitechurch; commencing construction on up to five other schemes at King’s Island, Morrison’s Island in Cork, Crossmolina, about which there has been a bit of conversation, the Poddle River and the River Wad; and progressing up to three further schemes towards substantial completion at Athlone, Springfield and Templemore. These schemes will provide protection to over 600 properties.
Outside of these major schemes, as the Deputy knows, local authorities can apply to the Office of Public Works for minor flood mitigation works and the coastal protection scheme. This provides up to 90% of the funding required and, so far, has protected 7,900 properties.
I will outline a county-by-county breakdown of the major flood relief schemes that are currently being progressed. In Cavan, there is a scheme at Cavan town, which is at stage 1. In Clare, there is Kilkee, which is at stage 1; Shannon; and Springfield, which is almost at completion. In Cork, there is Ballinhassig, which is at stage 1; Ballymakeery-Ballyvourney, which is at stage 1; Bantry; the Bride River-Blackpool, about which there has been some conversation in the House; Carrigaline; Glashaboy, which is under construction; the lower Lee, which is an enormous scheme that the Deputy will know; Macroom; Midleton; and Morrison’s Island, which has gone out to tender. In Donegal, there is Ballybofey-Stranorlar; Buncrana; Burnfoot; Castlefinn; Donegal Town; Letterkenny; Lifford; Ramelton; and Raphoe. In Dublin, there is the Dodder; Dublin city; Loughlinstown; Malahide; the Poddle River; Portmarnock; Sandymount, which is at the scoping stage; Skerries; and Whitechurch, which is at stage 4.
I will come back to the other counties in my next contribution.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House.
A county-by-county breakdown of the major flood relief schemes and small flood relief projects that are currently being progressed is provided in the tables, including the current status or stage of each scheme. The 12 flood relief schemes that have reached substantial completion since 2018 are also listed.
Table 1. Major Flood Relief Schemes by County with Scheme Stage.
|
County |
Scheme |
Status |
|
Cavan |
Cavan Town Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Clare |
Kilkee Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Clare |
Shannon Town and Environs Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Clare |
Springfield Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage IV: Implementation/Construction |
|
Cork |
Ballinhassig Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Cork |
Ballymakeery/Ballyvourney Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Cork |
Bantry Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Cork |
Bride River (Blackpool) Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage II: Public Exhibition / Confirmation |
|
Cork |
Carrigaline Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping Stage |
|
Cork |
Glashaboy (Glanmire / Sallybrook) Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage IV: Implementation/Construction |
|
Cork |
Lower Lee (Cork City) Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage II: Public Exhibition / Confirmation |
|
Cork |
Macroom Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping Stage |
|
Cork |
Midleton Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Cork |
Morrison’s Island Public Realm and Flood Defence Project, Cork |
Stage III: Detailed Design |
|
Donegal |
Ballybofey - Stranorlar Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Donegal |
Buncrana - Luddan Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Donegal |
Burnfoot Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Donegal |
Castlefinn Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Donegal |
Donegal Town Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping Stage |
|
Donegal |
Letterkenny Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping Stage |
|
Donegal |
Lifford Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Donegal |
Ramelton Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Donegal |
Raphoe Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage II: Public Exhibition / Confirmation |
|
Dublin |
Camac River Flood Alleviation Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Dublin |
Dodder Phase 3 (Clonskeagh Road Bridge to Orwell Road Bridge) Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Dublin |
Dublin City (River Wad - Phase 1B) Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage III: Detailed Design |
|
Dublin |
Loughlinstown Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Dublin |
Malahide Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping Stage |
|
Dublin |
Poddle River Flood Alleviation Scheme |
Stage III: Detailed Design |
|
Dublin |
Portmarnock (Strand Road) Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping Stage |
|
Dublin |
Sandymount (Phase 1 & 2) Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping Stage |
|
Dublin |
Sandymount (Phase 2) Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping Stage |
|
Dublin |
Skerries (Mill Stream) Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping Stage |
|
Dublin |
Whitechurch Stream Flood Alleviation Scheme |
Stage IV: Implementation/Construction |
|
Galway |
Ballinasloe Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Galway |
Galway City Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Galway |
South Galway (Gort Lowlands) Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Kerry |
Kenmare Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Kerry |
Tralee Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Kildare |
Athy Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Kildare |
Morell River Flood Management Scheme |
Stage IV: Implementation/Construction |
|
Kildare |
Naas Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Kilkenny |
Freshford Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping Stage |
|
Kilkenny |
Graiguenamanagh-Tinnahinch Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Kilkenny |
Piltown Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping Stage |
|
Laois |
Mountmellick Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Laois |
Portarlington Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Leitrim |
Carrick on Shannon Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Limerick |
Adare Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Limerick |
Castleconnell Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Limerick |
Kings Island Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage III: Detailed Design |
|
Limerick |
Limerick City & Environs Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Louth |
Baltray Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Louth |
Carlingford & Greenore Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping Stage |
|
Louth |
Drogheda Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Louth |
Dundalk and Ardee Flood Relief Schemes |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Mayo |
Ballina Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Mayo |
Crossmolina Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage III: Detailed Design |
|
Roscommon |
Lough Funshinagh Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping Stage |
|
Tipperary |
Marlfield Lake Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Tipperary |
Nenagh Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping Stage |
|
Tipperary |
River Mall (Templemore) Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage IV: Implementation/Construction |
|
Westmeath |
Athlone Flood Alleviation Scheme |
Stage IV: Implementation/Construction |
|
Wexford |
Enniscorthy Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Wexford |
Rosslare, Co, Wexford |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Wexford |
Wexford Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage I: Scheme Development and Preliminary Design |
|
Wicklow |
Arklow (Avoca River) Flood Relief Scheme |
Stage III: Detailed Design |
Table 2. Small Projects by County with Scheme Stage.
|
County |
Scheme |
Stage |
|
Carlow |
Carlow Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping |
|
Clare |
Bunratty Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping |
|
Clare |
Kilrush Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping |
|
Donegal |
Glenties Flood Relief Scheme |
Commencement |
|
Donegal |
Kerrykeel (Carrowkeel) Flood Relief Scheme |
Pre-Planning |
|
Donegal |
Na Dúnaibh (Downings) Flood Relief Scheme (Na Dúnaibh FRS) |
Commencement |
|
Galway |
Clifden Flood Relief Scheme |
Commencement |
|
Kerry |
Abbeydorney Flood Relief Scheme |
Commencement |
|
Kerry |
Banna Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping |
|
Kildare |
Leixlip Scheme |
Commencement |
|
Kilkenny |
Ballyhale Flood Relief Scheme |
Pre-Planning |
|
Laois |
Clonaslee Flood Relief Scheme |
Commencement |
|
Leitrim |
Leitrim Village Flood Relief Scheme |
Commencement |
|
Leitrim |
Mohill Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping |
|
Limerick |
Athea Flood Relief Scheme |
Commencement |
|
Limerick |
Rathkeale Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping |
|
Longford |
Longford Flood Relief Scheme |
Commencement |
|
Louth |
Ardee Flood Relief Scheme |
Pre-Planning |
|
Meath |
Mornington Flood Relief Scheme Augmentation |
Commencement |
|
Offaly |
Rahan Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping |
|
Roscommon |
Bogganfin Flood Defence Scheme |
Commencement |
|
Sligo |
Rathbraghan Flood Relief Scheme |
Commencement |
|
Tipperary |
Golden Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping |
|
Tipperary |
Holycross Flood Relief Scheme |
Commencement |
|
Tipperary |
Killaloe/Ballina Flood Relief Scheme |
Commencement |
|
Tipperary |
Knocklofty Flood Relief Scheme |
Commencement |
|
Waterford |
Aglish Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping |
|
Waterford |
Ballyduff Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping |
|
Wicklow |
Avoca Flood Relief Scheme |
Commencement |
|
Small Projects by County and Stage |
||
|
County |
Scheme |
Stage |
|
Carlow |
Carlow Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping |
|
Clare |
Bunratty Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping |
|
Clare |
Kilrush Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping |
|
Donegal |
Glenties Flood Relief Scheme |
Commencement |
|
Donegal |
Kerrykeel (Carrowkeel) Flood Relief Scheme |
Pre-Planning |
|
Donegal |
Na Dúnaibh (Downings) Flood Relief Scheme (Na Dúnaibh FRS) |
Commencement |
|
Galway |
Clifden Flood Relief Scheme |
Commencement |
|
Kerry |
Abbeydorney Flood Relief Scheme |
Commencement |
|
Kerry |
Banna Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping |
|
Kildare |
Leixlip Scheme |
Commencement |
|
Kilkenny |
Ballyhale Flood Relief Scheme |
Pre-Planning |
|
Laois |
Clonaslee Flood Relief Scheme |
Commencement |
|
Leitrim |
Leitrim Village Flood Relief Scheme |
Commencement |
|
Leitrim |
Mohill Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping |
|
Limerick |
Athea Flood Relief Scheme |
Commencement |
|
Limerick |
Rathkeale Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping |
|
Longford |
Longford Flood Relief Scheme |
Commencement |
|
Louth |
Ardee Flood Relief Scheme |
Pre-Planning |
|
Meath |
Mornington Flood Relief Scheme Augmentation |
Commencement |
|
Offaly |
Rahan Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping |
|
Roscommon |
Bogganfin Flood Defence Scheme |
Commencement |
|
Sligo |
Rathbraghan Flood Relief Scheme |
Commencement |
|
Tipperary |
Golden Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping |
|
Tipperary |
Holycross Flood Relief Scheme |
Commencement |
|
Tipperary |
Killaloe/Ballina Flood Relief Scheme |
Commencement |
|
Tipperary |
Knocklofty Flood Relief Scheme |
Commencement |
|
Waterford |
Aglish Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping |
|
Waterford |
Ballyduff Flood Relief Scheme |
Scoping |
|
Wicklow |
Avoca Flood Relief Scheme |
Commencement |
Table 3. Substantially Complete Schemes since 2018 by County.
|
Substantially complete since 2018 by County |
|
|
County |
Scheme |
|
Clare |
Ennis (Lower) Flood Relief Scheme |
|
Clare |
Ennis (South) Flood Relief Scheme |
|
Cork |
Bandon Flood Relief Scheme |
|
Cork |
Clonakilty Flood Relief Scheme |
|
Cork |
Douglas (incl. Togher Culvert) Flood Relief Scheme |
|
Cork |
Skibbereen Flood Relief Scheme |
|
Dublin |
Dodder Phase 2C, 2D, 2E Flood Relief Scheme |
|
Galway |
Clare River (Claregalway) Flood Relief Scheme |
|
Galway |
Dunkellin & Aggard Stream Flood Relief Scheme |
|
Louth |
Bellurgan Flood Relief Scheme |
|
Mayo |
Westport (Cois Abhainn & Ashwood) Flood Relief Scheme |
|
Meath |
Ashbourne Flood Alleviation Scheme |
As I said, I am asking for the overall figure nationally and whether a project at stage 1, stage 2 or whatever. This relates to the broader point of trying to clarify how many are at stage 1 and identifying any delays. I have spoken previously about schemes that have been beset by problems and I want to get an overall picture of how many are stuck, for want of a better adjective. The Minister of State might then outline what difficulties the various schemes are experiencing.
With regard to those that are currently active, there are 67 major flood schemes and 29 small schemes. These are being led by the local authorities in most cases. There are currently six at construction and these will provide protection for up to 870 properties. We have also initiated a pilot scheme between the Office of Public Works, Donegal County Council and Kilkenny County Council. There was a suggestion that as some of the schemes in tranche 2 are so slow coming out of it, there is a question as to whether they will ever come out of it. We have provided additional resources where that has been deemed necessary, and the Leas-Cheann Comhairle will be aware of this in the context of Galway. If a local authority submits a business case to us for additional personnel, whether in regard to hydrology, civil engineering or otherwise, the local authority in most cases has had the application viewed very positively by the Office of Public Works.
I have a fairly substantial table in my response which deals with stages 1 to 4 and others that have not even got off the starting blocks. I will forward that information to the Deputy afterwards.
I thank the Minister of State. As I said, I want to gauge where we are at with the various schemes. Judging from the initial figures that the Minister of State read out, and I do not want to misquote him, there are 67 major schemes and 29 smaller schemes, and just six of them are at construction. If that is the headline figure, there are obviously difficulties with various schemes across the country that are stuck in the pipeline. I welcome the response and look forward to getting the detail afterwards. I might discuss various issues with the Minister of State afterwards.
The opportunity for people to raise these issues on the floor of the Dáil is very important to me and the Office of Public Works. In recent years, we have been at pains to point out that these are not just flood relief schemes, as they were typically called, and they are an adaptation to El Niño and the climate issues that are currently being faced by the world and not only by Glashaboy, Coirib go Cósta and everywhere else. These are schemes designed to withstand 100-year events and have the international standard that goes with that. They are complicated by nature and we have had a lot of over-and-back with the Minister, Deputy Donohoe, with regard to the planning applications around some of them. However, those that have been built and delivered have been very successful, and every Deputy is aware of one that has been delivered in their own constituency. The alleviation of the mental trauma for a community when we finally hand over to the local authority for completion is what is worth it at the end of the day. I thank the Deputy and other Deputies for using the opportunity to raise this because it gives me political capital with the Minister to make sure that more can be done.
The Minister of State is not lacking political capital, I can tell him.
As we have a short time left, we will go back to Question No. 95 from Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú. He will not get all of his time but he will get some of it.
95. Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform when the agreed cost-of-living increase of 4% for ESB pensioners will be approved and paid; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5284/24]
I ask the Minister when the agreed cost of living increase of 4% for ESB pensioners will be approved and paid. This is on behalf of a constituent with 49 years of service, which is a considerable working life. Like everybody else, he could detail the cost of living crisis and so on. I ask that this is addressed as soon as possible.
I am conscious of time and will cut straight to the matter. On 17 January of this year, the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications wrote to my Department confirming the consent of the Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications to a pension increase of 4%. On 30 January, officials in my Department agreed to this and I wrote back to the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications, which subsequently informed the ESB. Payment of the increase to all pensioners, including the Deputy’s constituent, which will be backdated to 1 January 2024, is now a matter for the ESB.
Go raibh maith agat. At this stage, this is with the ESB and everything has been done from a governmental point of view. It is just the case that the ESB has to get its act together. I would appreciate it if the Government could make any sort of contact with the ESB and I will do the same. My constituent and others are awaiting this and cannot understand the impediment. We just need to make it happen as soon as possible.
The ESB most certainly does have its act together. In fairness to it and other bodies, the pay agreement was only made a couple of weeks ago, with the knock-on impact that it has for all of the other issues in this regard.
As I said, the Department wrote to my own Department in the middle of the year and we responded very quickly. This payment will be backdated. I am confident that the ESB will look to expedite it as quickly as possible.
