asked the Minister for Finance whether funds will be made available to complete the drainage of the Lung River in County Roscommon in view of the work already done on the river up to Lesine Bridge and the outflow provided by the removal of Tinnecara Rock below Lough Gara.

The Lung River will be dealt with as part of a comprehensive scheme under the Arterial Drainage Act, 1945, for the Boyle River Catchment Area. In view of immediate heavy commitments it is not possible at present to say when that scheme can be reached in the arterial drainage programme.

Is there any possibility of having that river included as one of the intermediate drainage schemes?

That is unlikely at the present time.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that, consequent on the removal of Tinnecara Rock and the consequent lowering of the level of Lough Gara, this river was actually cleared up to Lesine Bridge and above the Lesine Bridge there is a relatively short distance of the river which could be cleared without any very heavy expenditure which would confer immense benefit on the people on that part of the river who feel a sense of grievance at present in that they confidently anticipated that it would be done when the Tinnecara Rock was dealt with and, seeing half of it done, are now naturally under a grave sense of grievance? Will the Parliamentary Secretary consider that?

The position is that the works on the Lung River can be done only as part of a comprehensive scheme under the Act.

Why?

Is not one half of it done already and it was not a comprehensive scheme and a very good job was made of it?

That is a matter of opinion. There was a joint meeting of the Board of Works and the Electricity Supply Board and in an agreed report on 6th June, 1961, it was unanimously agreed that no further work would be done because it would only aggravate the flooding and the Shannon position generally. The agreed report recommended that the works on the tributaries of the Shannon should not be done independently but should be accompanied by works on the main stem of the Shannon.

Let me choose tactful words. The Parliamentary Secretary, clearly, is not au fait. The river in question is draining into a lake the level of which was lowered by six feet some years ago. There is no possibility of consequential flooding on the drainage of this particular tributary river as the lake will receive all that the river can discharge. In these circumstances would the Parliamentary Secretary not consider allowing the upper reaches of this river to be completed?

My advice is entirely different from what the Deputy says.

Get better advice. It is all wrong. The Parliamentary Secretary is clearly off the beam. Get further advice.