Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Inland Waterways.

Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 14 December 2004

Tuesday, 14 December 2004

Ceisteanna (19)

Paudge Connolly

Ceist:

42 Mr. Connolly asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs if consideration will be given to the restoration of the Ulster Canal as a navigable waterway and to the development of this project on a cross-Border and all-island basis; his views on its potential as an integral part of one of the world's longest inland waterway systems; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [33405/04]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí ó Béal (11 píosaí cainte)

The Deputy will be aware that one of the functions of Waterways Ireland, one of the six North-South implementation bodies established under the British-Irish Agreement Act 1999, is to examine the possible restoration of the Ulster Canal. No decision has yet been taken to proceed with the restoration of the Ulster Canal.

A commissioned study estimated the cost of restoration of the full canal to be approximately £90 million Sterling based on 2000 costs. The issues arising in regard to the Ulster Canal, including the question of whether a phased or partial approach to the matter might be feasible, are being considered by my Department and the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure in the North.

I thank the Minister for his reply though I regret it is not a little more positive. Will he agree that the financing and re-opening of the Ulster Canal connecting the Shannon-Erne waterway and Lough Neagh and passing through counties Leitrim, Cavan, Fermanagh, Monaghan and Armagh, is a classic example of a cross-Border project and of cross-Border all-island co-operation? Will he agree that project would breathe new life into large tracts of the BMW region, in particular small towns such as Belturbet, Killeshandra, Smithboro-Monaghan and the Glaslough-Tyholland areas?

Will the Minister further agree there is no major tourist attraction in that area? The Ulster Canal has done wonders for County Leitrim, west Cavan and the Ballyconnell area. The re-opening of that canal has enormous potential. The framework for doing so already exists as does the route. All that is needed is for it to be revamped. The project is headed by a North-South voluntary committee which acts, as cross-Border bodies should, in a true spirit of co-operation. However, the committee has met with many obstacles in trying to obtain finance. Some €1 million raised by it through private investment has been lost but could be recouped if the two Governments were to show a willingness to enter into such a cross-Border project.

The opening of the Ulster Canal, taking into account the scale and costs of the project, estimated in 2000 to be £90 million Sterling, is a matter for the two Governments in conjunction with Waterways Ireland. I do not believe a voluntary body could carry out such a sizeable project. A major project requires major decisions. We must all hope and pray the current ongoing talks come to fruition. In that context, much greater progress would be made on this issue. There is general support in both communities, North and South, for the project. The representatives of the various counties in question have approached me on it. However, a consideration of the project would have to be a joint one between the authorities, north and south of the Border. The conditions for this to happen would require certain political events to unfold in a favourable way.

We either have cross-Border co-operation or not. While similar major projects in Dublin have been discussed, this project seems to be in the wrong geographical area. The Minister talks about the scale of the project, yet this should be balanced with its benefits. Over time it would represent excellent value for money and more than likely would be self-financing. People want to see examples of cross-Border co-operation but there have been few tangible projects. This project is tangible, with research completed and committees in place. The committees have much expertise and are more than willing to give their time freely to ensure this project becomes a reality. I ask the Minister to reconsider it.

I said I believed it was not a project that a voluntary body could undertake. If it is to happen, it will happen under the aegis of Waterways Ireland. That is a reasonable statement. I never said it should not take place——

The Minister is not coming across in a positive way.

I cannot make a unilateral decision on the project as any decision must be taken jointly between the authorities North and South. The Deputy is aware of the current political situation in which we find ourselves. I hope the situation will work its way through. If the talks come to a positive conclusion, then a stable political situation would exist where representatives of the Northern Ireland Assembly, acting once again as ministers, could re-engage with these issues. At this juncture, it is not possible to make any significant progress on the issue.

People on both sides of the Border would like to see such a project take off and develop. It would show what can be gained from North-South co-operation.

I fully agree with the Deputy. However, another issue in North-South co-operation must be resolved first. The appropriate structures in Northern Ireland must be in place before major projects such as this can proceed. There is no question about the benefits the Shannon-Erne waterway has brought to Ballyconnell. Every time, I visit counties Leitrim and Cavan——

It has done wonders for County Leitrim.

It has done incredible wonders for the county. The project will be examined but I cannot make a unilateral decision on it and will not be goaded into making such an announcement. Certain circumstances must be in place before we can proceed with the project.

Barr
Roinn