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

To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform further to Parliamentary Question No. 28 of January 2013, if he will provide an explanation of what he means by capacity restrictions with the existing channel; if he is referring to the restriction at the bridge at Athleague and to the reduction of the two openings at the east end of bridge; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13968/13]

Brian Hayes (Dublin South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The "capacity restrictions" within the existing channel mentioned in my reply of 23 January 2013 to the Deputy refers to the water conveyance capacity of the River Suck channel up to Athleague from the River Shannon. It does not allude in any way to the Athleague Bridge having a capacity restriction. The backwater effect refers to the River Shannon water level that backs up towards Athleague beyond the point to which a diversion channel and the construction of a weir at Tobervaddy would be beneficial in preventing the flooding of Athleague village, should an event such as the 2009 flood event occur in the future. As stated in the same reply, the proposed works upstream of Athleague would not have alleviated this effect.