Tag Archives: Dublin

VdeP and the canal turf trade

My eye was caught this morning by one point in an Irish Times story about the Society of St Vincent de Paul:

One of the organisation’s most frequent requests for help at present is for solid fuel.

“People are using their fireplaces again. It’s too expensive for them to fill the tank with oil, or pay electricity heating bills and so we are getting huge demand for coal and briquettes,” says Kenny. “There is real poverty in this country now. We hear their stories every day.”

That was one of the reasons the canal-borne turf trade lasted so long in Dublin. Turf had two advantages. First, it did not require a grate, which was an expensive piece of equipment. And, second, you could buy it in small quantities. Coal had to be bought in large quantities, eg a quarter of a ton, so you needed spare cash and you also needed a secure place to store the fuel.

Turf, on the other hand, could be bought in small quantities, a few sods at a time, for small amounts of money. During a coal shortage in 1926, for instance, the Irish Times reported:

Early yesterday morning there were large supplies of brown turf at several points along the Grand Canal in Dublin, but these were quickly sold off at famine prices. Before the coal strike this quality of hand-dug turf was sold at two sods a penny, and sometimes cheaper. By Friday last the price had risen to tenpence per dozen sods; yesterday it was being retailed at a shilling a dozen when carried away from the dumps, while hawkers in the streets were reaping a rich harvest selling turf to importunate poor people at 1.5d a sod or 1/6 a dozen.

Poor people complained bitterly that one dealer refused to sell in small quantities; instead he sold cartloads to hawkers and bellmen at a shilling a dozen. The hawkers took the turf a little distance from the canal bank, and sold it in small lots at three halfpence a sod, making a clear profit of 50 per cent.

Turf, especially the brown turf sold in Dublin (as opposed to the black turf used in the south and west), was a less efficient fuel than coal, but it could be bought for small sums and did not require a large initial outlay.

The Vincent de Paul website is here; it accepts donations.

Waterways Ireland asset disposals

I was interested in Waterways Ireland’s programme for disposal of assets. I wrote asking for:

  • a list and details of the assets disposed of since 1 January 2010, including the amounts realised. I said that I was particularly interested in disposals of land and built assets (as opposed, say, to old machinery)
  • a list and details of the assets planned to be disposed of between the date of my enquiry and 31 December 2012
  • an account of the uses to which the funds realised have been, are being or will be put
  • a list of land and built assets being leased or rented out by Waterways Ireland.

I had mentioned some of these disposals here when the North/South Ministerial Council [NSMC] approved them, but I had no information on their value.

WI very kindly provided the information; it’s easier to deal with it in reverse order.

Land and built assets being leased or rented out

WI said:

Waterways Ireland currently leases a total of 233 properties, comprising (1) land, (2) buildings and (3) land and buildings. Of these properties, 121 are on the Grand Canal, 50 on the Royal Canal, 3 on the Barrow Navigation, 2 on the Lower Bann Navigation, 2 on the Shannon Erne Waterway and 55 on the Shannon Navigation. The compilation of the full list will take some time due to pressure of work coming up to the end of year. However, if there are specific areas, navigations or regions of particular interest, every effort will be made to provide the information as quickly as possible.

That’s quite a lot of leases, so I said that I was happy to wait.

The application of funds

WI said:

The funds raised are principally used for capital works in the relevant jurisdiction.

So if something is sold in NI, the money is used there. That is consonant with WI’s funding arrangements for capital projects (other than the Clones Sheugh). As far as I can see, all the property disposed of was in the republic.

Note that the disposals (rightly) do not go to supplement grant income for current expenditure.

Disposals 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2012

WI very kindly sent me an Excel file listing the disposals, only one of which fell into the category covered by my second question (planned to be disposed of between the date of my enquiry and 31 December 2012), so I’m dealing with both questions under one heading. WI said:

The 2010 & 2011 figures have been extracted from Waterways Ireland’s Audited Accounts and represent the Gross amount received i.e. before costs. The 2012 figures have not yet been audited.

The first point to be made is that the total value of property disposals over three years was only €529,557.19: a little over half a million euro in the context of capital expenditure for the three years of about €30,000,000: €21m in 2010 and €5m in 2011, according to WI’s annual accounts, and an amount slightly smaller than 2011’s budgeted for in 2012. So the asset disposals are not very important in WI’s overall capital spending.

disposals to public bodies

Several of the disposals were to other public bodies, allowing them (I imagine) to build bridges, lay pipes and so on. There may also (I imagine) have been disposals of small parcels of land that WI didn’t need but the other body could use. Here are the disposals that seem to fall into that category:

  • Long Lease of Property at Ballyconnell to Cavan County Council: €18,100.00
  • Long Lease of Property at Reilly’s Bridge, Dublin to Iarnrod Eireann: €23,000. This was, I think, what the NSMC called “granting of a 99 year lease to Córas Iompair Éireann for the proposed construction of a road bridge, crossing the Royal Canal at Ratoath Road, Dublin”
  • Long Lease of Property at Lesson Street, Dublin to Dublin City Council: €5,100.00. This may have been what allowed the Council to bury utility ducts under the towpath
  • Long Lease of Lands at Tullamore re: N52: €25,000.00
  • Grant of Easement at Ballygoran to Kildare County Council: €7,500. This may have been to allow Kildare County Council to run water pipes across the Royal Canal near Pike Bridge
  • Long Lease of Lands at Kilkenny re: N9/N10: €41,791.50
  • Long Lease of Lands at Fingal re: M50/N3: €48,582.62.

There was also a Grant of Right of Way at Ballyleague, Co. Roscommon (presumably at WI’s harbour on the west of the Shannon, opposite Lanesborough) for €5,000. No further information is provided but this looks like another pro forma grant of access, perhaps to the local authority. If you know more, please leave a Comment below.

Delwood

Delwood Park is in Castleknock, Dublin 15, and part of it backs on to the Royal Canal. Delwood Close is east of Delwood Park and runs towards the canal.

In 2010/11 WI sold “two parcels of land at Delwood Close, Castleknock” for €60,000 and in 2012 it sold “9 Plots to rear of Delwood Park, Castleknock” for €36,000. I don’t know who bought them so I don’t know whether the residents were extending their gardens or Iarnród Éireann wanted to build a new platform or provide a bridge over the canal from Delwood to the railway …. Local info welcome.

In the bogs

In 2010/11 WI sold property at Ferbane, Co Offaly, on the Grand Canal, for €100.00. In 2012 it sold three properties at Derrycooley, south of Pollagh, which is also on the Grand Canal, for €587.00, 750.00 and €750.00 respectively, and it expects to sell property at Pollagh for €6,750.00 before the end of 2012. That’s a total of less than €9,000.00. I don’t know what land this is, or why WI owns it, but at the prices I suspect it’s bog. Could it have been associated with Turraun?

The rest

The lowest price achieved was for “Long Lease of Property at Lough Ree”, which earned “No Premium”, which I take it means that there was no charge. I don’t know what property that was for; did WI support any charitable or similarly worthy endeavour on Lough Ree in 2012?

The highest price was €150,000.00 for “Sale of Freehold Interest of Property in Salins, Co. Kildare”. Again, I would welcome information on the property. In fact, that applies to all of these, so I won’t repeat it.

The second highest price was €87,500.00 for “Sale of Lots at Derrymullen, Robertstown, Co. Kildare”, which is where Lowtown is. And the final two were €19,046.07 for “Sale of Lands at Albert Lough [presumably that should be Lock], Drumsna” and €19,000 for “Sale of Freehold Interest in Properties at Dolphins Barn, Dublin”, which may have been land underlying the two harbours formerly to be found there.

Dolphin's Barn

Dolphin’s Barn

My OSI logo and permit number for websiteWasn’t that fun?

 

WI programme costs

From WI's annual report for 2011

From WI’s annual report for 2011

Note that programme costs do not include staff costs, as the income and expenditure account for y/e 31 December 2011 makes clear.

From WI's annual report for 2011

From WI’s annual report for 2011

The most startling thing in the programme costs is that Shannon costs have increased 57% while Grand Canal costs have decreased by 25%. I presume that the change is in the Civil Construction/Supply contract costs, as the other items don’t seem to have enough scope for such large changes. It would be interesting to know what the contracts were. The accounts of Grand Canal improvements on pages 12 and 16 don’t suggest any diminution in activity, although they are not specific enough to be definitive; the account for the Shannon on page 17 mention some new undertakings, of which the most significant was perhaps the new mooring at Killaloe, whereof the Chief Executive said in the Foreword:

From WI's annual report for 2011

From WI’s annual report for 2011

And so, I’m sure, say all of us.

But wouldn’t that be a capital cost? I can’t work out how the income and expenditure figures link to the activities covered in the descriptions of achievements.

WI revaluations

From WI's annual report for 2011

From WI’s annual report for 2011

WI and NAMA

From WI's annual report for 2011

From WI’s annual report for 2011

Southron sheughs

For reasons now lost in the mists of time, I forgot to draw the attention of Learned Readers to an exchange in the Dáil on 18 April 2012, which was reported on the invaluable KildareStreet website as well as on the Oireachtas site. Jack Wall, a Labour TD for Kildare South, asked this question:

Question 702: To ask the Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht the position regarding the canal system under Waterways Ireland; the plans the agency has for the development of the canals; the number of lock keepers in the system; if there are any vacancies; if so, when same will be filled and the mechanism that will be adopted to do so; if the agency has any plans to refurbish existing systems that are not in use at present; if the agency has any plans to increase the number of berthings on the canals and if so, in which areas; if the traffic on the canals has shown a percentage increase over each year for the past three years; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18431/12]

Now, that’s a bit of a portmanteau question. I wonder whether Jack Wall was prompted to ask about lock keepers but not quite well enough briefed to ask follow-up questions. The minister, Jimmy Deenihan, gave a four-paragraph answer, and I’m going to break it up so that I can discuss each element individually.

Waffle

The minister’s first paragraph was background music:

Since its formation in 1999, Waterways Ireland has continued to upgrade the facilities on the canals through the capital allocations under the National Development Plans. The canals system has benefited extremely well during that time, particularly with the number of additional mooring and landing spaces that have been made available. The provision of further mooring space will be dependent on available finance and priorities over the coming years.

I’m going to move the third paragraph up and deal with it next.

Lockkeepers

The minister said:

I am informed by Waterways Ireland that there are 20 lock keepers employed at present on the Grand Canal and Barrow Navigation. A number of staff have retired recently and decisions on their replacement will be taken having regard to the business needs of the organisation. I understand that Waterways Ireland is not planning to recruit lock keepers at this time. Any posts filled will be either by internal transfer or external recruitment, depending on the particular circumstances.

Although the minister mentions the Royal Canal elsewhere in his answer, and the question certainly does not exclude the Royal, the minister doesn’t mention it in this paragraph. In fact, there are several things the minister doesn’t mention:

  • that there are no lockkeepers on the Royal
  • that agency staff have been employed
  • that, far from considering recruiting replacement lockkeepers, Waterways Ireland might be considering reducing their numbers, or at least assigning some of them to other duties, perhaps on the Royal.

Now, I’m not saying that any of those actualities or possibilities is necessarily a bad thing. In fact, given the virtual absence of lockkeepers on the Canal & River Trust’s English and Welsh canals, it’s hard to see why the Irish canals, with much lower traffic, need so many.

But my point here is that a TD, and especially a Labour Party TD (haven’t they something to do with supporting workers?), might be presumed to be interested in the aspects that the minister did not mention. The minister’s answer was true but incomplete.

For the 2011 election Fine Gael published a document called Reinventing Government, with section headings on “More Open and Transparent Policy-Making Processes” and “New Systems of Openness and Transparency”. Where are they?

Stop digging

Here is the minister’s second paragraph:

My Department’s 2012 capital allocation for Waterways Ireland is €4.5m. This will facilitate continued investment in the development and restoration of the inland waterways. The main thrust of the refurbishment of the waterways over the next few years will be focused on the re-opening of the Ulster Canal from Upper Lough Erne to Clones. However, Waterways Ireland is also undertaking feasibility studies on the Kilbeggan Branch of the Grand Canal and on the Longford Branch of the Royal Canal. These are due to be completed by the end of 2013.

AAAARRRGGGH!

They’re thinking of digging even more sheughs!

Look. I know that engineers love to have excuses (and money) to do engineering: all that kit, wellies and hard hats, muck-shifting and the satisfying feeling that you are bringing joy (and tourists) to a small town. But it’s a waste of time and money. And there is absolutely no point in doing feasibility studies: what you want are cost-benefit analyses. Pretty well every single canal ever built with public funding in Ireland has been a waste of money and there is no reason to believe that relining the canals to Longford and Kilbeggan will be any better. I mean, look at the Naas Branch: very scenic, but hardly anyone ever goes there other than in convoy.

What you want to do is to explain, politely, to the TDs of Longford and Kilbeggan that they can have canals only if they will agree to having all other public services (including the drinking-water supply) cut off. But of course both Kilbeggan and Longford already have ways of attracting tourists. Kilbeggan has a distillery while Longford has an absence of signposts, especially to Athlone, thus causing motorists to drive around in ever-decreasing circles until they imitate the oozlum bird.

I mean, the canal age is over; this is the age of the camper van.

Traffic

Here is the minister’s final paragraph.

I am informed that boat traffic numbers on the Grand Canal and Barrow Navigation have remained fairly constant over 2009 and 2010. In 2011 the numbers increased by 30% following the re-opening of the Royal Canal and the fact that access was available to the Tall Ships event in Waterford.

Now this is really interesting, for three reasons:

  • first, Waterways Ireland keeps telling me that it cannot produce any usage figures for the canals and the Barrow. So on what traffic numbers are the minister’s statements based?
  • second, note that the basis of comparison between the earlier years (2009 and 2010) and the later (2011) is not clear. The Royal was not officially open during the earlier years, although there was some traffic. Was it counted? And does the 2011 figure that shows the 30% increase include Royal figures (in which case it would be an invalid comparison) or not (in which case the few boats doing the complete triangular route caused a huge increase in traffic)?
  • third, note that the minister does not give any actual usage figures. Could it be that they are very small?

What the canals and the Barrow need is action to increase the amount of traffic, especially in summer (when few people travel because of weed and sometimes water shortages) and winter (when few travel because it’s miserable). Adding extensions only spreads the existing traffic more thinly over a larger number of destinations. When you get to the stage of having traffic jams at locks, you can begin to think about extra destinations. Until then, put the shovels away.

WI has won an award

WI has won the Public Sector Award from the [Dublin] Docklands Business Forum. The award is for

[…] its active contribution to the Docklands Summer Festival, the South Docks Festival, Tall Ships Festival and Docklands community life throughout 2012.

With docklands moorings becoming available, WI may have a chance of retaining its award next year.

Incidentally, we learned earlier this week about music at the Box in the Docks; the Public Sector Award press release has more information about the Box:

Waterways Ireland owns and manages a multipurpose centre in the Basin which is used as a Visitor Centre during the summer season and provided a linchpin for the festival and events as well as community activity such as the Waterways Ireland Community Choir.

And we hear a rumour that models are being built ….

By the way, WI is compiling its events guide for next year: get your event in to them by 25 January 2013.

Music box in the docks

WI PR here.

More mooring locations on the canals

From a WI presser received this afternoon:

The second set of locations offering the E.M.P include the Floating Moorings on the Grand Canal Dock beside the Waterways Ireland Visitor Centre on which a permit will be offered until March 2013. Additionally extended mooring locations will also be opened on the Grand Canal near Lock 34 in Co Offaly, Pike Bridge in Co Kildare and Abbeyshrule in Co Longford. The full details of the locations including the GPS co-ordinates, the Application Form and Guidance Notes will be available on www.waterwaysireland.org from the 3rd December.

Update 4 December 2012: the press release is now on the WI site.

Spencer Dock

The Royal Canal meets the River Liffey at Spencer Dock (more or less: older OSI maps suggest that the section between Sheriff Street and the Liffey is Royal Canal Docks, with Spender Docks north of Sheriff Street). Much development has been proposed, and perhaps undertaken, in the area, where CIE (the public transport authority) owned much land.

Now, the Sunday Business Post tells us [perhaps behind a paywall], CIE’s subsidiary Irish Rail, which runs railways, is to sell land at Spencer Dock to a “private sector buyer”. The proceeds will enable Irish Rail to get rid of another 120 workers: it planned to lay off 300 workers this year but only 89 left because Irish Rail could not afford the terms of a voluntary redundancy scheme. The departures will reduce its wage bill.

I don’t really understand why CIE doesn’t simply shut down Irish Rail altogether, with the possible exception of the Dublin commuter services. Even its main-line trains are surely unnecessary now that most major conurbations are linked by motorways, on many (if not all) of which Bus Éireann, another subsidiary of CIE, runs express services. Lunatic ideas like the Western Rail Corridor don’t help, of course, but when, as the SBP reports,

[…] a train was recently left stranded in Galway after a local supplier refused to provide further credit […]

and when the company (again according to the SBP) cannot afford toilet rolls or receipt rolls for credit card machines, it may be that the market is trying to give the owners of the business a message: “close down now”.