Our next order of business is our engagement with Cork County Council and the Office of Public Works in relation to P00016/25, "A Call for Urgent Action on Flood Relief for Rathcormac, Castlemartyr, Killeagh and Mogeely".

Cork County Council is represented by Mr. Brendan Meagher, acting county engineer and Ms Catherine Murphy, acting senior engineer. We are also joined by Mr. Jim Casey, head of flood risk management at the Office of Public Works, OPW.

Before we begin I wish to explain some limitations to parliamentary privilege and the practice of the Houses as regards references witnesses may make to other persons in their evidence. The evidence of witnesses physically present or those who give evidence from within the parliamentary precincts is protected, pursuant to both the Constitution and statute, by absolute privilege. Witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks and it is imperative that they comply with any such direction. It is proposed to publish the opening statements on the committee's website. Is that agreed? Agreed.

On behalf of the committee I want to extend a very warm welcome to Mr. Brendan Meagher, acting county engineer of Cork County Council, Ms Catherine Murphy, acting senior engineer of Cork County Council and Mr. Jim Casey, head of flood risk management at the OPW. I now invite Mr. Meagher and Mr. Casey to make their opening statements and then members will get the opportunity to ask questions.

I thank the Cathaoirleach and the members of the committee for the opportunity to meet with them today. Cork County Council is deeply aware of the challenges posed by recent flood events in east Cork and across the county, and we are actively working to address their impacts. In partnership with the OPW, we remain committed to implementing effective flood mitigation measures and advancing the delivery of flood relief schemes that will strengthen resilience and protect communities throughout the county. Above all, we want to acknowledge the hardship experienced by affected communities and assure them that supporting recovery and safeguarding homes, businesses, and livelihoods remains at the heart of our efforts. We will continue to work closely with residents, businesses and community groups to ensure that their needs and concerns guide our approach.

Today I will provide an overview of the work the council has completed and is progressing to mitigate flood risk in the wider east Cork area, with emphasis specifically on the villages of Rathcormack, Castlemartyr, Killeagh and Mogeely, which are the focus of this committee hearing. As members are aware, Storm Babet had a devastating impact on the east and north-east Cork area, resulting in flooding of an estimated 915 properties in addition to significant road and other infrastructural damage, the impact of which is still being addressed. Approximately 74% of the properties flooded were in Midleton but the wider east and north-east Cork area also suffered significantly during this unprecedented storm event.

The flood risk management capital programme delivery and operations division of the OPW is responsible for the delivery of a programme of flood relief projects to protect communities most at risk of flooding in collaboration with the relevant local authority which, in this instance, is Cork County Council. The OPW’s 2018 south west catchment flood risk assessment and management, CFRAM, programme identified a second series of projects, known as tranche 2, which were designated as areas for further assessment but were not included in the initial tranche 1 investment cycle. While tranche 2 projects are not yet in the delivery pipeline, we continue to work closely with the OPW to monitor opportunities for advancement. There are three tranche 2 projects in east and north-east Cork - Castlemartyr, Rathcormack and Youghal - and we appreciate the ongoing engagement with the OPW on the advancement of these schemes.

Cork County Council works closely with the OPW to access funding for flood mitigation measures beyond the major flood relief schemes programme. Through the OPW’s minor flood mitigation works and coastal protection scheme, funding is available for projects up to €750,000, subject to a demonstrated cost-benefit. Under this scheme, the council provides 10% matched funding and takes responsibility for the operation and maintenance of completed works. Traditionally, this scheme has supported smaller, less complex projects due to the funding cap and cost-benefit requirements. We welcome the recent ministerial indication that the scheme will be revised, including an increase in the maximum eligible project value to €2 million.

Cork County Council looks forward to receiving further details of the revised scheme and continues to work in partnership with the OPW.

Cork County Council is currently responsible for progressing six tranche 1 major flood relief schemes across the county in partnership with the OPW. We greatly appreciate the funding and support provided by it, which have enabled us to resource the projects effectively. In addition to receiving this support, Cork County Council has committed further time and resources to ensuring the schemes’ successful delivery.

We also manage the operation and maintenance of completed schemes in five areas – Bandon, Clonakilty, Fermoy, Mallow and Skibbereen – helping to safeguard communities into the future. All our flood relief schemes are fully funded by the OPW throughout their entire life cycles, from initial planning and design through to delivery and ongoing maintenance.

As part of the response to the severe impact of Storm Babet in October 2023 on towns in eastern and north-east Cork, Cork County Council engaged with the OPW to develop a scheme of individual property-protection measures as a mitigation for properties affected by the storm. Properties that flooded during Storm Babet in Castlemartyr, Mogeely, Killeagh and Rathcormack were eligible under this scheme. The scheme is 100% funded by the OPW and the current budget to deliver it is €5.8 million. There are 721 eligible properties, for which barriers to protect 1,859 openings are being provided. Civic works are required for 1,562 of these openings to receive barriers. To date, 57% of the barriers have been delivered to property owners and 45% of the civil works required have been completed. In summary, works on 48% of the openings to be protected under the scheme have been fully completed.

The council has experienced many challenges with the delivery of the scheme due to the market response and the complexity of the individual homes, but we believe we have dealt with these challenges in the best way possible. The current programme indicates that the scheme will be completed by September 2026.

Surveying and high-level hydrological and hydraulic modelling were undertaken in the Castlemartyr area as part of the OPW CFRAM programme. However, this study did not extend to the Mogeely area. The OPW has confirmed that any major flood relief scheme to be progressed for Castlemartyr as a tranche 2 project will include Mogeely due to the hydraulic connectivity between the two settlements. The hydrology in this area is extremely complex. It is a karst area that includes underground streams and caves that have been very responsive to intense rainfall events, resulting in groundwater overflow contributing to a flood risk from out-of-bank river and surface-water flows.

After Storm Babet, Cork County Council employed a consultant to undertake a high-level review of the flood mechanisms in the Mogeely area with the intent of identifying interim mitigation measures that could be delivered in the immediate term. This study identified that further detailed assessment had to be undertaken to ensure any works proposed would not have unintended consequences, such as increased flood risk to other properties. Cork County Council has applied for and secured funding from the OPW under the existing minor works scheme for €116,000 to undertake this study. A tender was advertised for the consultancy appointment on 18 December 2025. The return date for these tenders is 2 February 2026. It is planned that the consultant appointment will be made in April 2026.

The primary objective of the study is to undertake a robust technical assessment to allow the recommendations on interim flood protection measures to mitigate flooding in the villages of Castlemartyr and Mogeely. The interim solutions may include flood walls, flow diversions, etc. The assessment proposed under a previous application to the OPW for the investigation of potential natural water-retention measures has also been included in the consultant’s brief. The study will also include detailed topographical surveys, site investigation, and hydraulic and hydrological monitoring for the streams and rivers, in addition to groundwater assessments. The appointed consultant will also be tasked with identifying any under-capacity culverts in the area.

In November of last year, Cork County Council submitted to the OPW an application for funding of approximately €265,000 to carry out for the Rathcormack catchment a study similar to that proposed for Castlemartyr and Mogeely.

If funding approval is received, a consultant will be appointed to undertake the detailed investigation and modelling required to identify flood mitigation measures which can be delivered.

Killeagh village was found to be at low risk under the CFRAM predictive assessment and was not included as an area of potential significant flood risk in the OPW’s second cycle review in 2019. However, due to the significant flooding experienced in Killeagh village during Storm Babet, the OPW has committed under the 2025 PFRA review to undertake a detailed review of the flood mapping to identify the current risk. We look forward to the results of this review and remain committed to working with the OPW in the delivery of flood mitigation works in this area.

On the interim mitigation works overview, in total the Cork County Council's flood projects section has progressed works exceeding €200,000 in value for interim flood mitigation works in Mogeely and Castlemartyr and the Killeagh and Rathcormac areas since Storm Babet, the majority of which has been funded under the OPW’s minor flood mitigation and coastal protection scheme. With the support of climate adaptation and resilience grants of an estimated €200,000, the council has also carried out or is in the process of progressing drainage upgrades and road reprofiling works in Rathcormac and Mogeely with the intent of reducing flood risk to properties during significant rainfall events. In addition, Cork County Council continues to liaise with Coillte which has completed river clearance works in woodlands around Mogeely, Castlemartyr and Killeagh since Storm Babet.

Under the Cork County Council’s flood action plan, several locations have been identified where site-specific flood action plans, FAPs, are required. These are based on flooding history and the outcomes of the ongoing CFRAM programme. The FAP for the east Cork municipal district is available on the Cork County Council website. The appendices to this plan include FAPs for the following areas: Midleton town and environs, Youghal town and environs, Castlemartyr to Killeagh N25 corridor, Mogeely, Ladysbridge and Whitegate. The Rathcormac FAP is contained in the Fermoy municipal FAP.

On behalf of Cork County Council, I acknowledge the significant distress and hardship that repeated flooding causes for residents, families, business owners and all affected property owners. Cork County Council is committed to advancing measures that reduce flood risk as quickly and effectively as possible. We will continue to work in close collaboration with our partners in the OPW to deliver schemes that provide meaningful and lasting flood protection for property owners and all those impacted. Supporting our communities remains at the heart of what we do.

I welcome any comments and questions from the committee.

I thank the Cathaoirleach for the invitation to attend this meeting of the joint committee. The OPW appreciates the opportunity to address important issues relating to flood risk management.

I am acutely aware of the significant impact of flood events on communities in east Cork and the distress that arises from such flooding and the risk of flooding. I have seen at first hand the impact of flooding on people and their homes and businesses in communities in east Cork and elsewhere across Ireland. The OPW, as the lead State body for flood risk management, has a vital role in co-ordinating the delivery of measures towards meeting the Government’s national flood risk policy and in leading a comprehensive programme of measures to address flood risk from rivers and the sea.

The OPW co-ordinates a whole-of-government approach to managing river and coastal flooding and its social, economic and environmental impacts. It does this through a variety of mechanisms and structures, including the interdepartmental flood policy co-ordination group. The Departments and State agencies involved are each taking the lead to provide effective supports and policy measures within their areas of responsibility and to promote and address community and individual responses.

In 2018, the OPW completed the largest study of flood risk ever undertaken by the State to establish those communities that are at risk from significant flood events. The OPW’s catchment flood risk assessment and management programme was undertaken by engineering consultants on behalf of the OPW, working in partnership with local authorities. The CFRAM programme studied 80% of Ireland’s primary flood risk and identified solutions that can protect against over 95% of that risk.

The key outputs of CFRAM were flood maps that show the flood hazard and risk for 300 communities and 29 river basin flood risk management plans that set out the proposed flood relief measures to address the flood risk in each community. These plans, which set out a strategic assessment of long-term flood risk management, were formally approved by the then Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform in 2018. The plans provide the roadmap for the Government's significant investment in flood relief schemes today, identifying 150 new and additional schemes that will provide protection to approximately 23,000 homes and businesses in communities across the country. The Government is funding delivery of the measures outlined in the plans through the NDP to 2030.

When all of these schemes are completed, 95% of those properties assessed in the study will be protected from future flooding. The residual risk is being addressed by other flood risk management measures, for example, the minor flood mitigation works and coastal protection scheme, individual property protection and enhanced preparedness, including development of the national flood forecasting and warning service, and the promotion of individual and community resilience.

To date, the OPW has invested €580 million in 56 completed flood relief schemes, which protect 13,580 properties nationwide and provide an economic benefit in damages avoided estimated to be in the region of €2 billion.

As it is not feasible to progress all the flood relief schemes identified by the plans concurrently, the flood relief delivery programme was subdivided into two tranches, focusing initially on tranche 1 schemes and those schemes already in the delivery pipeline. The prioritisation of the first tranche of schemes was based on three criteria, including scale of projects, capacity to deliver a national programme and maximising return on investment by reference to property numbers.

Since 2018, as part of a phased approach to scheme delivery, funding under the NDP has allowed the OPW to treble work on flood relief schemes through partnership with local authorities. Consequently, 100 flood relief schemes are currently at design, planning or construction. Currently, the OPW and local authorities are progressing ten schemes at construction stage nationwide. These ten schemes, upon completion, will provide protection to a further 2,880 properties and an estimated economic benefit to the State of €361 million in damages and losses avoided. Simultaneously, other tranche I schemes at earlier delivery stages are actively being progressed by the OPW and its delivery partners through development and design towards planning, construction and completion.

There are two main delivery models for the capital flood relief programme: schemes led by the OPW or local authority-led schemes, with funding and support provided by the OPW. Whichever model is selected, project steering groups are established to monitor the progress and implementation of major capital flood relief projects, which, on average, meet monthly. The progression of flood relief schemes requires rigorous ongoing project management and technical expertise. As the approving authority under both models, the OPW provides oversight and ensures that all individual projects in the capital flood relief programme are evaluated, progressed and managed in accordance with the infrastructure guidelines. To facilitate the rapid and significant expansion of the scheme delivery pipeline, the majority of schemes are now led by local authorities. To lead the delivery of these schemes, the OPW is funding 50 engineering staff in local authorities across the country.

Progressing this significantly increased programme of flood relief schemes requires capacity and capability in highly specialised areas of engineering. As each scheme is progressed by a multidisciplinary team, designing the optimal technical solution, ensuring a robust approach to environmental assessments and meeting other regulatory requirements are all essential steps that are required to be undertaken.

While the OPW strives to expedite and progress flood relief schemes, major schemes involve complex engineering and construction operations that can impact on people's living, built and natural environment. The process is lengthy and detailed and follows five stages from feasibility through design, planning and construction. Any flood relief scheme being developed needs to map and understand the location of flooding sources and constraints. This is achieved by extensive and wide-ranging surveys to understand the topography, hydrology and environment of a community.

Market demand and competition for these necessary surveys or schemes, and other developments, have resulted in an extension of the period of time needed for these surveys to be completed. Detailed technical analysis is further required to establish the most appropriate solution, technically and environmentally, from a range of possible design options. Extensive public consultation is required at various stages to ensure that those affected by a scheme have the opportunity to input to its design and implementation. The delivery of all schemes must meet all regulatory and planning requirements, while a key part of due process is the timeframe to obtain planning decisions. Compulsory purchase orders, as well as managing judicial reviews, also impact on delivery timelines.

All new and ongoing flood relief scheme projects require preparation of a scheme adaptation plan, at both design and implementation, that takes the potential impacts of climate change into account, with a view to ensuring the scheme will provide for, or can be adapted to manage, the likely increases in flood risk to maintain protection for our communities. In addition, the development of flood relief schemes under the OPW's capital programme involves the specific requirement to assess the potential for nature-based solutions as part of the overall solution to managing flood risks for a particular community.

Flood relief schemes are complex, multi-annual civil engineering projects. While timelines may vary significantly from project to project, the completion of stages 1 to 5 has to date taken on average some 11 years in total. However, it is expected that this overall timescale can be improved upon going forward. Specifically, the five delivery stages are: stage 1, scheme development and preliminary design; stage 2, planning process or public exhibition-confirmation; stage 3, detailed design; stage 4, construction; and stage 5, the handover of works.

Nine flood relief schemes in Cork city and county are now complete. These have provided protection to 1,750 properties and an economic benefit to the State of €456 million in damage and losses avoided. Completed schemes require operational maintenance and appropriate resourcing. Ten flood relief schemes are at the design, planning and construction stage in Cork city and county. Six of these are led by Cork County Council, including the Midleton flood relief scheme. Once completed, these ten schemes will protect 3,800 properties, with an economic benefit to the State of €382 million in damage and losses avoided. The OPW has provided €5.8 million to fund the Midleton and east Cork individual property protection scheme. The OPW currently provides for nine staff in Cork County Council to progress these flood relief schemes and the Midleton and east Cork IPP scheme. Of these, four staff work exclusively on the Midleton scheme advance works and the IPP schemes for Midleton and east Cork.

The OPW and Cork County Council have frequent and ongoing engagement regarding the progression of flood relief projects. Under the national programme, work has yet to commence on the design of 54 tranche 2 flood relief schemes, including nine schemes in Cork. Among these are schemes for Castlemartyr, including Mogeely and Rathcormac. A number of initiatives are under way that will inform the delivery of these and other flood relief schemes.

The minor works scheme was introduced by the OPW in 2009. The purpose of the scheme is to provide funding to local authorities to undertake minor flood mitigation works or studies to address localised flooding or coastal erosion problems. The scheme generally applies where a solution can be readily identified and achieved in a short timeframe. To support the delivery of interim flood mitigation measures across Cork, the OPW has approved funding of over €7.3 million for 56 projects under the minor works scheme.

A number of minor works projects in the communities of east Cork, which are the focus of this committee, have been approved for funding in the amount of €321,100. Those communities are Rathcormac, Mogeely, Killeagh and Castlemartyr. The funding thresholds for the minor works scheme are being increased from €750,000 to €2 million, subject to qualifying criteria. This will allow for an increase in the scale of projects encompassed by the scheme. The OPW will share the revised conditions with local authorities shortly. The OPW will continue to work with its partners in Cork County Council to advance flood relief measures for communities in the county as part of a national programme of delivery. I welcome any comments or questions committee may have.

I thank our witnesses. I will now go to members. I call Deputy Buckley.

I thank Mr. Meagher, Ms Murphy and Mr. Casey for coming in. I want to put on the record that the engagement with Cork County Council for us, as public representatives, and the OPW has been excellent and very frank, which is the best way to do business. I thank them for that. On the other side, I have to share the annoyance and anxiety of the people we deal with. This is a huge project. Despite what people say - I hear all the time "Ah, it is not fast enough" - from what Mr. Meagher said, the average period for the projects, from start to finish, is 11 years. I saw in the statement that the period from stage 1 to stage 5 is already down to nine years. I know it sounds like a very long time for people outside these Houses, but we were lucky that we had no fatalities during Storm Babet. I am a resident of Midleton. The speed, height and volume of the water during that storm was frightening.

Everything is going in the right direction. People outside are probably saying that it is not happening fast enough. This also comes down to resources. It is very complex. I know from Midleton, with the caves and stuff, that there is fluvial flooding because of the two or three rivers there. There is also pluvial flooding resulting from rainfall and groundwater flooding. It is a Pandora's box when it comes to flooding.

It was stated that there is a full commitment from the Government, which I welcome. There has been an increase in funding. In the context of the Dublin Metro, if it is to go ahead, will that affect it? There are only so many engineers, etc., within county councils. Would that have an effect on what has already started in east Cork? The area comprising Rathcormac to Midleton, Youghal, Castlemartyr, Killeagh, Mogeely, Ladysbridge, Whitegate and along the N25 is massive. I am worried that it may come down to a lack of resources. I am not referring to money, because in the context of a lot of projects, money from the Government is available no problem. I am worried that when we get to the crux of the matter, we will not be able to get enough engineers, scientists and builders. Do Cork County Council, the OPW and the municipal councils feel confident that they will have the supports to bring this project to fruition as quickly as possible, despite what members of the public might say to the effect that it is not happening fast enough? People may sometimes say that something is a once-in-100-years or a once-in-200-years event. In that context, the perception is that it is only going to happen every 100 or 200 years. Mr. Meagher said this and put it down to the fact that you have can have two once-in-100-years events in the same week. There is a 1% chance of it happening twice in a week. I wanted to put that on the record.

There is a big worry about tranche 2.

How can we, as legislators and elected representatives, assist the OPW to try to push and speed that tranche 2 stuff in Mogeely and Killeagh into a tranche 1? I am conscious that means additional resources, man time and engineers, but perhaps there is a way that we could assist the witnesses, because it is not about beating the organisation with a stick but trying to all work as a team.

I go back to the municipal district council meeting with the local councillors, the OPW, Cork County Council and to everybody who has been involved. It has been the highest amount of communication, despite what people outside the House might think. This is probably the biggest engagement of any projects I have ever been involved in, whether it was the national development plan or county development plans. That has to be noted but I know the witnesses are restricted. As I said, I am here as one of the elected representatives from east Cork to see if there is anything I can do to assist the witnesses and to help them to progress this further because the final line on this was about supporting the whole community. It is not to get a feather on the cap, it is just to do the right thing.

I thank the Deputy for his questions. He mentioned the reference to the metro and major infrastructure projects and how that might impact on our ability to deliver. The resources are in place for the tranche 1 projects we are currently actively progressing. The active tranche 1 projects are fully resourced and are moving forward through the pipeline and programme. Since Storm Babet, the OPW and Cork County Council have been engaging on additional resource needs and additional engineers, and staff resources have been provided since Storm Babet to Cork County Council, funded by the OPW.

The Deputy asked how he might help us. In terms of the roll-out of the next tranche of flood relief schemes and other infrastructure, because we will be competing with other infrastructure projects being rolled out across the State, the recently published Department of public expenditure and reform report on accelerating infrastructure delivery has picked up on some of the resource challenges. There are specific actions within that report to look at enhanced resources being brought in to provide support to the delivery of future infrastructure projects in Ireland. We will certainly be benefiting from that.

Flood relief schemes are very specialist projects in terms of the type of engineering expertise required, for example, expertise in specialist areas of hydrology and hydraulic modelling. They would not necessarily be required on all infrastructure projects. They are particularly unique to flood relief schemes, so it is a very specialist area. Our ability to attract additional engineering expertise in those fields would be important for the delivery of the future tranches of flood relief schemes.

I thank the Deputy for his kind words. To reiterate what my colleague Mr. Casey has just said, we have 18 staff now on the flood mitigation works. That is including the nine staff funded by the OPW and the further nine staff, which includes myself. I am in the post approximately four weeks now but I have a clear remit and priorities. Our number one priority in relation to our resources is to meet the delivery of all these flood relief schemes.

I have nothing further to add to what Mr. Casey has said about the schemes only to note our construction timeline for some of these schemes will probably coincide with construction timelines here in Dublin for the MetroLink. That might pose a challenge for boots on the ground.

I have one supplementary. Also, it is great to have the Cork accents here. It drives the gang in Dublin mad.

Speak for yourself.

It drives them all mad. On a serious note, if the witnesses are meeting barriers, I ask them to please come to us and let us know. As I said, we are here to help. I am in constant contact with the Minister. Off the record, he has threatened me a couple of times in the Chamber, asking me to leave him alone. There is dialogue. I again thank the witnesses for their time.

Like the Cathaoirleach and Deputy Buckley, I welcome the witnesses. I have heard about this issue on several occasions in the Chamber when Deputy Buckley and my Fianna Fáil colleague, Deputy James O'Connor, have highlighted the concerns of residents in the areas affected and what the people in those communities went through during different flooding episodes. Obviously, all of us support projects in that regard being moved on as quickly as possible. We understand the time lag in getting work done.

My question relates to Mr. Casey's concluding remarks with regard to the minor flood mitigation works and coastal protection scheme. It was introduced in 2009 by the Office of Public Works and was a very welcome development. Back in mid-December, I asked questions of the Minister for public expenditure and reform in regard to funding provided to local authorities under this scheme. In his response to me at the time, the Minister said that the criteria for the minor flood mitigation works and coastal protection scheme were under review and there would be an increase in funding thresholds as well as a change to the criteria of the scheme. The Minister also indicated that the OPW hoped to advise local authorities, early in the new year, I assume, of the revised criteria. I presume, when Mr. Casey referred to the revised conditions, that local authorities will be informed in that regard over the next few weeks, as well the fact that the funding threshold is being changed.

From my engagement with very good officials are local authority levels in my counties, Cavan and Monaghan, I understand it was rather hard to meet the criteria to draw down funding under that particular scheme. I have advocated for drainage works and flood mitigation measures to be undertaken at a number of locations where there have been consistent episodes of flooding year in and year out. Again, the councils said on a number of occasions that some applications would not meet the criteria because, even though there were flooding incidents on an annual basis, there were traffic volumes to be researched and all of this type of thing that made no sense.

Those of us who grew up on small farms in the countryside know that, before there was very sophisticated and welcome information available from Met Éireann, members of the farming community could predict a flood. Those of us who grew up in rural parishes were very aware of that.

I sincerely hope Mr. Casey can bring back to his colleagues in the OPW that, while there is the welcome revision in the funding threshold and the change in the criteria, there is a need, where there are consistent episodes of flooding, for those projects to go ahead without unnecessary barriers being put in place to councils being able to draw down funding. Where projects have met the criteria, that has made a significant change to households and communities in different parish areas. My colleague, Senator Flaherty, has dealt with the same issue in his constituency of Longford-Westmeath.

Mr. Casey will be aware that I have consistently advocated for close co-operation with the authorities in Northern Ireland. He may have heard me, in different debates in Dáil Éireann over the years and through successive parliamentary questions, express the need for close co-operation with the Department for Infrastructure in Northern Ireland. There is co-operation. It is part of the technical co-ordination groups, in particular with regard to CFRAM, etc.

One area that concerns me hugely is the Erne river, which rises in County Cavan and flows through County Fermanagh into Donegal. It causes huge flooding in my county and Fermanagh. In recent weeks, I travelled through County Fermanagh to go to parts of Cavan in my constituency. I have seen the cross-Border difficulties we have in Cavan and Fermanagh due to flooding on the Erne. It is an area where some studies have been done on lowering the river level. It is an issue.

I do not expect a response today, but I sincerely hope those issues are kept to the fore in all areas of cross-Border co-operation and in reviews of which projects might go ahead to benefit both North and South. I sincerely hope that progress can be made with revised conditions for the minor flood mitigation works.

We have carried out a review of the minor works, and we will be writing to each local authority in the next few weeks to clarify the changes that are being made on foot of the minor works scheme review and what the revised criteria around that will be. We have been listening to the concerns of the communities and the local authorities in conducting that review. Ultimately, there are criteria, such as the benefit-cost criteria, that apply to the minor works scheme, and it is with a view to getting a return on that expenditure of public funds that the benefits of doing the work match the costs. Sometimes that can prove to be a bit of a barrier for local authorities, and we are very conscious of that. We have looked at what we can do to address that challenge, and we will be writing with further details on that very shortly, as I said.

As to the Deputy’s point on cross-Border collaboration, for many years, even pre-CFRAM, we have had ongoing engagements with our colleagues in Northern Ireland, for example with DfI Rivers. We collaborate in terms of our assessments of flood risk in cross-Border catchments, and indeed in cross-Border flood mitigation measures. That work continues. We have very close collaboration and, in fact, we meet DfI Rivers at senior management level twice annually, and we have technical engagement. All of that work will continue. However, I am conscious of the concerns the Deputy raised about that ongoing engagement.

I thank Mr. Casey for his positive responses. Some years ago, when the Minister of State, Deputy O'Donnell was the Minister in charge of the OPW, I had an exchange with him during oral questions in the Dáil on the issue of cost-benefit analysis. At that time I said, and I repeat it today, that just because there are small numbers in rural communities who are constantly affected by flooding does not mean they should continue to be disadvantaged. The reality in Ireland, and please God it will always continue to be so for our country, is we have a dispersed population. We have people living in rural townlands, and those people are as entitled as a person in the main street of a principal town to the benefits of modern construction and flood mitigation works. Having served in the Oireachtas for quite a number of years, I see, thankfully, people living in townlands today in my county of Cavan where there was nobody living when I started as a public representative. We can grow our population in rural areas and issues like cost-benefit analysis should not disadvantage the less populated areas. I again thank Mr. Casey.

A good point well made. I will call Senator Flaherty in a moment. We are very grateful to our witnesses for coming in, but we did specifically ask them to come in to talk about a very specific issue in a locality. I am conscious that we do not want to be bouncing into something else. It is quite appropriate to say we will pick that up offline or that we will come back to that afterwards. We know our witnesses are here for one specific topic, but nobody can blame anyone for hopping the ball a bit, because these are issues that come up in all of our constituencies. We will try and keep it tight.

I thank the speakers for coming in. We are all relieved to hear that there is a solution to the flooding in Killeagh. I do not think it was realised a few years ago it was going to become an anthem or a rallying cry for sports teams all around the world. It would be terrible if some of them turned up and the place was flooded. The sooner there is a solution to the situation in Killeagh, the better.

Obviously, from my colleague here, I can hear that there is positive engagement and there is work under way to resolve the problem. Mr. Casey will be conscious as well that we are in a housing crisis. Was there any input from the OPW to the infrastructure committee that was brought together to see if there was an analysis done on the projection of future flooding? We talk about a once in 100 years event, but anybody who lives in rural Ireland in particular knows that there is no such thing as a once in 100 years event anymore. We are seeing crops and plants growing now where we never saw them grow and we are seeing water on a scale that we never saw before. The once in 100 years event is a myth. These flooding events will happen when and where the temperatures are unprecedented. For example, the year we had last year was unprecedented.

Traditionally, if there was a bit of blue in the county development plan, that is where there would be a flood and you could not build there. It was an easy get out of jail card. Is there an evolving national flood plan that changes and that a local authority can look at and factor in a once in 20 years or a once in 50 years event and how it would impact?

"Yes" is the short answer. We do not just look at present flood risk. We carry out a national scale flood risk assessment, which is a requirement of the floods directive. We do that on a cyclical basis, roughly every six years or so. In fact, we have just published, in the past couple of months or so, the second review of the preliminary flood risk assessment, which is a national scale assessment. We look at the flood risk throughout the State, primarily from rivers and coastal flooding but also from other sources of flooding, not only for the present 100-year risk, as the Deputy referenced, but also in terms of the impact of climate change, the future scenarios and how they change that risk. We look at a number of future scenarios, typically what we call a mid-range, a high-end future scenario and more extreme scenarios. We look at that and we update those assessments, roughly on a six-year cycle. We will continue to do that as we go forward.

We are constantly reviewing the situation nationally as to whether we need to make adjustments to our overall response to that risk through our flood risk management plans. We are due to publish a review and update of our flood risk management plans in 2027. That will be a review of the work that we have done and published previously, in 2018.

Has the OPW had engagement with Bord na Móna on its rewetting plans, particularly given our expected commitment under the nature restoration Act and the large amount of lands that Bord na Móna intends to flood or let back to a natural state of vegetation and water, especially in the midlands? We would have a large number of complaints from adjoining landowners that, because Bord na Móna has now absented itself from water level management, there is a huge risk and a large amount of flooding on lands that there never was previously.

I will interrupt the Senator for one second. That is one of those issues that I referred to that might be outside the remit, certainly of this meeting, and not on the terms that we had sent our witnesses. I am sure it is something that could be picked up afterwards. I am sure Mr. Casey might have the answer off the top of his head but it is a detailed question. It might be more appropriate for afterwards. I am conscious of being fair to our witnesses, who have been asked to come to discuss one specific issue, if that is okay.

That is fine.

I thank the witnesses for being here. Residents were here as witnesses recently. It was mentioned that 915 properties were damaged, along with critical infrastructure, including roads and so on. I think it was said that 74% of the properties that were damaged were in Midleton alone. Is that correct? Were those houses built in areas they should not have been or does it represent a systemic failure of the flood defences already in place? If so, what has changed since the flood defences for those houses were built? How is it that there was such an impact in Midleton?

In the 48-hour period of the Storm Babet event in October 2023, the volume of rain that fell was 125 mm. An unprecedented amount of water fell. On building on zoned lands or flood plains - I think that is the Senator's question-----

Is that a part of an issue?

No, it is not an issue I am aware of down there. When Cork County Council assesses applications for planning permission, there is a strict way of assessing them in accordance with the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage risk assessment for flooding and assessing mitigating measures that may need to be put in place. It is not an issue I am aware of in Midleton.

If this was absolutely unprecedented, there are lessons to be learned. Is it preventable, if there is another storm, such as Éowyn or whatever?

Yes, we are designing the new flood relief scheme in Midleton around the storm event that happened during Storm Babet, with those levels of rain. It was a one in 100 years storm event. We believe when we have that design, it will be effective under the same scenario.

With the millimetres or centimetres of rain already detailed, is that flood defence likely - it can never be guaranteed - to prevent the kind of damage that happened?

Following Storm Babet, we reviewed the proposed scheme design for Midleton and found that, largely, it would have protected Midleton from that event, but with small modifications to the scheme. We have since made those modifications to the scheme design, so I can say we are confident now that the design we are bringing forward for a flood relief scheme for Midleton would, after the construction of the scheme, protect the properties that were flooded if we had a recurrence of it.

One thing was clear when the witnesses were here. One lady whose name I cannot remember said that, even when it rains heavily, they are all on tenterhooks and wondering what will happen. They emphasised that they cannot obtain flood insurance so that has left them financially exposed. Have Cork County Council, Cork City Council and the OPW done anything to restore the insurability of those properties? Will the works they intend to do restore insurability for those residents? Will they also provide a timeline for those works?

Ultimately, decisions about insurance will be matters for the insurance companies and they will take those decisions on a commercial basis. However, following the delivery of the flood relief scheme for Midleton, once we provide the level of protection to the 100-year standard, we expect that community to be eligible for insurance against flood risk. We liaise closely with the insurance industry on the design standard we provide for our flood relief schemes. Generally, the 100-year defence standard, to which all our major schemes are designed, aligns with the standard acceptable to the insurance industry.

There are some concerns that insurance industries generally have when it comes to flood relief schemes. For example, they do not like the presence of removable barriers or barriers that have to be deployed ahead of a flood event, and they can bring some complexity to those considerations. In the main, however, the standard of protection we provide is acceptable to the insurance industry.

On that, is there any joined-up thinking between residents, Cork County Council and the OPW as regards approaching the insurance companies? I know it is an insurance company decision at the end of the day, but one thing the residents were clear about is that it is a horrible scenario for them to be in at present. Do they have any supports from the OPW to work with the insurance companies?

Probably the best line of approach to the insurance industry is through the policy lead on that, and that rests with the Department of Finance.

Okay. Have the residents themselves received any practical, logistical or financial supports from the council or the OPW? I refer to the people who have been flooded more than once who have appeared before us.

There are Government supports, humanitarian schemes and support schemes. The community in Midleton would have received supports from Government in the immediate aftermath of Storm Babet. They are schemes that are considered in the aftermath of major flood events such as Midleton. They were activated in the case of Storm Babet for Midleton and supports were made available both to residential recipients and business recipients.

My last question was on the timelines for the implementation-----

Mr. Meagher was indicating to come in.

Part of the other supports that are being implemented by Cork County Council and the OPW include the provision of the individual property protection, IPP, scheme, where we are providing floodgates, etc., to the properties-----

Are those the 71 units Mr. Meagher mentioned earlier?

It is approximately 1,800 openings. The number of those is, I think, 700-odd.

It is 721.

It is 721 houses locally. We are providing that also.

Okay. The final question is on the timeline for the implementation of these new flood defences that are being designed.

Currently, the timeline in Midleton is that we intend to make a planning submission in quarter 3 of this year. That is through An Coimisiún Pleanála. On the timeline from there on, we would have to wait and see how long that will take. That could be a year to 18 months. There is a design period after that. In Midleton, which I know is outside the scope of what we are talking about here, we are looking at an end date of 2031 for the delivery of that scheme.

I thank the Senator very much. I have a few questions of my own if our witnesses do not mind, although one is a comment. The residents who were impacted by this appeared before the committee. I welcome that both witnesses acknowledged in their opening statements the personal trauma and the impact this has on families. As the Chair of the committee, however, I feel it would be remiss of us not to record that again here. We heard from people, and it is not so much that their lives were destroyed, which they were to a certain extent, but also that they are holding their breath. Their lives are on hold and all for a drop of rain. We would really be living in the wrong country if we feared rain because we never know when it is going to happen. It is the only place in the world where rain can fall out of a clear blue sky. I have often said it. However, the impact of this on the people in the areas affected is real. I know they are watching, and the witnesses will know as well that they watch every single line and every word and everything that is uttered about this because it materially impacts how they are going to be able to live their lives.

I welcome the answer to the question. They did not build their homes in a place where that was always going to happen. What the witnesses have said to me is that events have overtaken them. Other things have happened around them that have now caused their houses to flood. We heard from people who are afraid to go on holidays. Not everybody gets to go on holiday, but people are afraid to leave their homes for any reason for an extended period of time, even overnight, in the winter. That causes them extreme distress. I wanted to record that here because, as a committee, we were very moved by what we heard and the pure human impact of what has happened. I fully appreciate that the witnesses have acknowledged the human impact, which is very welcome. I also know their job is to look at the bigger picture and not to peer in the window of every house. I get that. I want to record the quality of the testimony that was given and the pure human impact which was evident for all to see.

Deputy Buckley asked what it would take to get the projects in tranche 2 moved to tranche 1. Is that possible, probable or likely? I refer to issues relating to other projects that could impact on the capacity to have personnel on the ground. If everything goes to plan and the funding and everything else is in place, will the personnel be available? I ask Mr. Casey to say a few words about workforce planning specific to the projects we have outlined.

I acknowledge that there are some forms of compensation, but there are people who have lost things they will never be able to replace. They have lost baby photographs and things that cannot be replicated. There is a huge personal cost. I appreciate that the State has come in to take some of it, but in every single house impacted by this there is a cost on family finances. Sometimes that cannot be quantified and, therefore, cannot be compensated for, but that is a very real fact.

On moving from tranche 2 to tranche 1, we keep the progression and timing of the tranche 2 schemes under constant review. We have to balance the progression of tranche 2 with the impact that might have on the tranche 1 delivery. We have to ensure that when we move forward with tranche 2, it is not going to delay the delivery in tranche 1. We are balancing all of that. We are constantly looking at ways in which we can improve the efficiency of delivering our tranche 2 schemes when the conditions might be right to progress to tranche 2. We keep that under ongoing and constant review. I cannot give the Cathaoirleach a specific timeline today on when that might happen, but we are keeping that under constant review and assessment. We are looking at what we can do to ensure that can be done at the earliest possible time.

For the communities affected, there are things we can do to help them even though they may not be elevated or prioritised to tranche 1 level. Mr. Meagher and Ms Murphy highlighted in their opening statement the work under way in Castlemartyr, Mogeely, Killeagh and Rathcormac, more of which is planned to be done in the coming months. That work will continue. We are hopeful we will be able to find solutions through that work which will help those communities and deliver a level of flood mitigation to them, and possibly be able to do that within a faster timescale than if they were brought forward to tranche 1.

Is it a case of be careful what you wish for? It might actually happen without the move up to tranche 1 and there could be quicker progress made?

Yes.

We will certainly accept that.

We think there is potential to make progress in a shorter timescale by pursuing the approach we have outlined here.

I thank Mr. Casey.

Similar to what Mr. Casey just said, in Midleton we have had part 8 projects go ahead that are part of the scheme and we hope they will be delivered this year. The work we are now doing with the consultancy services for the other settlements is not work that would be lost. It is work, or part of the work, that would be done at the start of a tranche 2 anyway. That work will go towards that, and if anything is identified, we will look at the earliest opportunity to try to deliver as well.

The other question was on workforce planning. I mentioned the team that has now been assembled in Cork County Council for the delivery of these flood relief schemes. I think that scheme has been doubled since Storm Babet. We have 18 staff there now managing 17 minor schemes and six major schemes across the county. In addition to that we have very skilled consultancy services that we are availing of on all these schemes. We try to keep them apprised of the schemes that are coming up. It is to be hoped they are engaging in workforce planning and have the right people in place for these schemes when they do come.

Sorry to cut across you, Mr. Meagher, but my question was specifically on the large-scale projects which are planned which will need a lot of engineers and the type of expertise that will also be needed in Castlemartyr, Killeagh, etc. My question is not so much whether the council has enough for now but rather if there is a pipeline. Mr. Meagher was talking about projects that will happen five years from now. Is he talking to the young people in secondary school? They are the ones we need. Is there an expansion in the number of engineering places or is there another plan? Very often we find ourselves with large-scale infrastructure projects having gone through all the paperwork phase and then we begin recruitment when really those two things should happen together so that we are ready to go when the talking-about-it phase, as it were, is over.

We are identifying a lot of resources within Cork County Council as well – people who would be suitable for this type of work. In relation to the boots-on-the-ground pipeline, we do keep connected with a lot of the contractors locally too and keep them apprised of upcoming works. For example, Sorensen will be finishing a contract in the city very shortly. It has those skills now and it would be great to keep them going onto another project. We do try to keep them apprised.

Thank you.

Just to add, obviously we collaborate with the universities, UCC and MTU, and we bring students on board during the summer. We had two students working full time on Midleton last summer. We do use resources to try to encourage interest in what we do.

Absolutely.

The OPW also does that. We have expanded our graduate development programme in the last two years where we are looking to bring in graduates directly from university and develop them and train them in particular areas of flood risk management. Similar to Ms Murphy, we also give opportunities for students to come in ahead of their final year during the summer and get some experience with us. We provide those opportunities to try to encourage young people into this specialised area.

And particularly, Ms Murphy, we should be encouraging young women. I was at the Young Scientist exhibition recently and was struck – pleasantly so – by the number of young women with specific interest in engineering. More of us and we will change the world. That is a good thing.

I thank Mr. Meagher, Ms Murphy and Mr. Casey very sincerely for coming in and sharing their insight and expertise with us. The discussion we have had will inform the committee in our work and is very much appreciated. We appreciate their time and the insight they have given us.