Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will discuss the difficulties encountered by farmers as a result of flooding with representatives of the Irish Farmers Association. Cuirim fáilte roimh Mr. Michael Silke, chairman of the IFA floods project team; Mr. Joe Parlon, IFA Offaly county chairman; Mr. Andrew McHugh, IFA Longford County Chairman; and Mr. Gerry Gunning, IFA rural development executive. Go raibh maith agaibh as teacht i láthair.

By virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, witnesses are protected by absolute privilege in respect of the evidence they give this committee. However, if a witness is directed by the committee to cease giving evidence on a particular matter and the witness continues to so do, the witness is entitled thereafter only to qualified privilege in respect of his or her evidence. Witnesses are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and they are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise or make charges against any person, persons or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable. I also wish to advise them that any opening statements or documents submitted to the committee will be published on the committee's website following this meeting. Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

Given the volume of rainfall and difficult and different seasons we have had in recent times, the committee feels it is apt to discuss the issue of flooding and, in particular, how the fallout from it is impacting on various sectors of society. A number of witnesses will appear before the committee over the next few weeks, and we are particularly anxious about the frequency of inclement weather, given it can happen during the June bank holiday weekend as well in the depths of winter. We are concerned about how the implications of that are being dealt with by agencies and authorities.

We are particularly concerned to hear the views of the representatives of the IFA on the fallout for their members, particularly in the context of the difficulty of obtaining insurance cover, increases in insurance premia which make it impossible for someone to afford the cover for his premises or land and, for example, how fractious the relationship is between insurance companies and IFA members or how inflexible the companies are with them. People on the ground have suffered extensively and they are concerned about how insurance companies have discharged their duties. On many occasions, there is a huge gap between what farmers believe is covered and what insurance companies will compensate them for. We know that from experience and we are anxious to hear the views of IFA members.

My interest would be around the difficulty in obtaining insurance cover - renewal, cost and the inflexibilities that members have invariably had to deal with it in recent months and years. I invite Mr. Michael Silke to commence his presentation, following which we look forward to a good exchange of views between Members and witnesses.

Mr. Michael Silke:

I thank the Chairman and members of the committee. I am chairman of the IFA's flood project team. I am accompanied by Mr. Joe Parlon, Offaly county chairman of IFA, Mr. Andrew McHugh, Longford county chairman of IFA and Mr. Gerry Gunning, executive secretary of IFA's rural development committee. The third paragraph of my presentation reads, "As a result there are no major fodder problems...". It should read, "As a result there are now major fodder problems ...". That was a misprint. There are major problems in the region.

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This should include a solution in his opening statement.

Mr. Michael Silke:

The summer flooding that occurs on the River Shannon is of grave concern to farmers in the area. In early June 2012 the most serious summer flooding that has ever been witnessed in the Shannon catchment area began. This flooding had a devastating effect on the farming community, irrespective of one's county of origin. The horrifying reality was that thousands of hectares of grasslands and meadow lands which farmers would have used to graze their stock and to harvest and conserve for their winter fodder requirements was totally destroyed. This forced farmers to house their stock in early summer, at huge financial cost to themselves. Today farmers in these areas are facing total financial ruin as a result of the flooding. The only response from official Ireland was the standard response that this was an act of God. There was no consideration of issues such as damage to the environment, the public good or the level of human suffering and the social and economic effects that farmers were enduring.

In recent years, all-party Oireachtas committees had come up with proposals and recommendations which would have some beneficial effect as regards summer flooding. Sadly none of these has ever been acted upon. Today politicians are putting their faith in CFRAMS, the cartchment flood risk management and assessment study, which is taking place in respect of the Shannon but will not be finalised until 2015 at least. It is a long way down the line and we will still only have a proposal, a study, a survey, or whatever one wishes to call it. In the interim we have a major problem.

Early indications would suggest that farmers are losing confidence in the process, largely because of what I have said, as it was envisaged that there would be a lead agency, namely, the OPW which would dictate what works would be put in place to alleviate flooding. While all the agencies have a role, such as the OPW, the ESB, Waterways Ireland, National Parks and Wildlife Service, Inland Fisheries Ireland and Bord na Móna to some extent as well as local authorities, political responsibility must be taken by the Minister of State at the Department of Finance, Deputy Brian Hayes. None of these people are taking responsibility. It is unacceptable that agencies can have a veto when proposals are made for the alleviation of flooding and actions are urgently required. No one agency should have a veto particularly when it comes to protecting the public good which includes the livelihoods of farmers, dwellers in towns and villages along the river.

In the case of Waterways Ireland, whose remit on the waterways is solely for navigation and recreational purposes, it has consistently allowed artificially high levels to be maintained in our lakes, which has contributed massively to serious summer flooding in recent years. However, Waterways Ireland has suggested that it is working within a parameter with the ESB through a so-called "gentleman's agreement" to maintain the river and the lakes at a certain level. This is totally unacceptable.

The aim should be to reduce the water levels to the lowest level for navigation purposes so that the river is able to take additional water at critical times such as times of excessively heavy rainfall. Why were not Met Office forecasting procedures not used in anticipation of the high rainfall that arose last June?

In the case of the ESB, it is clear that the holding back of water at critical times has led to a situation where it has contributed massively to serious summer flooding. There is no doubt that water levels in Lough Ree, Lough Allen and Lough Derg are maintained at an artificially high level.

Farmers want to know why the water levels in Lough Ree were tampered with in the 1970s and have risen by 0.6 m, which is exactly 2 feet. These levels were given statutory effect in 1979. As farmers, we contend that this has been a major issue in respect of flooding since that particular time. This was done without consultation. We would like to know who was this facilitating? Was this to facilitate a wider navigation course all over Lough Ree? Members of the committee need to address this issue.

The current system, which is underpinned by protocols dating back to the 1970s, disregards landowners' interests. It is outdated and needs to be overhauled urgently to address the concerns of farmers whose lands are submerged in water frequently during the summer months. Surely it is wrong that these agencies can destroy people livelihoods and inflict massive dollops of human suffering along with financial ruin and still not be held responsible.

Essential maintenance work has not taken place despite the fact that various reports over many decades indicated that remedial works in key areas along the river Shannon would have a massive beneficial effect for farmers, the wider community and also the protection of our globally threatened wildlife species. As I have alluded to, it is contended by two groups in the House that certain works would have massive beneficial effects. We have only to look at the corncrake population which has been wiped out as a direct consequence of summer flooding, particularly in the past ten years. The figures for same are not supplied in the handout. In 2002 there were 59 calling males in the Shannon catchment area, that is, between Athlone, Portumna and Meelick, a stretch of about 27.5 miles. For every calling male bird there is at least one female and two females in many cases. Today, there is none. They are gone. Their nests and their young have been washed away. I do not think we will ever see a corncrake in that region again. This is a globally threatened species. The same will happen to the wader bird population which is decimated to a large extent. I am talking about the lapwing, the redshank, the curlew and the snipe which are also globally threatened. They will be washed away like the corncrake if something is not done.

The consequences of the failure to maintain the Shannon River system, with tributaries such as the river Suck and river Little Brosna since the foundation of the State has also had a major impact on the failure of foreign fishermen to return to our country, largely because they cannot access the river due to major situation and high water levels.

The Minister of State, Deputy Brian Hayes, who has responsibility for OPW, must take a lead and insist on implementing a strategy. This must include an early warning system for extreme weather patterns and allow water to move on when heavy rainfall is forecast and occurs. We also need to see essential maintenance work carried out. All of these measures have to be given legislative effect. An issue which we as farmers have is that while OPW is the lead agency it has no power to empower the ESB, Waterways Ireland or the National Parks and Wildlife Service to do what needs to be done. It can cajole them but that is all it can do.

The promise of a lead agency with proper legislative powers must be delivered upon. That was promised by the two previous Governments and it still has not happened. The current situation whereby more than half a dozen agencies have a say in water levels, with some having a veto on whether remedial works go ahead, is untenable and must be changed. The failures of the past must not be allowed continue and it is up to the Government to address the issue once and for all.

In his opening address the Chairman raised the issue of insurance. We should not get hung up on that issue. I have 100 acres of land which has been flooded since 7 June 2012 and it is still flooded. I do not mind it being flooded now. I got nothing out of it during the whole summer and I do not know if I will get anything out of it next summer. I do not have money. Even if I could afford to insure it, why would I insure it?

As I see it, this is what will happen in my area. Farmers are financially ruined as a consequence of the summer flooding. There is no question about that. They do not have money to pay premiums. For instances, in the town of Ballinasloe there were two young girls whom I knew who bought houses in Derrymullen estate and gave big prices for them during the Celtic tiger years, and who were flooded in 2009. They now have €150,000 to €200,000 of negative equity. They have houses worth nothing and they cannot afford to insure them again. They cannot afford to pay the premia. As farmers, will we go down the same route? That is where we are going.

The issue is not insurance. We must tackle the core issue, which is the failure of the State since its foundation to put in place a proper maintenance programme, to remove the impediments in the Shannon and to go back to the levels that existed prior to the 1970s. We have a serious problem with that. The levels should not have been tampered with. If they were, there should have been an alternative strategy put in place to take away the water that is coming north of Athlone into waste boglands over a critical period and release it, maybe, at a more appropriate time, as time goes by, but none of that has happened. The simplest solution was to widen the navigation course on Lough Ree to get the boats above the silt and get them into places where they never went previously. We, as farmers, have paid a savage price for that.

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On the lead agency issue, has Mr. Silke met directly the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Hayes, or has he made submissions to OPW on how that lead agency should be formed and the kind of role and functions it would have? A significant function a lead agency should have would be the discretion to instruct an organisation to do something and have certain jurisdiction over other bodies, not merely expect them or ask them politely not to do something or to do something. In some cases, as in the situation as it pertains, it might be the ability to tell them not to do something or to cease a practice that is contributing to the difficulty. Can Mr. Silke elaborate on that suggestion of a lead agency? I accept there is a lack of progress but what efforts have been made directly with the OPW to bring that about?

Mr. Michael Silke:

As matters stand, we meet the OPW on a regular basis. The OPW tells us clearly that it cannot effectively command ESB, Waterways Ireland, the National Parks and Wildlife Service or any such body to carry out any process that needs to be carried out. For instance, last year when there was a minuscule amount of maintenance work done in an area below the gates in Mellick, the National Parks and Wildlife Service vetoed the work. I, myself, would have had contact with the National Parks and Wildlife Service over the past ten or 15 years since I started my involvement in IFA and it was the senior staff in the National Parks and Wildlife Service, not the OPW, who got that through for us. The OPW had no power to do it and its officials themselves told me so. That, to me, flies in the face of everything that is right. When there is a person who knows what needs to be done or what would be of some help, and people are suffering seriously because it is not done, it is wrong that an agency such as the National Parks and Wildlife Service can veto it because it raises questions related to the Habitats Directive.

The habitats directive is a rough tool. Where I live, for instance, tiny islands have accumulated on the River Shannon which are on no map. Most of them have accumulated in my time and I am not yet 100 years of age. What happens is they accumulate from silt from Bord na Móna and natural run-off and then a bird drops a seed and a little twig grows, as in a sally bush, an ash bush or whatever, and 20 years down the line there would be a tree and then it is alluvial woodland. This is what has happened. It comes under Annex I of the habitats directive when one wants do something to take it out of there. It is a major problem. We need to look at that issue. It is critical for the likes of the OPW, which has its own environmentalists, to take on the likes of the National Parks and Wildlife Service and tell them that the public good is at risk, that people's liveihoods and human health are at stake and this must be stopped.

We are not looking for the River Shannon to be drained. We never did. After a summer like last year, we would accept flooding if every procedure were followed, the impediments were cleaned out of the river and the levels in the lakes were appropriate, but we cannot accept it on the back of what is there at the minute. That is why it is so critical to us that there would be a lead agency such as the OPW that would have the power to command other agencies to do what needs to be done. That is not the way it is at present.

In the time of then Minister of State, Dr. Martin Mansergh, when he appointed the OPW as the lead agency, Mr. Gerry Gunning and I met him to discuss the matter. We put a great deal of pressure on him that there was a need to put legislation in place to strengthen OPW's hand. Dr. Mansergh told us - he was clear on it and Mr. Gunning remembers this the same as I do - that if the statutory instrument was put in place and found to be wanting, then he would go back and strengthen it. It is in place two years. That was after the flooding of November-December 2009 and it has not been strengthened. The OPW staff are walking around like lame sheep. They have no power.

I watched the misery of people last summer. There are farmers today who are bankrupt. It is as simple as that. I do not know how they will pay their bills to the merchants and others. We are facing into an awful crisis. I do not think anybody realises it, but we are. I am living and farming in the middle of it. I can tell the committee there is real despair and we need to tackle it. The only hope we have today is to come in to the likes of this committee. If the committee cannot do something for us, we all must throw our hats at it and say the game is over. There is no future for us, and I can say that clearly.

I, myself, am involved in the suckler cow sector. We got a large cut in the budget. I lost €3,500 or more in the budget as a consequence of the farm cuts, not to mention any other cuts. That is significant in a year like this to the likes of us down along the river. Most of the farmers down along the river are involved in the suckler cow sector and sheep because their land is not good enough for dairying. I do not see a future unless the committee can do something for us.

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Mr. Silke outlined fairly well the case of those who are affected in that part of the country. What of the wider implications, not only the clean-up operation or the role of statutory agencies such as the local authorities or OPW, but the experience of IFA members in other parts of the country with insurance? Are there any lighthouse issues that need to be resolved or addressed between individual insurance companies and some of the IFA members in other parts of the country?

Mr. Michael Silke:

The big issue with insurance, for a start, is that people have never seen it as a feasible proposition to insure one's land against flooding. I do not think it is even possible to do that anyway. In 2009, when the big flood came, I lost a great deal at that time. I had a field of fodder beet and a field of turnips that were covered over and I could get nothing for them. They rotted. One must ask oneself whether, if one was insured, one would have got something. Possibly, one could have. The question is whether one could continue paying the premium. I gave the genuine example of the young girls in Derrymullen in Ballinasloe.

I do not see that as being where farmers want to go. As farmers, we see that one insures one's house and one can insure one's stock, etc. On insuring one's land against flooding, a farmer who loses his or her land loses every ability to feed his or her cattle for that year. We lost every bit of our ability to feed our cattle last year. The feed we used was bought feed. Everyone is in the same boat. It is a matter of how long one can stay at it and take this.

Let us say I was insured last year. If, through some figment of the imagination, one could get insurance anyway, could I go back and pay the premium the following year and then have to draw on it again. Where would I be? My premium would rocket, and at a time when the margins are not there.

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Leave the land aside for a moment, what would be the case with outbuildings, the primary dwelling house, etc.?

Mr. Michael Silke:

The dwelling house is critical. In my experience, all over Galway, in particular, south Galway, the position is the same. If one is insured and one gets the insurance the first time round, most are unable to afford the insurance the second time round even if they can get it. The insurance companies, if they have to pay for damage once, are not inclined to take one on again. That is the other side of it.

We should not dwell on the insurance issue but on the feasibility of getting something done and reducing the possibility of allowing floods to being created in the future. I have no illusions about saying there is a need to tackle critical areas of the Shannon. I have worked on this with Mr. Gunning in the IFA over the years.

We have made proposals to the OPW. I spent almost a week on the river with the OPW and we identified the critical areas which need to be tackled. These are small key areas along the river from Portumna to Athlone. They will probably be covered by the catchment flood risk assessment and management study, but this is a long way away, which concerns us. We might not be there in 2015 and this is the harsh reality. All we will get in 2015 is another report. In 1956, after the flooding of 1954, we had the Rydell report which proposed a summer relief scheme. In 1961 the ESB and OPW issued a report which proposed much the same. We then had the Delap and Waller report in 1988, the report of an all-party Dáil committee in 2000 and last year's report. They all proposed something in the line of a summer relief scheme to deal with summer flooding.

We have no major issue with winter flooding, and Deputy Corcoran Kennedy knows this from living in the heartland, as do Deputies Cowen and Flanagan. Apart from when winter flooding enters cattle sheds and houses, it is not a major issue. We accept it is a natural phenomenon. We are concerned about the summer flooding which occurs. Every year a winter flood occurs during the summer and this cannot continue. The corncrake is gone. The wader birds will go, as will the farmers, and it will be a wasteland. This is what will happen. Many families are moving out because they cannot take it any more.

Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome Mr. Silke and his delegation. It is not the first time they have come before the committee to discuss this issue. The lack of progress since it was last discussed makes this an opportune time to raise it, which is the purpose of the committee meeting, and the Chairman laid out the matters for discussion. The response given by Mr. Silke is very stark and shocking to those unaware of the situation. Most committee members are aware of it.

It is obvious that no insurance company would touch the region as it stands because it would not be at all profitable. It is only when a mechanism is put in place to rectify the situation or seek to rectify it that one may consider the possibility of insurance. Listening to the presentation, what jumps out at us is that many farmers are ruined, bankrupt, in crisis and despairing. Insurance is not an issue for these people. There has been no compensation and no Government fodder scheme to deal with the crisis and the despair being felt.

We raised this issue as far back as last June on Leaders' Questions and as Topical Issue matters. This led to an Oireachtas joint committee consulting a wide variety of bodies and making recommendations. We believed legislation might flow from the report. The progressive recommendations made are similar to and in agreement with those of the delegation with regard to the OPW taking the lead in managing the Shannon, the introduction of early flood warning systems and utilising boglands as flood plains. We had hoped the next stage would be to debate the report on the floor of the House and have a response issued by the Ministers with responsibility in this regard, including the Minister of State, Deputy Hayes. This may have allowed the Government to put in train a series of measures to seek to address the issue.

I do not wish to be party political, and I acknowledge what was said about successive Governments, but in recent years it has become very much a summer flooding issue. It is a regular occurrence. What happened in 2009 was thought to be an exception but it also happened last year. Unless a concerted effort is made on foot of the recommendations from the delegation and the Oireachtas joint committee, we will see a wasteland developing, and those who wish to do so can preserve it all they like afterwards because there will be no interference with it. This is with regard to what Mr. Silke stated about islands emerging in the floods.

With the best will in the world the committee and its Chairman saw fit to address an issue pertaining to the insurance industry and its response to flooding. The IFA in its wisdom saw fit to bring a group which represents an area with a huge amount of flooding. I do not necessarily want to look at this from a national perspective. The immediate pressure and significance of the Shannon callows is what is paramount. I have sought to impress publicly the need for the report, the recommendations of which I support, to be brought to the floor of the House, for a formal response to be made by the Government and for efforts to be made to have the report's recommendations implemented, or at least a working committee put in place to report back to the committee thereafter to acknowledge what progress, if any, can be made on the recommendations. I know it has the full support of and commitment from all committee members, having produced the report under the chairmanship of Deputy Corcoran Kennedy.

As far as the committee is concerned, Mr. Silke is pushing an open door. I hope it will be reciprocated by the Government and the Ministers with responsibility in the area showing a willingness to bring about change and recognise the gravity of the situation, which is absolutely and despairingly ridiculous at this stage. I ask the Chairman to use his influence in so far as he can, whether through the Whips or his association with the Government, to bring this to the floor of the House. Perhaps a Friday sitting could be used for a response to be put on the record and for a process to be put in place by which we can seek to effect change and put in place the recommendations which have universal approval. It would be different if we were all coming at this from different angles and with different ideas. I know financing will be put forward as an issue and an impediment, as will the vested interests of the ESB, but a protocol can be agreed in the public interest and public good to protect not only the livelihoods of those affected but also the commercial viability of the entire region. I look forward to progress in this regard.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. Silke, Mr. Parlon, Mr. McHugh and Mr. Gunning for coming before the committee and making their presentation. Mr. Silke has conveyed in words how grave the situation is. The section with which I am most familiar is west Offaly. I have received many complaints from people living in the area and I am very concerned about it. Like Deputy Cowen I have been involved in meetings with the Minister of State, Deputy Hayes, and have tried to impress on him the urgency of the situation.

While the Shannon is the major concern, in the constituency of Laoighis-Offaly there are problems with drainage works on the rivers Goul, Erkina, Nore, Whitehorse and Barrow. At the root of these problems are pounds, shillings and pence, but also the powers of the National Parks and Wildlife Service which can almost stop an aircraft flying across the sky. EU directives have given it massive powers. We have a choice to make. The witnesses are leading figures in the IFA. I am not stating we should unhinge from Europe, but at some stage soon the IFA and politicians must state some of these directives are bananas. I speak from an environmentalist point of view when I say the environmental destruction that has happened because of flooding on the Shannon is criminal. Mr. Silke mentioned the corncrake, and hundreds of other species have probably been wiped out, never mind the human race, along the banks of the Shannon, which is our primary concern today. Farmers are being wiped out by the summer flooding in the area. It is a major issue. To carry out 40 or 50 yards of work on the rivers Goul and Erkina, Laois County Council was told a report done last year had to be redone and another set of consultants brought in.

One must spend €10,000 to carry out €1,000 worth of work in order to allow a fellow in with a digger or a Hymac for a half day or a day to remove silt. That is crazy. The expense affects the local authorities, ratepayers, farmers, house owners and people living in towns and villages. I have seen the same thing happen on all of those rivers when I was a councillor and since I have become a Deputy. We need to grab hold of the matter.

Mention was made of the lead agency and it is a recurring theme. When we met Deputy Hayes the last time the impression that I got was that the OPW had very little power. There is more power in a 30 watt light bulb than the OPW when it comes to this issue. They NPWS are subserviant to the OPW. I support Deputy Cowen's call to debate the matter in the Dáil.

With regard to the legislation and the powers of the OPW, the delegation is familiar with it because they lobbied us last year about OPW powers and EU directive on wetlands, the drainage of wetlands and the onerous changes that were made last year. The legislation needs to be tested and faced down. There is a crucial difference between us and Europe. We have a different problem to that experienced by drier central European countries. We have a serious flooding problem which needs to be dealt with.

Perhaps the delegation will spell out what it means by river maintenance. I think I know what they mean. What are the most important issues of river maintenance that we need to be deal with now? I ask the delegation to comment on the battle of wills between the NPWS and sustaining a livelihood in agriculture in areas which have been affected by serious flooding.

Summer flooding was mentioned a number of times. It is caused by climate change. All of us over 40 years of age will remember the term "squally showers" which meant a cupful or more of rain. The volume of rain would not fill a basin. Now we have a month's rain in half an hour, particularly during the summer, which affects many areas. I ask the IFA to comment as it is a crucial issue.

In the greater scheme of things we are a small nation but we have a responsibility to deal with the problem. We also have a responsibility to provide food due to an increase in the world's population and we must provide for Harvest 2020. I ask the delegation to comment on climate change because it is having a serious impact on every country and it has had a visible impact on Ireland since 2003 or 2004. One day I had to stop my car outside of Durrow because I could not drive due to extremely heavy rainfall. That was the first time that I had to stop my car due to heavy rain and I have been driving for a good few years. I would also like the delegation to comment on summer flooding.

What does the IFA think we should do about the OPW and the NPWS? The report needs to be laid in the Dáil. We also need legislation in order to undo some of the harm done. What specific issues on river maintenance need to be addressed? I fully support what the IFA is doing.

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I call Deputy 'Ming' Flanagan. I shall return to the visitors later and then the Government side. Each Member has five minutes to make a contribution.

Luke Flanagan (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the delegation for its excellent presentation. In my couple of years in the Dáil dealing with this matter this matter has been the most disappointing experience for me because we have debated the topic so many times. Last year the IFA approached me about the issue and that was the first time that I had to deal with it. I have never been a Deputy before but even as a county councillor the subject of flooding did not come at us that big. Last year was the first time that I had to deal with the matter.

As I am sure the IFA is aware, it organised a meeting on the River Shannon. I attended and was well educated by the people there who explained the situation to me. One could not miss the frustration felt by all of the farmers. There was talk of some man who said in desperation that he would blow up the dam rather than let flooding return for another summer. The meeting appeared to generate a little momentum. This is where my political naivety comes in because I thought that there was some political momentum. I spoke to Mr. Silke in detail, as did my parliamentary assistant who is an engineer and has a good understanding of the area. We examined to him how we could push the topic. A meeting then took place between Department officials and the Minister responsible, Deputy Hayes, was present. My understanding of the meeting was that we needed to do a PR job and get the information out that a study was going to be done and nothing could happen until then. It was an emergency situation with farmers on the verge of suicide in some cases so something had to be done. I decided to kick up a row about it in order that something might be done. Subsequently, a meeting took place in the AV room at Leinster House which Deputy Hayes openly said he had been bumped into. I wish that he had not said that but he did. This is where the IFA's problem lies. Earlier today it asked if the committee cannot do anything then who can. The IFA will throw its hat at the problem. The committee is the only game in town for the IFA because we are the only people who can do anything.

The IFA is aware of how the parliamentary system works but I shall explain it. The Minister is the boss and one must try to influence him. It is a question of where there is a will, there is a way. Is there a will? It is quite clear what needs to be done. There have been umpteen reports. This good report was put together by Deputy Corcoran Kennedy and the rest of the people involved so it is clear what needs to be done. We know what needs to be done. We have a problem with silting needs to be cleared. We need one body to control the silt removal which was recommended but it did not happen.

One of the big things that come to my mind is that the job of the National Parks and Wildlife Service, which seems to be the blocker on an awful lot of these things is to preserve rare wildlife. It is extraordinary what Mr. Silke told us, and we heard it before, that the actions of the NPWS has destroyed the future for the corncrake in the area. It is bad enough that there is no action but its is worse that the body who is meant to preserve creatures has created a situation where they will not be around any more. A lot more needs to be done. Unfortunately, Leinster House will always be a talking shop unless the man with the power to pull the lever does so. The Minister knows what must be done and he must do it. There is no point compiling more reports because if we do we will have to cut down more trees which in turn will lead to more flooding.

The delegation is probably aware that I have had my differences with the IFA on other matters. I have dealt with a lot of people since I came here two years ago. Having had dealings with the delegation I can vouch that they are a credit to the IFA. I wish that people would listen to Mr. Silke. We met him and one was left in no doubt that he wanted a solution and works really hard. Unfortunately, he does not seem to have got anything back. Perhaps my saying it will put some pressure on the Minister. I hope that it will.

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Before I call the Government representative I must inquire whether Deputy Stanley wishes to ask a question on the OPW and the NPWS?

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes, on the issue of climate change.

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Okay. I shall allow Deputy Stanley to ask his question and then I shall call Deputy Corcoran Kennedy.

Mr. Michael Silke:

Deputy Stanley asked questions on maintenance, the NPWS and the OPW so I shall marry them together. When we talk about river maintenance we are not talking about dredging. Many people have suggested that we drain the River Shannon, which is a stupid comment because we will never see it drained. Deputy Stanley asked questions on maintenance, the NPWS and the OPW so I shall marry them together. When we talk about river maintenance we are not talking about dredging. Many people have suggested that we drain the River Shannon, which is a stupid comment because we will never see it drained. There is no money to carry out minor schemes, never mind drain it.

It goes back to the role of Bord na Móna. As the representatives of Bord na Móna are absent is hard to say what I must say, but as I have expressed my opinions on this to them many times they are aware of my views. I believe they have a responsibility in this regard. Bord na Móna has operations along the Shannon and there are thousands if not millions of tons of peat in critical areas of the River Shannon. It washes down the river and got caught at corners and different places. We have identified the critical areas in which silt has accumulated and bushes and trees are growing in it today. We want these bushes and trees taken from the river. We are very clear on this point and we have identified the sites of the silt to the OPW. It is correct that we have a problem with the National Parks and Wildlife Service and it goes back to the point made by Deputy Luke 'Ming' Flanagan that the National Parks and Wildlife Service is the body that is supposed to be protecting the corncrake, yet it has contributed to destroying them. There is a rethink within the National Parks and Wildlife Service at present but does it go far enough? It is all very well to be rethinking but one must be prepared to take the boot off. I have been told by senior staff in the National Parks and Wildlife Service that when those sites were designated as alluvial woodland or annexe 1 under the directive, the staff who made those decisions were not sufficiently senior to make those decisions. When Mr. Gerry Gunning and I went to Brussels three years ago the Director General for the Environment clearly told us that what had happened in Ireland should not have happened, that sites that should not have been designated were designated because there was an internal problem in Ireland. That is the reason it is critical that the Oireachtas must give us help at this time. We cannot do a great deal with the National Parks and Wildlife Service. I can get a break but I cannot draft legislation. The OPW is the lead agency and it must have the legislation to support its work, and if it does not have that power, it is at nothing.

Environmentalists in particular raise the issue of climate change. I listened to Pat Kenny lead a discussion on rising sea levels, as though it was causing the summer flooding in the Shannon callows. He does not know there is 120 ft. of a drop between Ardnacrusha and the other side and one must come back up the river. The sea is hardly going to rise 120 ft. and come up to Clonown, Shannonbridge or Clonmacnoise. We must talk sense.

When the water levels were raised in Lough Ree in the 1970s, the thinking was that we had come through a number of very dry summers and that precipitated the raising of the levels in the 1970s. Now the scenario is different, Deputy Stanley said specifically that we have experienced climate change and that is all the more reason we need to redress the issue and right the mistakes we made then.

Let us consider what happened on 7 June 2012. I have the ESB water management documentation on regulations and guidelines for the control of the River Shannon. The ESB states clearly the minimum navigational level in Lough Ree is 36.88 m and that means one can safely navigate Lough Ree at 36.88 OD. That tells a person that one can navigate safely through Lough Ree at 36.88 m. On the morning of 7 June, when the weather forecast was for very heavy rain, the level in Lough Ree coming over the weir wall in Athlone was 37.70 m. That is 2 ft. 8 in. above 36.88 m. There was no storage there and it was maintained during a six week period, one of the driest periods we ever had. I can remember well last May, as we were reclaiming land and the dust would cut the eyes out of your head. Water could have been shifted through the River Shannon. Nobody need tell me it could not have been done, as I am on the Shannon every single day of my life. A number of committee members have been down at my farm and Deputy Marcella Corcoran Kennedy came over to the island which is part of my farm. I know the levels instinctively as soon as I can get into my boat. Those levels were at summer level for a six week period prior to the 7 June and we could have moved the 2 ft. 8 in. of water from Lough Ree through the system safely without adverse effects but we did not do it. The question I pose is why are we not prepared to do this, particularly in the context of climate change because as Deputy Stanley stated when we get rain, it is heavier and the perception is that the rainfall is heavier now than in the past.

Surely we must make greater allowance for rain in the future, rather than keeping our head in the sand. It makes common sense to bring the levels back to what they were. I would even go as far, Chairman as to say if there are problems in Lough Ree with the jetties that were built in the intervening years, let a deal be done between the National Parks and Wildlife Service to make provision for proper access to those jetties. It should not destroy our livelihoods because it wants to get boats into a particular sport up along Lough Ree. I have been told by the boating people in Lough Ree that it is not issue except in a tiny number of cases, as 90% of the boats have no issue, but 10% of boats that have been brought in recently need bigger draught.

There are rocks and silt in critical area and that is the issue that should be addressed. Please do not destroy the livelihoods of people located between Lough Ree and Lough Derg. This area spans the constituencies of Deputies Stanley, Corcoran Kennedy, Cowen and 'Ming' Flanagan. Some five or six counties are being destroyed. Even if one goes up to County Longford, and my colleague, Mr. Andrew McHugh can speak for the farmers of County Longford, but some of the farms on the banks of Lough Ree have been destroyed because of raising the levels. When we have incessant rainfall, the rain has nowhere to go except out on to the farmland. It is hitting everybody, not just in my area of the country, in which it is a serious problem.

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I call Deputy Corcoran Kennedy.

Mr. Joe Parlon:

Before Deputy Corcoran Kennedy speaks, may I respond to the point Deputy Stanley made about the difficulty in trying to get work done. Maintenance work has been ongoing on the Little Brosna for three years. When I talk about maintenance work, the same as Mr. Silke, it is not taking out silt because one would not be allowed do that, but it is cutting the bushes and trees that are hanging down into the river and blocking it. The problem with doing that type of work is that one is not allowed on to the river until after 1 September because one cannot do anything while the trees are in bloom. Anyone who knows the area knows how difficult it is to get a dry spell in September and October. Work was carried out in 2011 and I was working with Vincent Hussey of the OPW. In order to get work done, one must apply to the OPW through Mr. Hussey and then he must apply for a licence from the National Parks and Wildlife Service to do that work. It was difficult to get that licence in the first couple of years so in the first year it was 25 September before we got the digger in. During the second year, we got them in on 20 September. In that second year, we had agreed to take out 12 trees that was hanging down into the river. We only managed to get half the work done before the weather broke and the diggers had to be removed after a week.

In the year 2012, we had a bit of dry weather in September and we moved again to try to get the work done. I had applied to do so in June and July through Mr. Vincent Hussey and around the middle of September we got the diggers in but when the diggers arrived, the local ranger decided that an environmental impact study on otters was required before they would allow any more trees to be taken out, even though they had taken out half of them the year before. That is the type of stupidity goes on. I lost the head with the ranger on this issue, to the extent that on a Friday evening he telephoned a man to come and look at the river first thing on the Monday morning and see whether the work could go ahead. It was passed and the diggers were able to take out the rest of the trees on the Monday. That is just an example of the difficulty of getting work done.

We have a major difficulty with maintenance work on the River Shannon. We dealt with two people, Mr. Vincent Hussey and Mr. John Curtin. I worked with Vincent Hussey for three years and he has been moved on. John Curtin, who had put in a big effort in doing things, has been transferred to the monuments section.

As soon as one builds up a relationship with an official, he or she is moved on. The new official, Mr. Michael Collins, maintains that the OPW has no responsibility for maintenance on the Shannon itself. He says it has responsibility for the tributaries, the Suck, the Little Brosna and so on, but that Waterways Ireland has responsibility for maintenance on the Shannon. It does not make sense that Waterways Ireland, which is interested in navigation and recreation, would have any interest in maintenance to allow water on. Its interest is in holding water up. That is a huge problem in getting work done.

Like Michael Silke, last June was a clincher as far as I am concerned. There was an opportunity during the dry period to allow water down through the system. There is no capacity now. That is why we have summer flooding. A small amount of rain in the summer will flood the system. Two feet of capacity could have been gained.

If there is any dry spell during the winter period water can be released and allowed down through the system. Last year was a prime example of this, when we had a dry period in March and April. If water had been released at that time, it would have created a huge capacity for when the rain came. Last week, the ESB contacted us to say there was a chance of flooding in the next 24 hours. That was too late. Weather forecasts are pretty good. Last June, we were given seven days warning of a huge rainfall that was coming but nothing was done in that seven-day period. The weir in Meelick could have been opened to allow water on. Athlone could have been opened. Even seven days water would have made a huge difference. Nothing happened until it had rained for 48 hours and Michael Silke had to go and plead with Waterways Ireland to open the weir in Meelick to let off some water. Where was the plan?

On my computer, I get updates on water levels on the Shannon and the predicted rainfall. We have all the figures and predictions of rainfall, but what can be done with them?

Marcella Corcoran Kennedy (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the representatives of the Irish Farmers' Association for their presentation. I know them all well and I am familiar with the situation. There is no point in my going back over what has already been raised. I have a couple of questions, and I might update the witnesses with some information I have received from OPW. I know the farmers have an issue with the catchment flood risk assessment and management, CFRAM, system and also that they have participated in the research being done by the company concerned. Are they concerned by the delay, or do they lack confidence that anything of value will come out of it?

We all acknowledge the need for maintenance works. The question of abatement measures was discussed at a meeting of another committee. What are the witnesses' thoughts on taking additional abatement measures somewhere along the Shannon? Infrastructural work could be done to hold back the water.

The witnesses will have seen a report produced by the joint committee last year regarding eight proposals urgently required to tackle flooding on the River Shannon, its tributaries and the waters feeding into it. One of the eight proposed measures was the attenuation of water from the Shannon to boglands in Roscommon and Longford. What are their thoughts on that?

Mr. Michael Silke:

We consulted Jacobs, the consultants involved in CFRAM. We were disappointed with their presentation on that evening. It did not address, in a fundamental way, the issue of dealing with the levels in Lough Ree. Jacobs simply had not dealt with that. Neither had they dealt with the issue of the feasibility of using cutaway bogs north of Lough Ree. There are thousands of acres of bog in that area. CFRAM should have been involved in looking into that. If Jacobs were to deal with the problem in a comprehensive way, which we were led to believe they would, they should have done that. We were disappointed by a number of other issues, but by that in particular.

A second thing disappointed me personally. I spent considerable time on the River Shannon and on other rivers identifying critical areas. We gave that information, which took a long time to prepare, to the OPW. That report was a layman's perception of what needs to be done, but it was reality none the less. Senior people in the OPW agreed that every area we identified was a critical area. There are a number of critical areas between Athlone and Meelick, and particularly between Banagher and Meelick. We identified them to Jacobs and the OPW.

We could address the problems of those areas and do something with them before Jacobs come up with their proposals. I do not see a lot happening with Jacob's proposals. In the current economic situation we do not have the funds to do what it is hoped they will propose. We will go down the road for at least ten years before we have money to do that. In the interim, however, we could carry out minor alleviation works that would not cost an arm and a leg, with the proper agreement with the National Parks and Wildlife Service and possibly with the involvement of Bord na Móna. Bord na Móna must come back into the process. It put the stuff into the Shannon in the first place and it must be involved. If everything could be married together, we could address the problem and stop at least some of the suffering being caused by flooding at present.

Deputy Corcoran Kennedy mentioned abatement works. I would be worried about that. In the River Suck, for example, there is fall of about 60 ft. between Castlerea and Ballinasloe and only 5 ft. from Ballinasloe to the River Shannon. When the Shannon rose 7 ft., the water flooded the houses in Ballinasloe. How do we stop the Shannon coming back up to Ballinasloe? We might stop the Suck going down into the Shannon but we will not stop the Shannon coming back up into Ballinasloe. That is what is happening.

The only way to address this issue is to get the water flowing and managed properly. That has not happened. It is a matter we must address. I hope that answers the Deputy's question.

Mr. Joe Parlon:

I know Deputy Corcoran Kennedy read the preliminary report from Jacobs last year. I was particularly disappointed by one line in it which said no short-term works were recommended at this time. Nothing could be done in the short term. As farmers, we saw another two years lost. We would have to wait until 2015. After two or three years doing this work, Jacobs could recommend nothing, even in the short term and with the amount of flooding we had last year. Surely something could have been said about maintenance and levels, but no short-terms works were recommended. I do not think I could have much faith in their final report. What could they recommend at that stage?

Mr. Andrew McHugh:

In the same vein, when we met Jacobs on their interim report, we asked if it would make a difference to flooding if levels in Lough Ree dropped. They said they had only looked at the big floods and that levels would have to drop massively to affect that.

When asked about whether it would make a difference to small floods, we were told that Jacobs had not even bothered considering that possibility and would do so for the final report, yet this is the interim report and we are determining what immediate action to take. The Office of Public Works, OPW, having considered the report and its figures, asserts that dropping the levels in Lough Ree to the weir, which would cause no trouble no matter what anyone in Waterways Ireland claims, would get rid of all of the minor summer flooding in the first April-August period. Jacobs did not come out with this information, but the OPW has. This is why we have problems with the report.

Mr. Gerry Gunning:

Mr. Silke's figures are based upon an event 37 years ago, a very dry spell in the mid-1970s. That event has not recurred since. As anyone in that region or the west knows, the summers are constantly wet, etc. Basing levels on something that occurred 37 years ago is wrong. Waterways Ireland asserts that it has been given legislative power by the Oireachtas, but the Oireachtas must deal with this issue because of the obsolete figures.

Noel Coonan (Tipperary North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the deputation and thank it for its presentation on this critical issue. Other regions are not under discussion today, but they share a common theme and common problems. It seems that we are dealing with a number of State agencies and bodies, all of which are working in their own interests and none of which works in the common interest or the interests of the agricultural community or is concerned about the effect on same. Herein lies the challenge of pulling these strands together to take action.

From this point of view, I welcome the Taoiseach's initiative. He has nominated my good friend and colleague, Deputy Heydon from Kildare South, to pull these reports and strands together and to report to him within a short time in order to outline the problems-----

Noel Coonan (Tipperary North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is not my phone.

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I beg to differ.

Noel Coonan (Tipperary North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is not mine.

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will take the Deputy's word for it.

Noel Coonan (Tipperary North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Mine is a BlackBerry and it is turned off.

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

BlackBerrys and iPhones are strange appliances. The Deputy is not guilty and should proceed.

Noel Coonan (Tipperary North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Under the Taoiseach's initiative, he wants the strands pulled together and actions proposed. That he intends to pursue those actions is welcome. A part of the committee's job will be to ensure that such actions are taken.

Mr. Silke mentioned that small, key issues needed to be acted upon. For the benefit of the committee's deliberations, will he place those areas on record?

One of the problems with speaking last is that most comments have already been made. I do not want to rehearse some points, but Bord na Móna has tabled a proposal. That company has a significant responsibility in this regard, given what it has got away with. Actually, I should say "what it has done", as getting away with it is no good to anyone. It has damaged the River Shannon and other rivers in the area. I have first-hand experience of that damage in Templetuohy. After the mines moved into the area, we saw the depth of the problem in the rivers, which Bord na Móna had flooded and blocked. The company is indecisive and is unwilling to clean those rivers or relieve flooding in the area.

The company proposes to extract water from the River Shannon close to the bridge of Portumna in Carrigahorig. I mentioned this, as Mr. Silke stated that summer flooding rather than winter flooding was his prime concern. However, all of the stakeholders in the area - tourism, boating, etc. - are against the proposal. Where does he stand on this proposal? Would it be of benefit to the callows, particularly during the summer?

What is necessary among the stakeholders, particularly the ESB, OPW, Bord na Móna and National Parks and Wildlife Service, NPWS, is a bit of common sense and common purpose, none of which is apparent. Given our experience of flooding, no one has the common sense to plan ahead and relieve water levels before a deluge of rain by setting aside water storage areas. The storage areas of the bodies I mentioned are always full before a flood. The heavy rains exacerbate the situation.

I acknowledge that this critical problem is a large one. The committee will not be found wanting in driving the issue to preserve farming in the areas in question, particularly during the summer, even if it only leads to the short-term action mentioned in this discussion.

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Before I call on our guests, does Deputy Corcoran Kennedy wish to add information?

Marcella Corcoran Kennedy (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes, I have some information that might be useful. I acknowledge the work done by the sub-committee in producing its document. We worked hard on it in a short space of time. It was accepted by the committee and laid before the Dáil. We set a date to debate it. Unfortunately for us, however, the Smithwick tribunal report was announced that day and we lost our time. I have been trying to arrange a debate, but the committee was told that all of the Whips would need to lobby for it.

Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

They have been.

Marcella Corcoran Kennedy (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To apply pressure, perhaps we should co-ordinate our lobbying instead of lobbying separately. It is essential that the document be debated. I will not take the foot off the pedal. I am familiar with this problem and the difficulties experienced by everyone involved. Action is necessary.

I have been in regular contact with the OPW. I will relay extra information that we might not have had to date. I do not know the best way to say it, but three paragraphs in the document are relevant and helpful. Will I cite from them?

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes.

Marcella Corcoran Kennedy (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The first paragraph relates to the ongoing concerns about water levels on the Shannon. The OPW facilitated a briefing by Jacobs Engineering to the Irish Farmers Association, IFA, on 24 October, which members will recall, and to the joint Oireachtas committee on 28 November regarding the report prepared by the committee reviewing the operating regulations and procedures of the control structures along the River Shannon with the purpose of identifying potential improvements with respect to flood risk management that could be introduced in the short term.

Relevant to Mr. Parlon's query, it was agreed arising from those consultations that the OPW would explore with the ESB and Waterways Ireland the possibility of conducting a water level monitoring exercise involving the controlled raising and lowering of weir boards, subject to favourable hydrological conditions. This was a strong wish among the farmers involved. I will supply our guests with a copy before they go. They do not need to make notes.

The results of such an exercise would inform consideration by the ESB and Waterways Ireland of a possible voluntary change to the management regime at Athlone weir. The aim would be to investigate the feasibility of a slightly lower starting level in Lough Ree in spring, with a possibility of reducing the risk of early summer flooding. In January of this year, the OPW met the ESB and Waterways Ireland to discuss the matter and review the scheduling of such an exercise. It was agreed to involve Jacobs Engineering to advance the water monitoring proposal that is to take place shortly, but this cannot be done unless conditions are favourable. The question of responsibility for river maintenance is also being examined. Something is being done. This issue has not been forgotten. The pressure is being maintained.

I will offer an important clarification. Never let it be said that the truth should not get in the way of a good story.

I heard Deputy Luke 'Ming' Flanagan say that the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Hayes, had been bumped into attending a meeting. Any of the meetings that were scheduled were sought through official channels and there was no question of anybody being bumped into it.

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy Coonan raised two questions. The first relates to the critical small areas, the key issues, and the second relates to the extraction of water from the River Shannon. Mr. Silke might address those.

Mr. Michael Silke:

To reply to Deputy Coonan, with regard to identifying the critical areas, the most critical area along the River Shannon between Meelick and Athlone is an area called Shannon Grove. That is an extremely critical area. It is approximately a mile from the bridge in Banagher down towards Meelick. We have identified that area. The OPW has the printout on these areas and I have given it all the details on this. I can give the details of what we have identified to the committee if it would like that information. Minor remedial works need to be done but that is one of the most critical areas. There is also an area north of Banagher, a place called Derryholmes, which desperately needs to be looked at. If we could tackle small areas like these, particularly the stretch between Banagher and Meelick and then move on towards Shannonbridge, there is no doubt it would have a massive beneficial effect. I do not want to give a big rigmarole about the areas because there is no point in setting out ten sites that need works carried out and for works not to be carried out on any of them. If we were to concentrate on two sites and carry out the necessary works, we could see if they would have a beneficial effect. I have no doubt about saying that it would have a beneficial effect because I know that area intimately as I live in that general area.

Regarding the issue of water going to Dublin, I have said from the word go, long before flooding was an issue and in terms of doing something about this issue, that if we had an abundance of water and the people on the east coast wanted it that they should not be refused it. That was my gut feeling, irrespective of a perception about flooding. There are three aspects about the issue of water going to Dublin, the first is that it should go to Dublin, the second is that it is being taken from the wrong place, and third is that it will make no significant difference to flooding of any description.

I gave the water levels for Lough Ree on the morning of 7 June last, namely, 36.88 m and 37.7 m. There was more than enough water held back in Lough Ree over and before the minimum navigation level not only to serve the Dublin area but the whole of the east coast for 15 months. That is the amount of water that was held back in Lough Ree. For anybody to say that taking water from there will decimate the Shannon and do this, that and the other, is telling blatant untruths. It is as simple and straightforward as that. It will have no appreciable effect. That is the reason I was a little fed up with the people from Jacobs Engineering when they had not investigated the possibility of moving water into the cutaway bogs north of Lough Ree. If water is needed in Dublin, there is a ready-made source as it were and it need not interfere with the River Shannon. If there is a dry summer, the water is available if it is needed for Dublin and, if it is not, it can be released whenever it is considered right to do so through the Shannon. It is safe to do that.

The water is going to Dublin now and the Shannon is going to be raped again. It was raped by Bord na Móna and down through the years by the local authorities. I have been told by old people in the area that one of the reasons the levels were raised in Athlone was the need for the sewage from the town to be decimated. The level of water that came over the weir wall was strong enough to shove it down and push it out over callows, which it did. The callows are not as fertile now as they were and that is the reason. I am pulling no punches here, this is the reality. With the water that is going to Dublin now, the Shannon is going to be raped again and that is wrong. We should have a programme for the water going to Dublin. We have a resource that is destroying our livelihoods and the east coast needs that resource, but it should involve a cost. The money derived from it should be invested in restoring the Shannon to where it was when the British left and in that way we could have better fishing, better boating activity and people could live in harmony. As a farmer, I am not against the people engaged in boating activity on Lough Ree who want the levels high all the time, as do anglers. Let us call a spade a spade. We could marry this together and live in harmony if this was properly approached. The water is being given too cheaply at present. It should not be an issue in terms of it going from Terryglass and I believe it is going from there.

Noel Coonan (Tipperary North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No, it is going from Carrigahorig.

Mr. Michael Silke:

Okay, Carrigahorig. It should not be going from there. It should have gone from above that from the north end. If it was to have any little beneficial effect in terms of reducing flooding, which would be minuscule, it should be to the benefit of the people living in the area between the two lakes, which is a critical area, and those people are suffering.

We should not get hung up about the water going to Dublin and we should not listen to what the headbangers are saying. I remember one eminent politician saying that she dreamt that when she woke Lough Ree was dry. Have the members ever heard such stupidity? We need only think of the climate change effects. The CFRAMS should examine the issue involved. The water should be delayed going to Dublin, even for another ten years if necessary. When it does go, we should have a proper mechanism in place. It should not be that a consultancy firm is brought in and that it and everybody else along the way gets a few euro out of the process

Noel Coonan (Tipperary North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Mr. Silke is at sixes and sevens there. On the one hand he is saying that it should go and on the other hand he is saying that it should not go.

Mr. Michael Silke:

No. I am saying that it should go but that it should be done in a properly managed manner. As matters stand, the water will flow down the river, having been taken from Lough Derg, but why can the water not be taken from the source in Lough Ree and the boglands utilised, as I have said? A proposal was put forward by the Dáil last summer that the boglands would be utilised in some shape or form and that could be done by having a proper mechanism in place.

Noel Coonan (Tipperary North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Overall, it will have no effect on the callows.

Mr. Michael Silke:

No. I do not think so.

Luke Flanagan (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

For the purposes of the record, I want to correct something Deputy Corcoran Kennedy said.

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy wants to correct something.

Luke Flanagan (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy suggested that I was telling lies.

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No one suggested the Deputy was telling lies.

Luke Flanagan (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am afraid the Deputy suggested that.

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No, she did not suggest that. She used an analogy.

Luke Flanagan (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

She said do not let the truth get in the way of-----

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No one said that the Deputy was telling lies.

Luke Flanagan (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am the first person of the last five speakers to ask if I can speak. Can I speak on this?

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy has 30 seconds to do so.

Luke Flanagan (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have 30 seconds?

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If the Deputy wants to correct the record, I think that is enough time for him to do so.

Luke Flanagan (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes. I want to correct the record on what the Minister of State, Deputy Hayes, said. I said that he said he was bounced into a meeting and that is correct. There are people in this room who know that to be a fact. I want to make that clear. I have never seen anyone get away with calling anyone a liar, whether here or in the Dáil.

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not think anyone said that. I do not think that was the intention.

Luke Flanagan (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That was the insinuation. It is best to clear up how Deputy Corcoran Kennedy was confused about the truth, given what her party promised in the election.

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Thank you, Deputy.

Marcella Corcoran Kennedy (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Clearly, Deputy Flanagan does not have a sense of humour.

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is the end of that matter. Deputy Flanagan has had his 30 seconds.

Luke Flanagan (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Chairman.

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I certainly did not hear anyone infer that the Deputy was a liar.

Mr. Joe Parlon:

On the question Deputy Coonan asked about the critical areas on the River Shannon, if the committee brings in officials from the OPW, the most important point to establish is who has responsibility for the maintenance of the river. Mr. Michael Collins has clearly told us that responsibility for maintenance of the Shannon lies with Waterways Ireland. The OPW has washed its hands of any maintenance work. It did some maintenance work, as Mr. Michael Collins said, on the new cut in John Curtin's time. Even though it has said that it is still looking at old legislation in this respect, it has told us that Waterways Ireland has this responsibility but, to my mind, Waterways Ireland has no intention of doing any work on it.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are a number of points to consider to ensure that we do not simply walk out of it and nothing happens. Deputy Corcoran Kennedy helpfully said that the Taoiseach has asked Deputy Martin Heydon to pull the various reports together. A discussion on this that was to take place in the Dáil was cancelled because of the outcome of the Smithwick tribunal but discussion on this needs to take place. There is a question about who reigns supreme in terms of who is in charge. Everybody here knows that if everyone is in charge nobody is in charge and nothing will happen. My opinion and my party's position on this is that the OPW should be in charge. Just so that we are not trying to play handball off a haystack, there seems to be agreement between the Independents, Sinn Féin, Fine Gael, Fianna Fáil and the Labour Party on this. If, collectively, we could decide, with the Chairman's leadership, to pursue this issue, we need, first, to nail down the lead authority and second, to have a discussion in the Dáil on the report which Deputy Corcoran Kennedy championed and drove forward. It is a very useful report and contains eight recommendations. It would be helpful if we could drive the process towards a solution.

I do not wish to speak for anyone else in the room, but the preference seems to be for the OPW. That would coincide with what was said at previous meetings. If legislation is required to give the OPW supreme power and to tip the balance in its favour, let us do that. Legislation is our responsibility.

We must begin discussion on short-term relief works. The witnesses spoke about an improvement of 0.61 metres, or 2 ft. That could give immediate relief to farmers in the area and would be of major benefit. Sometimes one foot of water can be critical.

Mr. Joe Parlon:

With regard to what Deputy Corcoran Kennedy said, the OPW is recommending to Waterways Ireland and the ESB that the levels be lowered in Lough Ree.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

They need the power to tell them.

Mr. Joe Parlon:

They are making that recommendation.

Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Recommendation days are over.

Mr. Joe Parlon:

They are recommending at present. If those recommendations are turned down, we must have legislation. Deputy Corcoran Kennedy spoke about recommendations. If the ESB and Waterways Ireland turn the OPW down, the time for asking will be over.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We must not walk out of the room and leave this matter hanging in mid-air, with various things happening but no action achieved. Deputy Martin Heydon is doing a report on behalf of the Taoiseach, and that is welcome. He is pulling the various strands of the reports together and I hope we get an outcome to that. I propose that we seek a debate on this matter in the Dáil. I will lobby our party Whip on the matter.

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

At least three or four other groups will be coming to the committee to discuss this topic before we make our report. There is no question of our leaving here and not having a follow-on. If you have a clear proposal, Deputy, please make it. If the proposal is seconded, it will be agreed.

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I propose that the committee seek a debate in the House on this issue and ask that the Taoiseach would present the findings of Deputy Heydon's report to the House, that the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Hayes, would come to the Dáil for that debate and that the committee recommend that the OPW be in charge of this matter.

Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is already a recommendation of the sub-committee. We want that publication put on the floor of the House for debate and the committee to make the point that legislation to give the OPW jurisdiction is needed and must be enacted.

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That needs to put that in the form of a formal proposal for the next meeting of the committee.

Marcella Corcoran Kennedy (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Whips must agree to what goes onto the floor of the Dáil.

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy Stanley, will you come back with a formal proposal at next week's meeting?

Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes. I will do that.

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the representatives for their very worthwhile presentation and the interesting exchanges that followed. It will help us to compile our report under the broader heading of flooding and its effects and implications. Ba mhaith liom buíochas a ghabháil leis na finnéithe a tháinig anseo inniu and an chabhair a thug sibh dúinn. Go raibh míle maith agaibh.