Arterial drainage review timetable
After a procedural request to raise another question on the Adjournment, Wilson asks whether updated regional productivity should affect cost-benefit assessments. The Minister says the review, initiated in 1982, will reach Government within weeks; he gives no deadline for a decision, and rejects claims that the review is being used to delay schemes.
I wish to raise the subject matter of Question No. 5 on the Adjournment.
Comment on this
Does the Minister agree that one of the cost-benefit analysis criteria for arterial drainage is the productivity of the region in which the drainage has to be done? Does he also agree that it is singularly inappropriate to mention 1970, three years before we joined the EC? Does he realise that he is dealing with a dairying area as far as cost benefit analysis is concerned because we have shown the way in the area of productivity since then?
Comment on this
I am sure that there is validity in Deputy Wilson's remarks. However, I wish to point out that all these questions are about the review of arterial drainage and it was decided in October 1982 that arterial drainage should be reviewed. Note the date. The decision then was that a review of arterial drainage policy should be undertaken to ensure that satisfactory returns from investment in this area would be achieved. It was decided that a report should be prepared for submission to the Government. Those decisions were made by a Fianna Fáil Government in 1982——
Comment on this
It was a comprehensive and detailed review and will be before the Government in a matter of weeks. Considering that it is such an intricate review, it is quite an achievement. Nobody has a right to say it should not have been carried out——
Comment on this
Nobody is saying that. Are we to be reassured by the fact that almost two and a half years after the review was decided on by the previous Government it still has not reached the Government? In respect of all arterial drainage, could we have a decision from the Government in a reasonable period, say six months, which the Minister can then act upon?
Comment on this
Will the priorities be changed from those already established, such as the Mulcaire and Suir rivers?
Comment on this
The review is the subject of the question. Would the Minister give an assurance that the review procedure, which has been going on for almost two and a half years, will not be used as an excuse for delay?
Comment on this
The review was initiated by Deputy O'Kennedy's party when in Government and he is now complaining about it.