Michael McNamara (Clare, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As a basic principle of common law, one can own the land adjacent to a waterway and the river bed but one cannot own the water. However, one can insist on the maintenance of a waterway and that the water not be diverted away from one’s land. These principles should inform the debate we will have on the proposal to divert water from the River Shannon to supply Dublin. The Minister of State, Deputy O'Dowd, need have no doubt that the people of the mid-west will fight to maintain the waterway that is Lough Derg. They would be right to do so. In recent weeks, I have heard various proposals from Members of both Houses of the Oireachtas, some sensible and some absurd.

I would like to draw the attention of the Minister of State to the most recent report from the Local Government Management Agency to the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government providing the results of service indicators in local authorities. The report published earlier this year contains some alarming figures. The level of unaccounted-for water as a percentage of the total volume of water supplied under the water supply schemes of Dublin City Council is 40.3%. A 2008 Forfás report highlighted the need to address unacceptable levels of unaccounted-for water and suggested that proposals to increase capacity should not attract funding in the absence of action plans to reduce leakage. This recommendation was reiterated by the report of the high level group on green enterprise from 2009. One could ask what has changed since then, other than the chickens coming home to roost. The failure of local authorities in Dublin to deal with wastewater resulted in water shortages in Dublin in recent weeks and water being cut off overnight.

The British left a good water system in this city when they lowered their flag over Dublin Castle on 16 January 1922.

Since then, the failure of central and local government to maintain a functional water system has been a tragicomedy. Now it proposed to veer to the farcical to compensate for that failure.

Lough Derg is designated as an SPA to comply with EU law. Much of its shoreline is also designated as an SAC. Under the accompanying regulations, farmers adjacent to the lake cannot take water for their livestock to drink without getting permission to do so. Now it is proposed to divert that water to Dublin so people can wash their pets. Is that really the water plan for Dublin in 2013?

Large environmental projects such as this are typically subject to litigation in Europe. To quote a well-known television programme, we are going to look like very silly “pixie heads" if, instead of fixing the water infrastructure problem in Dublin, we propose to divert water there. I cannot support any proposal to divert water from the Shannon until local authorities here in Dublin get their act together and put their system in order. I ask the Government for a guarantee that what I fear will not happen.

The operating range of Lough Derg is small; it changes by about 40 cm. That is set out in the Electricity (Supply) (Amendment) Act 1934. The water level is set at 110 to 112 ft. above the level at Poolbeg in Dublin. I want a guarantee that any scheme that might even be countenanced by the Government will guarantee that water level. Every infrastructural development on Lough Derg since 1934, including the piers and the waterway just opened in Killaloe, is predicated on maintaining the water level. No more than anybody else in the mid-west, I do not want to live beside a latter-day Aral Sea but beside a beautiful waterway. I look forward to the Minister of State’s response and hope he will be able to give me the guarantees I require.

Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am sorry I cannot give the Deputy the guarantees he requires because, with due respect to him, his summary does not make sense. My note suggests the Deputy is talking about robbing Peter to pay Paul. In my reply, I want to talk about the economy and the future of the country, including the area represented by the Deputy and the greater Dublin area. I want to broaden the issue. The Deputy referred to pixie heads and washing cats and dogs but I am talking about saving jobs and the greater Dublin area. It is a question of having water available to the greater Dublin area on a daily basis. The difference pertaining to usage is very small, at approximately 1% or 2%. If the supply is affected, as it was recently, it results in catastrophic failure right around the city. The Deputy is absolutely correct that Dublin City Council did have to cut off the water supply. It did not do so in the transparent way it ought to have done it. The Minister, Deputy Hogan, commented on that. People suddenly found that they did not have water for quite a number of nights.

We must ensure that every part of the country, be it Clare, Galway, Dublin or elsewhere, has an adequate and proper water supply. Most important, we must ensure jobs are maintained and that people can wash themselves and work in an industry that requires considerable water. The water supply in the greater Dublin area feeds the ICT sector and other water-intensive industries. It also feeds agribusiness. Dublin absolutely needs a water supply.

The Deputy is absolutely correct about the level of unaccounted-for water. I have a slightly different figure than the Deputy has. The one I have been given for Dublin – I appreciate the one the Deputy gave and I will check it immediately after this debate – is approximately 28%. I am told this is among the best figures around Europe. The fact is that if unaccounted-for water is below a certain percentage, it is not economical to carry out repairs or make adjustments. Significantly and properly, Dublin and Fingal, in particular, have been extremely proactive in dealing with the issue.

We must step forward together as an economy and country. We must deal with these issues transparently and openly, and they must be dealt with by meeting, talking and, above all, listening to one another. I have met and will be happy to meet again people from the area the Deputy represents. I will be happy to give them any hours or days they want. I will be happy to go to Clare, north Tipperary or Limerick to ensure that any proposals by the Government - it is the Government of which the Deputy and I are members that is making these decisions - are transparent and accountable. We should be running away from no issues. We want to ensure that the people understand fully what we are actually talking about. We are talking about improving the water supply for all the regions between Lough Derg and Dublin. All the towns and places of employment in the areas in question will be much better placed if this project operates according to due process. They will be able to employ more people and there will be much better amenities. The Deputy should not mind his cats and dogs but think about the people and the jobs; that is what this is all about.

It is also about the environment and ensuring that the people around the lake and along the river, which is the longest in Ireland at approximately 360 km, can be confident that the water will not disappear overnight. Any water that is taken from the Shannon will have to be taken in a proper and sustainable way, as pointed out by the Deputy. The water level must not be reduced below a certain point. I am absolutely aware of the economic benefit to the community deriving from the Shannon. That will not and must not be affected.

The planning and environmental impact processes will not and must not be allowed to affect the economic and community benefits. Rather than talk about legislating in Europe, I, as a legislator in this Parliament, would prefer to go with the Deputy to the people who expressed their concerns to talk to them and listen. We must ensure that the bodies that will be in charge of the project, including Dublin City Council, will meet the people in question to explain their position. Let us try to move forward together so we will not be robbing Peter to pay Paul. We are ensuring that Peter and Paul have a job and a water supply and that there will be no adverse economic or environmental impacts.

More than 1,000 jobs will be created through the project. It will cost over €500 million if and when it goes through all the processes. There will be very significant benefits for everybody. On foot of the extraction, which can happen only by way of due process, people must be happy that they will benefit as individuals and as members of their community.

Michael McNamara (Clare, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The reports I quoted were from Forfás and the Local Government Management Agency. Both are State agencies that report directly to the Minister of State's Department.

The Minister of State spoke about jobs. I know all about jobs and the lack of jobs where I come from. I represent Clare in the mid-west, which has the highest unemployment rate in the country. There is an empty Dell plant sitting in Limerick and I am damn sure that many people in Limerick city would like to work in ICT. There is no reason that I can see why every single ICT job has to be located in Dublin rather than the mid-west. If water is a prerequisite for this kind of work, it should be noted there is plenty of water and power in the mid-west. Moneypoint and Ardnacrusha are both in my constituency and there are plenty of people looking for work. They are getting planes and boats regularly. I acknowledge we need jobs in Dublin.

As we enter this decade of commemoration, we commemorate the democratic programme of the first Dáil. It referred to equality between men and women and stipulated that all the State's resources would be harnessed for all the people, not just the people living in one particular city. The Shannon is a national resource and nobody is seeking to keep it for Clare, Limerick, north Tipperary or south Galway. Rather, they are looking for a guarantee that the level of the Shannon will be maintained as it is now, and as it has been since Ardnacrusha was built. The Minister of State referred to major infrastructure projects. Some 20% of the GDP of this State was harnessed in 1925. Some 5,000 men worked around the clock to get the power station built. Is that to be sacrificed for this?

We can have major infrastructure projects but they do not all have to be in Dublin. They can be located across the country, as has been the case since the foundation of this State. We can have people working in ICT and tourism on Lough Derg just as well as we can have them working in some boghole in the midlands. If there is to be a reservoir in the midlands and Dublin runs short, the reservoir will be emptied to supply Dublin. What will happen then? Leisure jobs will be jeopardised in the midlands.

There is already a nascent leisure industry on Lough Derg. It has gone downhill. For 20 years since I grew up, many tourists have come into the mid-west to spend money and go out on the lake to fish and sail. Is that to be jeopardised? I am not talking about selfishly keeping water for one area but I am suggesting we should not damage one area to benefit another. The little water that exists in the mid-west at present needs to be guaranteed and maintained before we talk about diverting it anywhere. The Minister of State knows where I stand.

Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The word is "abstraction", not "diversion". Diversion suggests a change to the physical course of the river, but abstraction is the taking, by licence, of a volume of water from the river. As the water can only be taken at particular times, as the Deputy rightly points out, the level of the River Shannon cannot and must not be affected by the abstraction. It will be done according to a proper and due process, through the EPA and the planning system. There is no question but that it can only be done properly in environmental terms.

The Deputy is absolutely right about recreation on the River Shannon. It is a wonderful waterway on which billions have been spent to improve navigation and tourism amenities. The River Shannon cannot suffer as a result of this and there must be a clear community benefit from the project. If that is the case and the abstraction issues are dealt with properly and planning permission is given, I do not see any problem with the project. I have been to Ardnacrusha in the past. An uncle of mine actually worked there and I know the fantastic, monumental progress it represented when it was built. The Deputy might be interested to know that it was a Drogheda man, Dr. Thomas McLoughlin, who was in charge of the Ardnacrusha project. The plant has a beautiful art deco control room which is worth seeing - it is absolutely stunning. However, the Ardnacrusha power plant has had its day in terms of the energy needs it can supply, although that is not to say it is not functioning; it is. It meets something like 3% of our national energy requirements. I was actually surprised to discover the size of our current energy demands. For the record, my mother is from County Clare and I was born in Tipperary; as a result, I am very much tuned into the Thurles and County Clare sides of the issue.

The bigger picture is that we must step forward together and satisfy the communities affected. I repeat that I would like to go with the Deputy to meet them. I would have no problem in doing so. I would also make sure the appropriate officials were there. Obviously, the planning process will be gone through and all of the other issues will be addressed. We must listen to people and reassure them. We all want what was the Dell factory in Limerick to be occupied by people who are gainfully employed, but this is not an "us versus them" issue. It is not a Dublin versus Clare issue, although some might argue that it is. It is about everybody benefiting from this project.

As regards the hole in the bog in Garryhinch, it will allow over 200 hectares of water to be supplied to the greater Dublin area. An equivalent hole in the bog in Rutland Park in Anglia, England attracts over 1 million visitors per year, which is phenomenal. I absolutely agree with Deputy McGrath that whatever happens in Garryhinch, there must be additional improvements to tourist and other amenities on the River Shannon. That is the only way this will work and it will work if that happens. I appeal to the Deputy not to approach the issue in terms of it being Peter versus Paul or washing cats and dogs. This is about jobs, people, the area Deputy McGrath represents and the greater Dublin area. It is about meeting the needs of the various interested parties involved. Above all else, it is about listening to people, understanding the issues, meeting people's needs within and outside the planning process. We must reassure them that we do understand the issues involved and want their concerns to be addressed properly, fairly and objectively in a democratic, appropriate and proper fashion. I will pass on the Deputy's comments to the Department. I am happy to check the figures he has proffered because I have not been given them. I thank him for them.