Tag Archives: Ulster Canal

No news is good news … perhaps

Extracts from the Joint Communiqué issued after the 11th Plenary Meeting of the North South Ministerial Council on 21 January 2011:

3. Ministers discussed a range of common challenges and shared views on the economy, the banks and NAMA. They recognised the constraints on budgets in both jurisdictions and the ongoing discussions between the two Finance Ministers to identify potential cost savings through co-operation and sharing were welcomed. There was a desire to maximise access to EU funding and
resources.

6. Ministers noted the Progress Report on the ten NSMC meetings which have been held since the last Plenary meeting in July 2010 and welcomed the mutually beneficial co-operation taken forward including that:

[…] The restoration of the Royal Canal to reconnect it to the Shannon has  been completed and a preferred route for the Clones to Upper Lough Erne section of the Ulster Canal has been identified.

No exciting announcement there, so the bulldozers have not yet been set rolling on the Clones Canal. Phew. Maybe we’ve had to choose between the canal to Clones and the road to Londonderry/Derry and the road has won ….

Cost-benefit analysis

Here is an extract from what Mr Cowen, then Minister for Finance, said in Dáil Éireann (Volume 631) on 15 February 2007 about the National Development Plan:

Value for money is also a central theme in the delivery of the planned investment. Most of the capital projects, notably in the key area of transport, are being delivered on or below budget and, in some instances, ahead of schedule. Building on this performance, all expenditure under the National Development Plan 2007-2013 will be subject, as appropriate, to a robust value for money framework.

Among the key elements of this framework are that all projects will be subject to project appraisal, all capital projects over €30 million will require a full cost benefit analysis, the introduction of new procurement arrangements which will deliver greater cost certainty and evaluations under the value for money and policy reviews will be published and submitted to the relevant select committees of the Oireachtas.

In the coming period, my Department will be elaborating on the monitoring process to be put in place to measure progress under the plan. We envisage a streamlined, focused ap proach whereby progress can be readily assessed by reference to relevant financial and physical indicators. We will avoid the bureaucratic, committee-laden reporting process under previous plans, which was a source of dissatisfaction as expressed in the consultation process. The emphasis will be on efficient delivery and transparent reporting. A key new feature is the formal submission of an annual report on plan progress to the Houses of the Oireachtas.

The Clones Canal, stated to cost €35 million, clearly falls into the category of projects for which a full cost benefit analysis is required.

So where is it?

 

Saving the Clones investors

I’ve moved most of the original contents of this post to Ulster Canal 13.

I mentioned elsewhere that the Department of Community, Equality and Gaeltacht Affairs is known to some people as Craggy Island. Wikipedia tells us that

The real Craggy Island seen from helicopter shots is Inisheer.

And we learn in today’s Irish Times that Craggy Island is helping to provide subsidised electric cars on the Aran Islands including Inisheer (Inis Oirr), the “real Craggy Island”.

In other news

My most recent email to the Department of Community, Equality and Gaeltacht Affairs about the funding of the canal has not yet had a response.

My Freedom of Information request to the Department of Community, Equality and Gaeltacht Affairs about the funding of the canal has been acknowledged.

Budget 2011: Waterways Ireland

Money to be paid by Dept of Community, Equality and Gaeltacht Affairs to Waterways Ireland in 2011:

  • current expenditure down from €25,585,000 to €24,335,000 (I make that a cut of just under 5%)
  • capital expenditure down from €8,000,000 to €6,000,000 (25%)
  • total down from €33,585,000 to €30,335,000 (about 10%).

 

The Ulster Canal and WI assets

I’ve received a partial response (described as a full release, but actually ignoring several of my questions) from Waterways Ireland to some questions about the Ulster Canal. You can read about it here; it includes interesting information about the current valuation of sites in Dublin that might have raised money for the construction of the canal to Clones.

I’m writing this in advance of the Irish budget, due on 7 December 2010; it will be interesting to see whether Ajai Chopra gives the Department of Community, Equality and Gaeltacht Affairs enough capital to pay for the first year’s proposed work on the canal.

The Ulster Canal: abandon it now

I have now completed an examination of the proposals for the reconstruction of a section of the Ulster Canal from Lough Erne to the town of Clones in Co Monaghan. My conclusions are linked from this page, which also contains a brief summary of my views.

Ulster Canal 0: overview presents the main points of the argument in about 3,600 words. It does not contain most of the quotations and omits the references; it also omits some sections of the argument. However, it’s about one fifth of the length of the whole thing.

Ulster Canal 1 to Ulster Canal 10 present the argument under ten headings, amounting to about 18,500 words in all. That may be too much for most people. There are no photos or other illustrations, and most of the argument is about economics or politics.

It will be clear that I do not have full information; I will be glad to have Comments from anyone who can fill the gaps or correct anything I’ve got wrong.

For anyone who can’t wait, here is a copy of the summary of my views.

Summary

The Irish government has been pushing, since the 1990s, for the restoration of the Ulster Canal. Several studies have been commissioned; all of them show that the project is uneconomic. At no stage has either the UK or the Northern Ireland administration shown any willingness to commit funding to the project. As a result, the Irish government has scaled back its ambitions, proposing to fund the construction of a canal from Lough Erne to Clones in Co Monaghan: it would cross the border several times, but it would pass through no significant conurbation on the northern side.

However, this scaled-back project makes even less sense than the proposal for full restoration, and there is no reason to believe that the canal will ever get any further than Clones. The Irish government might, I suppose, decide to dig on to Monaghan, as a form of famine relief work, but there is no evidence that the Northern Ireland Executive will ever put money into completing the route to Lough Neagh.

The costs of the proposal have not been reexamined for many years (or, if they have, the results have not been published), and the economic analyses may overstate the likely benefits. Even if they are accurate, though, the main benefits seem to come from casual visitors rather than from boaters. The benefits will go to service providers in the area, rather than to the waterways authority, but even if they went to Waterways Ireland they would not pay the running costs, never mind repaying the capital cost. The project has failed every economic test to which it has been subjected: it simply does not provide the sort of return that would justify the project.

There seems to be some doubt over the source of the proposed funding. The Irish government said that it canal to Clones would be paid for by the Irish Exchequer, but it later said that Waterways Ireland would sell surplus assets to pay some or all of the cost. It is not clear that Waterways Ireland’s surplus assets would, in current economic conditions, bring in enough money; nor is it clear that the Department of Finance is willing to make up any shortfall.

There might be something to be said for acquiring the land and creating a walking and cycling route, but the current proposal for a canal to Clones is utterly unjustifiable and should be dropped.

The Ulster Canal: the supposed benefits

Here is the latest (and almost the last) in this series of posts: an examination of the expected benefits of the canal to Clones. My conclusion is that the benefits cited are higher than those likely to arise in current conditions.

The Ulster Canal: the costs

The figure of €35 million is widely quoted as the cost of the canal to Clones, but the basis for that figure is not clear. Here are some thoughts on the subject.

The Ulster Canal

The next page of the Ulster Canal series is now up. It is, I’m afraid, rather boring: an account of the various reports (“studies and appraisals”, in the jargon) commissioned since 1994. It may help in sorting out who said what where and when.

The Clones Canal (the first part of the Ulster Canal to be abandoned)

Waterways Ireland intends to build a canal to Clones at the instigation of the Irish government. I believe that this proposal is an unjustifiable waste of money, at a time when public expenditure (and especially capital expenditure) is being cut.

This page provides links to a series of pages about aspects of the proposal. At time of writing, there are four pages up; there will be more, concentrating on the economic and financial aspects.

I have had limited access to documents:

  • every debate in the Dáil or Seanad in which the Ulster Canal was mentioned
  • every debate and committee session in the Northern Ireland Assembly in which the Ulster Canal was mentioned
  • every debate in the House of Lords and the House of Commons in which the Ulster Canal was mentioned
  • the minutes of meetings of the North/South Ministerial Council in Inland Waterways Sectoral Format and relevant minutes of Plenary Format meetings
  • the documents available on the websites of Waterways Ireland and of the Department of Community, Equality and Gaeltacht Affairs.

Neither the Department of Community, Equality and Gaeltacht Affairs nor Waterways Ireland has answered all the questions I asked them. Accordingly, I may have got some things wrong, and I would welcome correction. I would also welcome copies of confidential documents: this could become WikiLocks.