Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome and fully support the objective behind the Bill. Having worked with the then Ministers of State, Deputy Canney and Kevin Boxer Moran, regarding the Shannon flood risk State agency co-ordination working group, as some of the State agencies in the group came under my responsibility when I was Minister, I know at first hand the challenges that exist and exactly what the Minister has elaborated and pointed out in his contribution. When I was Minister, we tried to amalgamate Bord na Móna and Coillte and that had to be abandoned because of the legal complexities involved in bringing two relatively young State agencies together. If a new agency is to be established, it will take at least five years to produce legislation and this will then be challenged the whole way to Europe. I can safely say that it will be a decade from now at the earliest before it becomes operational. We need to be honest with people in that regard.

The reality is that we do not have ten years. We need to see action now to address summer flooding and the scale of winter flooding, which families in my community are experiencing as we speak. I accept the core argument for the Bill, that is, that we do need a single, accountable authority that has the legal authority, first, to manage the water levels on the lakes and at weirs; second, to remove the pinch points south of Athlone, which will ultimately lead within the next five years to the removal of Meelick Weir; third, to remove the pinch points north of Lough Ree and; fourth, to carry out an ongoing maintenance programme on the Shannon and its tributaries.

I believe that legal responsibility should be given to the OPW to achieve those four objectives, as well as a legal responsibility to address flooding in general. This should be put in place now. I agree with the core argument behind this Bill that there is a lack of co-ordination.

In a reply to a parliamentary question on 13 October, the Minister of State stated:

The ESB is responsible for managing the water levels on Lough Allen, Lough Ree and Lough Derg. The levels in between the lakes are managed by Waterways Ireland for navigation purposes. Both organisations are members of the [co-ordination] group and communicate on a daily basis to ensure a co-ordinated approach to managing water levels.

On 3 July last, Waterways Ireland had half of its 30 sluice gates at Meelick weir open. The protocol stipulated that on that day it should open all of the gates as the water levels were continuing to rise. Between 3 July and 7 July, just five of the 15 gates were opened. On 3 July, however, as Waterways Ireland opened the gates at Meelick to reduce the rising waters - at far too slow a rate I must add - the ESB decided to open two additional sluice gates in Athlone, bringing it to six gates opened in Athlone. All six gates were left open for the next five days until the lands of farmers north of Meelick were flooded. For five days, there was no co-ordination between the ESB in Athlone and Waterways Ireland in Meelick. In between, the people within the Shannon Callows were flooded. That was the fundamental problem that led to the flooding that took place last July and during summer. It was because of a lack of co-ordination.

I have been consistently told here from meetings that I had with the ESB down through the years that we could not address the water levels on Lough Ree, Lough Allen and Lough Derg. These all need to be reduced to provide additional capacity. When Brian Hayes was in the Minister of State's position, however, the operational level of Lough Ree was reduced by a full metre on a pilot basis. When Kevin Boxer Moran was Minister of State, Lough Allen's level was reduced by 0.7 m. It can and has been done despite what the ESB has said in the past. It is clear that there is a lack of co-ordination.

In a reply to a parliamentary question on 1 October, the Minister of State indicated that a decision was taken last year to allocate €7 million to carry out a programme of maintenance between Athlone and Meelick in order to remove the pinch points. That money was secured by the OPW, which handed over €500,000 to the Department of Culture, Heritage and the Gaeltacht to allow Waterways Ireland to carry out the various implementation programmes that need to be done in advance of works starting. That has not happened, however. Again, a decision was taken 12 months ago and funding was provided to Waterways Ireland by the OPW but we will not see action until sometime next year. That is why I believe we need a short Bill to give the OPW legal responsibility for this, hold it accountable for it and let it drive the change that clearly is not happening as I have identified.

I have raised the problems relating to turloughs in Roscommon and Galway privately with the Minister of State and with the chair of the OPW. There are problems with Lough Funshinagh and Correal turlough outside of Roscommon town. There are also problems with Castleplunket, Bushfield and Lisserdrea turloughs. For the first three of those, we have a practical solution. What we need to see, however, is action.

We also need to see the cost-benefit analysis. A commitment was given that the cost-benefit analysis would clearly reflect the impact that flooding of turloughs has where water remains for a considerable time, unlike the flash flooding that would take place in other parts of the country. That cost-benefit analysis has yet to be introduced. Will the Minister of State introduce a specific cost-benefit analysis of turloughs in order that we have a fair assessment of projects that can be carried out to alleviate problems within their catchment areas?

At Lough Funshinagh, in the past five years some 300 acres of land that historically never flooded have been permanently underwater. As a result of that, farmers recently received threatening letters from the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. I raised this issue directly with the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine and informed him that what is happening was unacceptable. These letters contain threats to penalise farmers because, through no fault of their own, 300 acres of land that would historically have been available for farming are not now available. We need to see a flexible approach being taken by the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine with the basic payment scheme and with areas of natural constraints payments. Practical short-term solutions must be brought in to protect homes and farms within the catchment areas of these turloughs with long-term solutions brought forward as a matter of urgency.

See this speech in context