Tom Parlon (Laois-Offaly, Progressive Democrats)

I want to be very specific because the Senator has been colourful in the terms he has used and I want to answer everything clearly.

A scheme for this area was developed by OPW and the proposed works were placed on public exhibition in February-March 2002 as required by the Arterial Drainage Acts. A significant number of observations were received in response to the public exhibition expressing concern that the works would exacerbate the flooding already occurring in areas downstream of the Aggard Stream. The technical advice available to the OPW did not support this view. Nevertheless, to address the concerns that had been raised, OPW agreed with Galway County Council to carry out additional river maintenance works on the council's behalf on the Dunkellin River. The estimated cost of the Cregaclare scheme and the additional works was approximately €2 million. However, further objections were received from the residents and the landowners along the Dunkellin River who remained unhappy with this proposal and requested further substantial works. I met with representatives from the area and OPW officials had a number of further meetings in an effort to resolve the situation. However, it was made clear that the landowners were not prepared to allow OPW to proceed with the Cregaclare scheme. In the circumstances I had no option but to decide in September 2003 that the Cregaclare scheme could not proceed. All those who had submitted observations in response to the public exhibition were informed of this decision in writing.

The Senator mentioned a figure of €3.5 million. The background to this is that in February 2000 the Department of Finance sanctioned expenditure of €3,174,345, £2.5 million, on flood relief works in south Galway. The sanction stipulated that any works undertaken would have to avoid unacceptable environmental consequences, offer a reasonable cost-benefit ratio and, of course, fully comply with all relevant legal requirements. The south Galway steering committee was established to consider what works could be carried out within the terms of this sanction. I know Senator Burke is familiar with the work of the committee and with the extensive efforts made to examine all options for flood relief works.

The committee examined the possibility of carrying out flood relief works in the Termon, Kilchreest, Mannin Cross and Kiltiernan-Ballindereen areas but none was considered viable for economic or environmental reasons. A proposal to replace culverts at Kinvara was approved and carried out by Galway County Council with funding of €243,000 from OPW. A total of €163,330 has been spent in investigating the feasibility of works in the above areas and in bringing the proposed scheme for Cregaclare to public exhibition.

Lest there be any misunderstanding, I would point out to the Senator that the Department of Finance sanction of February 2000 conveyed approval to OPW to spend from its existing allocation and was not an allocation of additional funding to OPW for south Galway. I would therefore like to stress that there is not a sum of money being held to one side that can only be spent in south Galway. I must also point out that flood relief works had been carried out by OPW at two other locations prior to the establishment of the south Galway steering committee. A scheme was carried out in the Lacken-Ardrahan area in 1996-7 at a cost of €86,196 and on Bridge Street in Gort town in 1997, at a cost of €333,986.

I am very aware of the impact flooding has had on the people of south Galway and I have met many individuals and representative groups over the years who have been directly affected. The onus was on me as Minister of State with responsibility for the Office of Public Works to satisfy myself that everything possible had been done to find acceptable solutions. I am satisfied that the OPW has made strenuous efforts over the years to identify flood relief works that could be carried out in south Galway within the relevant criteria. Apart from those works outlined above, it is regrettable that it has not been possible to do more due to a combination of environmental and economic constraints as well as local objections.