Tag Archives: Ulster Canal

Alliance Party (NI) backs Ulster Canal

From the party’s 2011 manifesto:

Inland waterways and fisheries
Alliance calls for recognition of the needs to sustainably develop our inland waterways and fisheries – protecting and enhancing their bio-diversity while at the same time developing their recreational and leisure potential.

Alliance supports the regeneration and development of our inland waterways system, including the re-opening of the Ulster Canal. We recognise that funding needs to be explored on a partnership basis with interested bodies.

Alliance believes that improving water quality, including the revision of pollution controls, and appropriate planning measures are priorities for the effective and efficient management of inland waterways, recreational angling and commercial fisheries. We believe that increased co-operation between angling organisations and other environmental bodies would be beneficial, for example in meeting the challenge of biodiversity.

Alliance is committed to supporting the work of the North/South Body on Inland Waterways, to ensure a co-ordinated approach in border areas and to develop their potential throughout both areas.

The Ulster Canal and the NI Assembly elections

The importance of the Ulster Canal is shown in the number of times it is mentioned in the election manifestos of the political parties.

Number of mentions of Ulster Canal in DUP manifesto: 0
Number of mentions of Ulster Canal in SDLP manifesto: 0
Number of mentions of Ulster Canal in Sinn Féin manifesto: 0
Number of mentions of Ulster Canal in TUV manifesto: 0
Number of mentions of Ulster Canal in UUP manifesto: 0

Western Rail Corridor

The Irish Times reports that numbers of passengers on the Western Rail Corridor from Limerick to Galway are at about two thirds of the level assumed in the “business case”.

Well I never. Who could have known?

No more restoration.

Ulster Canal to lead to united Ireland, says French blogger

Google’s translation:

A great work that does not really captivates crowds in Ireland, unfortunately, apart from a few enthusiasts navigation, and it is a pity because the symbolic significance of these waterways, crisscrossing the island as a vector of unity, has not escaped the Dublin government has unblocked 35 million euros in 2007 to renovate the Ulster Canal, a waterway linking artery, once renovated, Belfast to Limerick (277 km apart for motorists).

More in French here.

Can it be that Craggy Island wants the Ulster Canal as a “vector of unity” rather than as a contribution to the economic development of Clones? Or that the Ulster Canal is (comme on dit) a Fenian plot? Surely not!

RVRC

It is necessary to draw public attention to a lamentable case of discrimination in Irish public policy and to announce the formation of a group to combat that discrimination and to ensure equal treatment for all.

Suppose you like travelling around Ireland in a white plastic whatsit. You need places to park, preferably free, with something nice to look at. You need services like toilets, showers, water and rubbish bins. You like to park close to fellow travellers and to meet them, perhaps for a barbie and some beer.

Your whatsit is well equipped with television and other entertainment; indeed the general standard of furnishing and equipment is very high. You can even carry toys — perhaps a dinghy and some bicycles — around with you, for some fresh air and exercise when you’ve reached a suitable place.

If your white plastic whatsit floats in water, you have the services of a cross-border implementation body, Waterways Ireland, spending millions (and charging practically nothing) on your leisure activities. You have government departments north and south looking after you, with the southern department keen to spend money borrowed from Germany on providing you with more places to go. And you have all sorts of other free services, like Coastguard and lifeboats, to help you out.

White plastic whatsits at Portumna Castle Harbour

If your white plastic whatsit has wheels, though, you are a pariah. You have no cross-border boy, no government departments, no free services, although your needs are the same as those of your boating brethren.

So owners of RVs (recreational vehicles, camper-vans, what you will) are forced to sneak in to Waterways Ireland harbours and to park inconspicuously along the edges. The best place to park is usually indicated by a sign.

Sign showing where to park at Killaloe

Parked beside Killaloe market

RVRC, the Recreational Vehicle Rights Campaign, seeks an end to this discrimination. We seek the provision of free facilities for camper-vans. We want a cross-border body of our own, RVways Ireland.

We have adopted Dana Lyons’s song RV as our anthem; you can listen to it free here (and while you’re at it see the animations of his best-known song here).

The Clones Canal

And this brings us, by a commodius vicus of recirculation, to Clones and the Craggy Island Canal. Boaters may like to see themselves as hardy mariners, sons of the sea who happen to be confined to inland waters, but economically they’re very similar to RVers. Many of them are older couples but some travel with children. They like going for weekends away; they need certain facilities; they don’t use hotels, B&Bs or other accommodation. They have enough equipment and supplies to prepare their own meals, but they do some shopping and may go to the pub or have a meal out.

As potential bringers of wealth, RVers have some advantages over boaters. You don’t have to spend €35 million to get them to your town; they are more mobile, so they’re not confined to a single site in the town; they can even park some distance outside and still get to the shops, pubs and restaurants. And RVers are hardy souls: in late February 2011 there was not a single boat in Portumna Castle Harbour but there were four RVs.

RVs in Portumna in February

So, given that Clones is an attractive destination, why is the Regeneration Partnership not now trying to attract camper-vans (and indeed campers and caravanners)? According to Discover Ireland, there is no caravan or camping site in Co Monaghan (although there could be sites whereof Discover Ireland is ignorant).

There are two points to this query. The first is that Clones could be doing something now to attract visitors, without waiting for Craggy Island to come up with €35 million. The second is that (assuming the blasted thing is ever built), after the excitement of having a canal dies down, Clones will have to do things to attract visitors. So why not start now?

All SEWn up?

Last week the Clones Regeneration Partnership Chairman called for politicians to support Craggy Island’s Canal to Clones. That’s the scheme being pushed by the Department of Community, Equality and Gaeltacht Affairs (which funds the Partnership’s Project Coordinator).

Then Brian Cassells, former President of the Inland Waterways Association of Ireland, joined the campaign, with an article in the Northern Standard. Happily, its Comments section is working (it was my fault that my comment was posted twice: I tried to edit it but ended up with two almost identical versions).

Brian says:

The phenomenal success of the Shannon/Erne waterway is largely down to the far sighted vision of the late Charles Haughey who had the dream of what has become an enormous tourist success.

I have argued that the success of the SEW is often over-stated and that much of the prosperity of the region is attributable to the businesses set up by Sean Quinn.

But there is another point that the Clones Canal’s fans overlook. According to askaboutireland.ie,

The £30 million funding [for the Shannon–Erne Waterway] came mainly from the European Union Regional Development Fund, the International Fund for Ireland and the E.S.B.

I have not been able to find any exact breakdown of who contributed how much, but it does seem that some large proportion of the costs was not paid by the taxpayers of either Ireland or Northern Ireland. That makes for a much better return on whatever amount of capital they employed.

This time, though, that’s not going to apply. The days of free Euroloot are over, and I haven’t heard that either the IFI or the ESB will be contributing.

Maybe the good people in Craggy Island are relying on winning the lottery?

 

 

Let joy be unconfined

I was really worried today. Yesterday was the deadline for Craggy Island, the Department of Community, Equality and Gaeltacht Affairs, to respond to my Freedom of Information Request for info on funding of the Clones (formerly Ulster) Canal, the insane project being pushed by Craggy Island. So I expected the response in today’s post.

I have been maintaining that Craggy Island hasn’t got the money and doesn’t know where it’s going to get it. But if they granted my FOI request, and showed funding streams providing lots of lovely lolly going into a hole in the ground over the next several years, I’d look a bit of an idiot. It wouldn’t take much to shut me up, though: just a tiny bit of evidence (a memo from the Department of Finance, say, or a budget or projected cashflow) that the money was available.

So imagine my joy when I got a four-page letter, an eight-page schedule of documents (showing, for most of them, why I couldn’t see them) and a pile of miscellaneous crap –ministerial speeches and suchlike — that I was allowed to see.

My faith is reinforced. They haven’t got the money. But I’m going to help, by appealing the decision and thus contributing even more to the departmental coffers.

Something in the water?

Readers may have realised that I don’t think much of the proposal to restore or rebuild the Ulster Canal. But I have to admit that it is not the most insane canal restoration proposal to have been made in the last few years. Even the restoration of the Strabane Canal doesn’t merit that accolade.

No: the outright winner has to be the Erne Canal proposal. Happily, despite support from Mary Coughlan, TD for the area and Tánaiste (deputy prime minister), the proposal doesn’t seem to have got anywhere.

What do all three of these proposals have in common?

Northsouthery, that’s what.

The Clones dudes

The Comments section on the Clones Regeneration Partnership blog is still not working, so my posting still hasn’t appeared. They seem to be using the free version of WordPress; maybe I should offer to help them ….

Anyway, they have been busy posting new stuff of their own to the blog. The Chairman of the Partnership has written a long post about the importance of the Irish taxpayer’s spending at least €35 million on the Clones Canal and urging the electors of Monaghan to demand that their representatives support the thing. In fact, he wants them to ensure that the entire Ulster Canal is reopened, all the way to Lough Neagh.

Wishing won’t make it so. I have written many pages explaining (a) why this is a bad idea and (b) why it’s most unlikely to happen (Ulster says no) and there is no point in my repeating them here. I’ll just note that I feel sorry for the good people of Clones: they have been misled by the campaign, conducted by the Department of Community, Equality and Gaeltacht Affairs, to impose a bit of northsouthery on Northern Ireland.

From the point of view of Clones folk, spending €35 million on a canal to Clones may make sense. The canal itself is likely to be pretty well useless, but the pubs of the area are likely to benefit from the beer money of the construction workers. That, though, doesn’t mean that this is a good deal for the Irish taxpayer: in fact it’s a rotten deal.

Risks of investing in waterways businesses

But even if it does happen, the good people of Clones should be wary of committing any of their own money to setting up businesses. Towards the bottom of this page you’ll see photos of the Sliabh-an-Iarainn Sunset and the Gertie, trip-boats that operated on the Shannon–Erne Waterway for some time; neither now operates there. And here are two small boats, which were hired out by the day from Ballinamore.

Former day-hire boats at Ballinamore

If you don’t think you can recoup your investment back in three years, forget it.

The Chairman says

The restoration of the Ulster Canal would bring direct economic benefits to the towns and villages in close proximity throughout the Ulster Canal corridor. It would provide the economic engine for a whole region to regenerate, as has been shown from the experience of the restoration of the Ballinamore/Ballyconnel Canal, where populations in those areas adjoining that Canal have grown for the first time in many years.

The benefits won’t be any greater because of being spread more widely (and thus thinly). This seems like an attempt at drumming up support from outside Clones.

The economic benefits cannot be understated.

I think he means “cannot be overstated” or perhaps “should not be understated”: they have been consistently overstated, for many years, by the canal’s proponents. It’s the sort of “ah sure it’ll be grand” thinking that has ruined the Irish economy: an unwillingness to accept, or even to think about, anything other than the most optimistic scenario. You decide on what you want to do; then you look for some evidence you can quote to support your decision — and you ignore all evidence to the contrary, or suggest that sceptics should commit suicide.

Remember, this project has been consistently backed by the Fianna Fáil government, the one that brought you ghost estates, empty office blocks, uncompleted retail developments, vacant hotels and an enormous amount of debt that citizens will be paying off for years to come. But for some reason they think a canal, built when the boat-hire industry is contracting, is a good investment ….

Welcome new readers

I suspect that the Clones Project Coordinator, Gerry Darby, has been reading this site, because he has today posted a page headed See cost benefit analysis of Ulster Canal by Marion Shields. Gerry (whose position is funded by the Department of Community, Equality and Gaelteacht Affairs — the very people pushing the Ulster Canal project) may have been following in my footsteps, because many months ago I tried to see if there had been any cost-benefit analysis of the proposal. There should have been one, according to one Brian Cowen, former Minister for Finance, but I couldn’t find one.

I did find Marion Shiels’s piece. It may be necessary to explain, to persons unfamiliar with the traditional usages of the College of the Holy and Undivided Trinity of Queen Elizabeth near Dublin, that a Senior Sophister, which is what Marion Shiels was at the time, is a final-year undergraduate student. Her piece, in other words, is not the work of a professional, and does not purport to be such.

But the other point to be made about the document is that it is not in fact a cost-benefit analysis: more a discussion of such analysis. Note, for instance, that there are very few figures, especially for benefits, yet

The guiding principle is to list all parties affected by an intervention and place a monetary value of the effect it has on their welfare as it would be valued by them.

Statements like “Hence, the revenue that could be expected from these fleets is enormous ….” don’t constitute analysis of benefits.

If there is a proper cost-benefit analysis out there, I’d like to see it.

And, of course, I’d like to know where Gerry’s funders intend to get the money to pay for the Clones Canal.

 

Waterways restoration? No thanks

An article in the Irish Times about railway restoration has prompted me to set out my views on waterways restoration. Essentially, I don’t believe public funds should be spent on projects that won’t provide a decent return, but I do favour small-scale conservation, opening up walking and cycling routes along waterways and marketing them to industrial heritage enthusiasts (and others).