asked the Minister for Local Government whether he has any proposals to reorganise the group water scheme system to reduce the delay between the date of application and the completion of schemes.

There are no immediate proposals under consideration in my Department for the reorganisation of group water scheme procedures but these procedures are kept under review with the object of providing the best practicable service to groups.

Would the Minister not agree that the vast majority of these schemes seem to be bogged down completely in procedure and red tape before they get off the ground? People are turning against them. It could be a useful procedure if the scheme were streamlined.

From the experience the Deputy had of one scheme it may be that he got the wrong impression. Group schemes are the direct opposite of what he says. Nearly 50,000 houses have obtained piped water supplies from group schemes. Local people and departmental officials display great dedication in dealing with those schemes. The Deputy wrote about one scheme and perhaps he had that in mind—the scheme at Raheengreney, County Wicklow. The Deputy said that the well withstood a 48-hour yield test, was inspected and improved three years ago and he thought there should be no delay. In fact, a chemical analysis in 1974 showed that the iron content was too high. A second analysis in May, 1975, after continuous pumping confirmed that the iron content was excessive and Wicklow County Council would not accept the source. In May, 1976, the council asked the group to discuss the possibility of treatment works and the problem, therefore, remains with the council and the group. One swallow does not make a summer. It would be unfair to judge other group schemes by the Deputy's experience of what happened in this area.

It is not the only scheme concerned.

It was not my intention to base the question on this one scheme. Will the Minister state if he is happy with the system?

My experience of the administration of group water schemes is that the system is working very well. From time to time I get complaints but usually if the matter is investigated it turns out that somebody along the way has fallen down on the job. It may be with regard to the submission of an application by the group, the location of a suitable source, the testing of the source for yield and quality, the design of the scheme, seeking tenders, the allocation of grants and execution of the scheme. I suggest to Deputy Murphy and to Deputy Fitzgerald that if they know of schemes that are not being looked after as they should perhaps they would give me information and I guarantee the matter will be investigated.

The fact that the Minister listed the snags that may occur gives some indication that the scheme should be more centralised.

I did not list snags. I listed details of the things which had to be done before the scheme could be operated. My objection to it is that, if anything, centralisation is not what we want. If we could spread it out and have it dealt with more locally that is what I would like to see done. As of now it is doing pretty well and has done a pretty good job.

Is it the intention to have it localised?

Not immediately but if Deputy Murphy or other Deputies who claim to have experience of trouble being caused by the way it is operating at present would bring those things to my notice I would be glad to look into them.

Do I take it now from the Minister that he is anxious to have it more localised?

I feel that it might be a better way but I have not made up my mind whether or not it could be done. It has been tried in one county. The cost of the administration at local level is higher than when it is being administered from the Custom House. That is one objection.

5.

asked the Minister for Local Government if he will now sanction the proposals and provide the necessary capital allocation for Mallow sewerage scheme, County Cork.

I am not as yet in a position to sanction this scheme, contract documents for which are under consideration in my Department.

Why is the Minister not? Is it because there is no money?

The scheme will consist of main sewers and new treatment works. The estimated cost a few years ago was over £250,000. It will improve the quality of the Blackwater River in the vicinity of Mallow as the town sewage discharging into the river would no longer be untreated. Approximately 80 per of the sewage is discharged raw into the river at the moment. The matter is at present getting very active consideration. I agree it would have a dual purpose and it would be a good idea to try to deal with this. It is getting very active consideration but I cannot say now that it will be sanctioned.

Question No. 6 is for written answer.

7.

asked the Minister for Local Government if he will sanction the proposals for a sewerage scheme for Tonbee, Castleisland, County Kerry.

I am not aware that Kerry County Council have any current proposals for the provision of a sewerage scheme in this area.

8.

asked the Minister for Local Government if he will arrange that the public inquiry concerning the water scheme from Loughatane, Killarney, County Kerry, to Tralee will be held as soon as possible.

I understand that Kerry County Council will require a considerable acreage of land in order to put this water supplies proposal into effect. I have been advised that it is necessary to defer the holding of a public local inquiry into the water rights application until the local authority are in a position to state that they can acquire all the necessary lands by agreement or until they make and submit to me a compulsory purchase order for the acquisition of such land. In the event of objections to a compulsory purchase order, a public local inquiry would be held concurrently into these and into the water rights application for a provisional order and both proposals would be considered and determined together. Kerry County Council have been informed accordingly.