Tag Archives: department of arts heritage and the gaeltacht

Shannon eels

Posted on Wednesday 20 June 2012 | Leave a comment

I have a page about the Shannon eel fishery here.

In April 2012 Frank Feighan TD asked many Dáil questions about the Shannon eel fishery; the answers provide a useful update to (and expansion of) the information on my page.

Leave a comment

Posted in Ashore, Built heritage, Economic activities, Engineering and construction, Extant waterways, Industrial heritage, Ireland, Irish waterways general, Natural heritage, Operations, People, Politics, Shannon, shannon estuary, Sources, The fishing trade, waterways, Waterways management

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Northsouthery latest

Posted on Tuesday 19 June 2012 | 3 comments

The joint communiqué issued after the June 2012 plenary meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council is available on the NSMC website. The waterways bits:

5. The Council noted the Progress Report prepared by the NSMC Joint Secretaries on the work of the North South Bodies and in the other NSMC areas for co-operation and welcomed the following key developments: […] preparation by Waterways Ireland of options for advancing the Ulster Canal project […].

I have asked Waterways Ireland for a copy of the options document ….

ST. ANDREWS AGREEMENT REVIEW

10. Ministers endorsed the following recommendations concerning North South Bodies:

Waterways Ireland

  • sponsor departments to consider options around the setting up of a Board that would deliver the benefits of improved accountability and governance for Waterways Ireland but comprising less than twelve members and to present proposals for consideration at a future NSMC Inland Waterways meeting;
  • sponsor departments to implement as appropriate, through changes to the legislation or other administrative means, a de minimis provision for dealing with Waterways Ireland disposal of a waterway or part of a waterway;
  • sponsor departments to review the current provisions in relation to Waterways Ireland’s commercial activities to ensure that these are adequate and to report to a future NSMC Inland Waterways meeting; and
  • taking account of the current economic and fiscal circumstances, no further action is taken at this time to extend the remit of Waterways Ireland.

So the Newry and Portadown folk will be disappointed and those on the Lagan will be relieved. WI will get a bit more freedom in property and commercial operations but will have a Board (whose relationship with the sponsor departments will be interesting).

The communiqué also says:

11. Ministers noted that work is progressing on a review of the Financial Memoranda of the North/South Bodies with the aim of having the review completed by end-December 2012. In relation to shared services, it was noted that work has commenced on exploring the potential for providing efficiency savings within the North/South Bodies with a view to a report to the NSMC in Autumn 2012.

That will be nice, though the southern government seems to have ignored the provisions of the existing memorandum in its proposal (which ran aground in the property crash) to grab some of WI’s assets to pay for the canal to Clones.

Finally, the communiqué says:

12. The Council noted that the First Minister, deputy first Minister, Taoiseach and Tánaiste will reflect and consult on Terms of Reference 2 and 3 with a view to decisions being taken at the November 2012 Plenary meeting.

That’s about another part of the St Andrews Agreement Review. The report that made the four recommendations discussed earlier was a report on the first of three terms of reference; the other two have not yet been tackled. They are:

2. To examine objectively the case for additional bodies and areas of co-operation within the NSMC where mutual benefit would be derived; and
3. To input into the work on the identification of a suitable substitute for the proposed Lights Agency of the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission.

The review was agreed upon five years ago, so speed doesn’t seem to be of great importance in these matters.

3 Comments

Posted in Economic activities, Engineering and construction, Extant waterways, Foreign parts, Ireland, Operations, Politics, Sources, Ulster Canal, Waterways management

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Government stimulus

Posted on Monday 14 May 2012 | 3 comments

According to the Irish Times:

Ahead of the summit later this month, Government departments have been told to draw up lists of capital projects with potential to create thousands of jobs for which funding would be sought if EU leaders agree on the package at the meeting to be held a week before polling day here.

Will DAHG be able to resist the temptation of suggesting the Clones canal? I’m sure that, since it discovered the project was going to cost almost one third more than it had originally believed, it has had teams of economists busily reassessing its, er, viability (and I’m expecting a visit from the easter bunny at any moment) so it will have its “business case” ready.

Still, there’s a slightly more cheering take on the matter here, where Michael Taft suggests that the government won’t be able to get much money for “stimulus”. I like the idea of using project bonds for the Clones Canal, though it might be hard to show that it qualified as “key strategic EU infrastructure in transport, energy and broadband” despite the Irish state’s delusions.

3 Comments

Posted in Economic activities, Engineering and construction, Foreign parts, Industrial heritage, Irish waterways general, Operations, Politics, Restoration and rebuilding, Ulster Canal, waterways, Waterways management

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

Heritage Council

Posted on Thursday 10 May 2012 | Leave a comment

The Heritage Council is now down wid da kidz in da hood, having acquired a facetweet page. Does this suggest that facetweeting is now becoming socially aceeptable? And it even has a YouTube thingie, where you can watch exciting videos of ministers making speeches.

Actually, the Heritage Council is becoming very with it, as the young folk say nowadays, aligning itself with the new reality that, unless it can show an economic payoff, its interests will be a low priority with the government.

You don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows, comme on dit, or at least comme Mr Dylan dit.

 

 

Leave a comment

Posted in Ashore, Built heritage, Economic activities, Extant waterways, Industrial heritage, Ireland, Irish waterways general, Natural heritage, Operations, People, Politics, Waterways management

Tagged , , ,

Support the Clones Canal

Posted on Wednesday 14 March 2012 | Leave a comment

It was suggested to me today that, because some boating organisations want the Clones Canal, the project must be worthy of support. I find that argument less than convincing. If I offer someone the benefit of a sum of money, without charge, I will not be surprised if that person likes the idea — but that won’t show that it’s a good deal for whoever bears the cost.

In this case, owners of boats are being offered the benefit of €45 million, so it’s not surprising that they like the idea. But I think they should be offered a practical method of demonstrating the depth of their support.

Accordingly, I propose that owners of registered boats on  the Shannon and the Erne be offered the opportunity to pay half the €45 million cost (the other half could be raised from a levy on the publicans of Clones, the other main beneficiaries). If there are 10,000 boats, the charge per owner, spread over three years, would be no more than €750 a year. Willingness to pay would provide more convincing evidence of support and would also make the project better value for the taxpayer.

 

Leave a comment

Posted in Ashore, Built heritage, Economic activities, Engineering and construction, Foreign parts, Forgotten navigations, Industrial heritage, Ireland, Operations, Politics, Restoration and rebuilding, Tourism, Ulster Canal, Uncategorized, waterways, Waterways management

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

DCAL, DAHG and WI

Posted on Sunday 11 March 2012 | Leave a comment

I was interested to see that DCAL has its own research programme [DOC file], but also makes use of other research services including the NI Continuous Household Survey:

To monitor engagement in culture and sport in Northern Ireland

The Continuous Household Survey (CHS) and the Young People Behaviour and Attitudes Survey (YPBAS) will continue to monitor engagement in sport, arts, museums and libraries in Northern Irelandfor adults and children. The CHS will also capture engagement by people in Northern Irelandat fisheries and waterways under DCAL’s control as well as engagement in Irish and Ulster-Scots languages and events. The barriers and benefits to engagement will also be explored.

DCAL and non-navigaBLE Waterways

I don’t know whether “waterways under DCAL’s control” are deemed to include those managed by Waterways Ireland as well as those directly controlled by DCAL:

The Department also has ownership of, and custodial responsibility for, those remaining sections of the Lagan and Coalisland Canals that remain in Government ownership following abandonment of navigation in the 1950s. An ongoing programme is in place for each of these highly popular towpaths to upgrade access for pedestrians, cyclists and disabled access.

I don’t suppose it would make much sense to ask questions about just two derelict waterways while ignoring those that are navigable, but the results are not shown on the CHS web pages: interested folk must ask DCAL direct.

I note that the DCAL Resource Accounts for the year ended 31 March 2011 [PDF] show that DCAL “Estimates provided for expenditure on […] certain inland waterways (including payments to the Rivers Agency), Waterways Ireland, […].” Later, we read:

Inland Waterways

DCAL manages and maintains 11 miles of the Lagan Towpath from Stranmillis to  Sprucefield; 3.5 miles of towpath at Soldierstown, Aghalee; 4.5 miles of towpath on the  Coalisland Canal; 22 water recreation sites; and shooting rights over the foreshore of Lough Erne. Work on the development of a policy on the re-opening of abandoned canals is in the preliminary stages.

Given that DCAL can own and run waterways, I wonder why the supporters of the Newry Canal did not seek to have it taken over by DCAL rather than by Waterways Ireland.

Water recreation

The non-navigable waterways are the second of DCAL’s three main activities. The first is this:

We are committed to developing the recreational potential of inland waterways through our Province-wide Water Recreation Programme.

Applicants, such as Local Authorities, are encouraged to work in partnership with the Department in providing and promoting water recreation facilities such as riverside paths and boat moorings for public use. Wherever practicable, works will incorporate disabled access facilities.

Again, the DCAL Resource Accounts for the year ended 31 March 2011 [PDF] provide more details:

Inland Waterways

[…] The Department continued to administer an annual Water Recreation Programme, amounting to £430k in 2010-11, aimed at developing the recreation and navigational potential of Northern Ireland’s Inland Waterways. Applicant organisations, primarily local authorities, were encouraged to work in partnership with the Department in the provision of water recreation facilities, such as riverside paths and canoe trails, complementing the Department’s continued commitment to upgrading the Lagan and Coalisland Canal towpaths for shared pedestrian and cyclist use. 9 new projects were completed during 2010-11. Funded projects were required to have an identifiable strategic value and where possible, contribute to the Department’s commitment to provide at least 5 kilometres of new or improved access for disabled persons each year.

This too would cover cooperation with the four local authorities who control the Newry Canal.

Oddly enough, inland waterways and fisheries are grouped together on DCAL’s website but they are in two separate divisions: waterways, for some reason, are in Culture whereas inland fisheries come under Sport, Museums and Recreation. DCAL does not, however, put waterways under southnorthery.

DCAL and DAHG

There is a useful contrast here with DAHG, which thinks that waterways exist purely to serve northsouthery: despite what WI thinks it is for …

Waterways Ireland has responsibility for the management, maintenance, development and restoration of inland navigable waterways principally for recreational purposes.

… DAHG does not appear to have adopted the view that waterways are for recreation. Perhaps if it gained responsibility for some waterways outside WI’s scope, it would develop a policy on recreational use of waterways. That would mean that, like DCAL …

The Department is also the sponsor department in Northern Ireland for Waterways Ireland which is the Cross-Border Body responsible for the management, maintenance, development and restoration of operational waterways throughout the island of Ireland.

… DAHG would be the department responsible for recreation on waterways, one (large) set of which are managed by WI, which in turn is controlled by the two departments.

The difficulty with DAHG’s current arrangements is that there is a division between theory and reality, but DAHG has organised its functions on the basis of theory. In reality, waterways are for recreation (or, if you prefer, leisure), but DAHG insists that they’re for northsouthery. Because that’s now been successfully routinised, waterways receive relatively little attention and are not, as far as I can see, considered as part of state provision for leisure or recreation. There can be no proper policy-making for the sector unless it’s grounded in reality.

Leave a comment

Posted in Economic activities, Engineering and construction, Extant waterways, Foreign parts, Forgotten navigations, Ireland, Irish waterways general, Operations, Politics, Uncategorized, waterways, Waterways management

Tagged , , , , , , ,

Monitoring Waterways Ireland

Posted on Saturday 10 March 2012 | Leave a comment

The Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure is the Northern Ireland department that shares with the Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht the responsibility for two north–south bodies, one of which is Waterways Ireland. DCAL’s organisation is described here. And on this page, you can find the minutes of departmental board meetings.

In the minutes of the meeting held on 14 December 2011, we read:

6.0       N/S Bodies Governance (Arthur Scott) (DB 90-11)

6.1       Arthur Scott spoke to paper DB 90-11 which highlights the key differences between the DCAL Sponsorship Manual and the Financial Memorandum for N/S [North/South] Bodies and the challenges this presents for DCAL officials in seeking to draw appropriate levels of assurance for the DCAL Accounting Officer (AO).  The Board were asked to note the key actions being taken to address these challenges.  These included:

6.1.1   Ongoing work with Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht (DAHG) to change the focus / nature of Waterways Ireland (WI) monitoring meetings.

6.1.2   Introduction of additional meetings between sponsor departments and the N/S Bodies to gain a better understanding of key issues and to be able to probe officials from the bodies about these.

6.1.3   A commitment by both AO’s to attend meetings about priority issues.

6.1.4   Briefing Ministers about key issues ahead of N/S Ministerial Council meetings.

6.2       The Board discussed governance and accountability arrangements and whether the Sponsorship Manual should apply the same way to N/S Bodies as it does with DCAL’s ALBs [arms-length bodies, I presume].  The Board agreed that the ALB Sponsorship Manual for DCAL, as it stands, should not apply to N/S Bodies.  Instead, a separate document is required with a starting point being the Financial Memorandum.

Action: Sinead McCartan to remove references to N/S Bodies from Sponsorship Manual.

6.3       Rosalie Flanagan said she would meet with her counterpart in DAHG, Joe Hamill, to discuss the Financial Memorandum and how DAHG draw their required assurances from it.

And in those for the following meeting, held on 21 January 2012, we read:

11.0    Quarterly Assurance Statements (Sinead McCartan – DB 7-12) […]

11.3    In relation to the delayed progress on the risk assessment exercise for N/S Bodies as highlighted on the Corporate Services Division QAS, Rosalie Flanagan confirmed that she has met with counterparts in the South and it is proposed that a new governance framework will be prepared for Ministers’ consideration.

Action:  Arthur Scott to incorporate the findings of the N/S risk assessment into the development of a new governance framework.

It seems that DCAL is pushing for tighter control over Waterways Ireland. If DAHG published its minutes [if it does, I can’t find them], we might be able to see what it feels about the matter.

 

 

 

 

Leave a comment

Posted in Economic activities, Engineering and construction, Extant waterways, Foreign parts, Ireland, Irish waterways general, Operations, People, Politics, Sources, Ulster Canal, waterways, Waterways management

Tagged , , , , , , ,

How much Dáil time …

Posted on Thursday 8 March 2012 | Leave a comment

… is wasted in asking and answering questions over and over again? I’d have thought that Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin TD (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein) would have realised that the government has discovered neither oil nor a crock of gold and that there is no money for a canal to Clones. The task of finding some is to be delegated to an “inter-agency group”, poor dears. I’d have thought it might be better to give the job to people with experience of unconventional fund-raising; there must be some such people around.

Leave a comment

Posted in Built heritage, Economic activities, Engineering and construction, Foreign parts, Forgotten navigations, Industrial heritage, Ireland, Irish waterways general, People, Politics, Restoration and rebuilding, Tourism, Ulster Canal, waterways, Waterways management

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

Public sector cutbacks

Posted on Friday 2 March 2012 | Leave a comment

The Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, which is ultimately in charge of waterways, has published an organisation chart [one-page PDF]. It shows that the department has a minister and a minister of state and a secretary general.

At the next level down there are five main divisions:

  • Corporate Affairs
  • Arts, Film, Music, Cultural Institutions
  • Heritage
  • Gaeilge, Gaeltacht & Islands
  • Central Translation Unit & Placenames.

Each of the first three is headed by an assistant secretary; the fourth has a Director of Irish and the fifth a plain director. The department is spread between offices in Galway, Killarney, Wexford and four locations in Dublin.

So where, I hear you ask, are waterways looked after? We have to come down to the next level, the principal officers, to find out. And there, we find that Corporate Affairs has three POs, one of whom is responsible for

HR, Strategic Planning, Corporate Governance, N/S Co-ordination & Waterways Irl.

That’s quite a lot of things for one person to be responsible for.

 

Leave a comment

Posted in Ashore, Economic activities, Extant waterways, Ireland, Irish waterways general, Operations, People, Politics, waterways, Waterways management

Tagged , , , , ,

Clones Canal update

Posted on Monday 27 February 2012 | Leave a comment

I’ve done a precis of developments since Novemebr 2011. There is nothing much new on the page, but it may assist new seekers after truth.

I’ve also given the overview a mild update, but without making major changes to its structure.

I’ve been making three main points about the Clones Canal proposal:

  • the expected costs are understated
  • the expected benefits are overstated
  • there is no funding available.

Just in case anyone from Clones, or from the government, is looking in, I want to point out that I have been shown to be right on two of those points so far.

First, I said that the €35 million cost figure, which was widely used by the project’s proponents, was unreliable. Waterways Ireland has recently said that the cost is now expected to be €38 million + VAT, which I gather is about €45 million. So has the government reassessed the economic case? If it has, it’s not admitting it.

Second, I said that I could not see how the Irish government was going to fund the project. I wrote:

So where is the money to come from? I’ve tried asking the public bodies that should know the answer, but they won’t tell me.

The government now admits that funding was not provided and it is clear that there will be no significant funding (ie enough to pay for construction) before 2014. Incidentally, my appeal against the refusal of information is with the Office of the Information Commissioner: I don’t believe that government should be able to keep matters of funding secret, especially if potential investors might be misled.

We have no result yet that would cast light on the expected benefits, but we do know that the boat-hire business has declined drastically in recent years. If Clones is to prosper, as I hope it will, it will need development initiatives that are easier, faster, cheaper and more effective than the proposed canal.

Leave a comment

Posted in Ashore, Built heritage, Economic activities, Engineering and construction, Extant waterways, Foreign parts, Forgotten navigations, Industrial heritage, Ireland, Operations, Politics, Restoration and rebuilding, Sources, Tourism, Ulster Canal, waterways, Waterways management

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , ,