Vol. 1081 No. 1
2. Deputy Ged Nash asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation to outline the accountability measures in the accelerating infrastructure action plan; the way he intends to implement and enforce them; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11340/26]
The accelerating infrastructure task force action plan was published towards the end of last year. Key to that plan is the accountability measures referenced in it and how they are implemented. The Minister, Deputy Chambers, might take the opportunity to put on the record of the House the details around accountability measures in that plan and how he intends to enforce and implement them.
In drafting the accelerating infrastructure report, there was extensive engagement with ministerial and official level colleagues to ensure clear ownership of actions and the expectations for delivery of these actions.
On publication, Departments were required to set out how they will implement the series of actions under their remit and ensure individuals know what they are accountable for. My Department will be managing the monitoring and reporting on delivery of the actions in the report and action plan, which will be led by my infrastructure division. It details 30 headline actions for delivery by quarter and sets out target outputs and outcomes to be achieved. All lead Departments have been engaged with over January and this month to provide an update on the delivery of quarter 4 of 2025 and quarter 1 of 2026 actions and the relevant structural changes within their sectors to aid the delivery of the 30 actions. All actions required for delivery in 2025 have been completed as of January 2026. Some of the key deliverables include the publication of the national development plan review in 2025 and the subsequent publication of all national development plan sectoral plans.
As committed to in the programme for Government and the accelerating infrastructure task force, a step-change in investment for the energy, water and transport sectors has been approved. The sectoral plans detail over 200 specific projects that are being prioritised, with a particular focus on those projects going to tender or construction within 2026 and 2027. This is with the specific aim of providing certainty to the construction on the pipeline.
With regard to the Government’s consultation on the scale of fees for environmental judicial reviews by the Department of climate, we will publish the consultation on fees for environmental legal costs, which will, in effect, limit the cost the State pays in environmental judicial reviews. We have had the first meeting of new joint utilities and transport clearing house, which will ensure shared understanding and collaboration between the utilities and transport sectors and greater co-operation in infrastructure delivery. I chaired the first meeting at which there was a wider discussion about its terms of reference and work plan over the coming weeks and months.
The Minister for justice, Deputy O’Callaghan, also brought heads of Bill to Government to place the judicial review process on a statutory footing, which were published on 6 January 2026. These give a wider indication of some what is being implemented. At this point, there are no significant indicators for actions that are off track, and good progress is noted for actions required for delivery in quarters 1 and 2 of 2026. I will go into the wider piece in my second contribution.
The Minister will be aware that we in the Labour Party gave the action plan a fair wind. We did so because of the absolute dire situation this country faces in terms of infrastructure development, most notably in housing. The kind of economic development we all want to see simply will not happen if we do not address the key concerns we all have around housing provision, renewable energy, transport links and improving connectivity around the country. Will the Minister put on the record, in terms of the accountability measures outlined in the plan, any legislative interventions that might be required this year? For example, I notice there is a heavy emphasis on accountability for regulatory bodies and different agencies that will be responsible for implementing the plan. Are there any key legislative interventions that will be made this year to make that happen and ensure accountability really is at the heart of this, rather than having mere words peppered throughout this report?
The task force is continuing to ensure we have challenge meetings and continued oversight of delivery. We have a Cabinet committee on infrastructure and the critical infrastructure Bill, and we will bring the scheme to the Government in the coming weeks. That will place clear obligations around the prioritisation of infrastructure across regulatory bodies and agencies when it comes to trying to speed up infrastructure delivery across the State.
I have also said in my role in terms of sanctioning respective Departments and agencies that co-operation and delivery of infrastructure is something that will be central to wider requests that are received through the year and the budgetary process. The accountability structure is there in terms of Cabinet committees and the utilisation of the wider sanctioning position I have. The critical infrastructure Bill will prioritise infrastructure delivery and place obligations on those involved in the infrastructure lifecycle around what they are expected to do and in what time. All of that will yield improved delivery and better accountability as through the year.
We will be watching this very closely. The reason we gave the report a fair wind was because of the dire situation with infrastructure in the country. According to the IMF and others, our infrastructure is about one third behind comparable countries. Accountability is key because that has been one of the significant missing pieces. The problem is that if it is everyone's responsibility, it is nobody's responsibility.
Ultimately, the Minister will be chairing the task force. My understanding, from re-reading the report yesterday, is that where issues around delays occur, the infrastructure division of the Department will deal with them but they could potentially be escalated to the task force and subsequently to the Cabinet subcommittee.
Mention was made of sanctioning Departments and agencies that are not performing, for example. It would have been a perverse situation if this kind of process were in place in recent years, given that we have had the Department of housing overpromising and under-delivering for years. We could have a situation in the annual budget round and the Estimates process, where the Department of housing, in the context of what the Minister is seeking to do here, could essentially be sanctioned with a reduction in its budget for not performing. Are financial penalties for under-delivering Departments the kind of thing we are talking about in this regard?
There are variety of mechanisms in that regard. It is about trying to drive compliance. There are obviously sanctions and requests received relating to staffing. For example, if a particular agency is not delivering in line with what we have set out in the infrastructure report, a request for additional staffing might be a consideration or how we restructure or reform a particular agency if it is not contributing to wider delivery. That is an example of it.
If things are escalated and we do not see delivery and change, then sanction plays a role in terms of driving progress and reforming. We cannot allow drift to occur. I acknowledge support of the Deputy and indeed that of many in the Opposition who wish to co-operate with this. It is fundamental for the wider future and long-term progress of the economy that we drive better delivery and reform. These are pragmatic steps that will make a difference. They have a good evidence base. Accountability is key and that is why the majority of the actions sit within my Department and the infrastructure division, so that we can drive that co-ordination piece over the next number of months.
3. Deputy Mairéad Farrell asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation to give an update on flood relief schemes; and on the underspend within the allocation to the National Flood Forecasting Warning Service; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11569/26]
Will the Minister of State, Deputy Kevin Boxer Moran, provide an honest update on flood relief schemes across the State? As we know, the catchment-based flood risk assessment and management, CFRAM, report, which carried out an evaluation of the entire State, identified 150 schemes. This was announced back in 2018 with huge fanfare. A total of 150 new schemes were going to be delivered. I note the Government keeps referring to schemes that have been delivered, including schemes that were delivered when I was a teenager. I do not want that information. I want to know how many of those 150 new schemes have been delivered to date.
To identify communities that are at risk from significant flood events, the OPW completed the largest study of flood risk ever undertaken by the State in 2018. The OPW catchment-based flood risk assessment and management, CFRAM, programme was undertaken by engineers and consultants on behalf of the OPW, working in partnership with the local authorities. The CFRAM programme studied 80% of Ireland’s primary flood risk and identified solutions that can protect over 95% of those at risk. A series of 29 flood risk management plans were launched in May 2018, providing the evidence base for required flood relief schemes. These plans are available on www.floodinfo.ie.
The Government has committed €715 million to the delivery of these flood relief schemes under the National Development Plan 2026-2030. Since 2018, as part of a phased approach to scheme delivery, the funding has allowed the OPW to treble the number of flood relief schemes at design, planning or construction stage to some 100 schemes. Today, work to protect 80% of all at-risk properties nationally is completed or under way. The first tranche of new schemes identified in the flood risk management plans includes some 60 schemes that were prioritised, along with schemes already under way. The prioritisation of the first tranche of schemes was based on three criteria, namely, scale of projects, capacity to deliver the national development programme and the maximisation of return for investment in respect of property numbers.
Flood relief schemes are complex, multi-annual civil engineering projects and take some 11 years to deliver, which include bringing a scheme through development, planning, design, procurement and construction. The current position with regard to flood relief schemes is as follows: the OPW has invested some €580 million in 56 completed schemes that are providing protection to some 13,580 properties.
The economic benefit to the State from loss avoided is estimated to be in the region of €2 billion. There are currently ten relief schemes that will protect over 2,800 properties on completion.
We have a serious problem here. I note that the Minister of State mentioned the 13,500 properties that are protected but the Dáil was told the same number of properties were protected in 2023. The fact is that we have not protected a single additional property since. The numbers have not changed in the past couple of years. According to the Government's website, I think 143 or 144 schemes were identified eight years ago and still have not been completed. I know that nothing can be done overnight and the Government continues to reach to judicial reviews and all the rest but large numbers of those schemes have not even gone to design stage, let alone planning stage. There is a serious issue with the delivery of schemes within the State.
The other part of the question related to the allocation for the national flood forecasting and warning service between 2020 and 2024. We are ten years on and this still has not been delivered. I heard the Minister, Deputy Chambers, talk about allocations and all the rest. We are ten years on and still do not have a system in place. There are serious problems within the Department.
I will bring the Deputy back to 2018, when I took up this role in the OPW. The first task I had was to travel the country. Many local authorities would not sign up to catchment flood risk assessment and management, CFRAM. It was a master plan for delivering flood defence for the whole country. Having achieved that in the first couple of months in my role, I then had to go and get investment. With the Minister at the time, Paschal Donohoe, I fought tooth and nail to get €1 billion. That was the start of delivering schemes, in my eyes, for the people of the country.
The master plan set out the areas that are hugely affected by flooding in the Deputy's area, my area and every other area in the country. The Government then backed that with money. We now have ten schemes at various different stages. Some are very close to completion. More schemes are being developed every day.
Since I returned to this position, I have changed the criteria for the minor works scheme. The budget has increased from €750,000 to €2 million. I brought about changes to give the local authorities staff to try to drive on these schemes. I have changed how we deliver these schemes through the minor works system. The schemes are an important part of delivering.
I appreciate what the Minister of State is saying. I also appreciate that the Minister of State was not in office during the eight years I am talking about. However, his Cabinet colleagues were. We lost a lot of time when no schemes were delivered. That is the problem. In 2024, three schemes were supposed to be delivered but none were.
I want to go back to the national flood forecasting and warning service. Less than €6 million of the nearly €20 million allocated has been delivered. As I said, this is a project that has been going on for ten years now. The Government agreed to establish the national flood forecasting and warning service. In the meantime, only one stage of the plan has been delivered, meaning we are currently stuck with an out-of-date and inaccurate warning system that does not even take ground conditions into account. Communities have been failed by the Government's lethargic approach to delivering a comprehensive and modern flood forecasting and warning service.
I know the Minister of State was not in government during this period but his colleague, the Minister, was. He was on national radio talking about allocations and all the rest. The people who were flooded do not give a rat's about that. I will not say what I was going to say. They want the Government to deliver. They cannot understand. This was to be announced ten years ago. Money is not being provided. The delivery of this service is not there. It is not good enough.
The Deputy said that no schemes have been delivered. Ongoing work is being done on schemes. We are protecting communities. We are giving the resources to local authorities to drive on the schemes. The Deputy knows that. I have worked with local authorities to push on schemes.
With regard to the national forecasting and warning service, I understand that the unspent money the Deputy is referring to relates to the flood forecasting centre in Met Éireann and, as such, would be a matter for the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage. Separately, the OPW made a once-off contribution of €871,000 to Met Éireann to support the establishment of the flood forecasting centre in Met Éireann. This funding supported the set-up costs of staffing, ICT, accommodation and procurement of relevant studies, services and expertise to develop hydrological models and staff capacity. The final element of the contribution was paid to Met Éireann in November 2023. The money may have been sent back but work is still going on to provide and bring this service that the people of Ireland want.
It has been ten years and we do not have it.
We, in government, are fully committed to delivering that service. My job, as Minister of State, is to protect communities and that is what I set out to do. I continue to work to do that.
4. Deputy Ruth Coppinger asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation for a progress report on the capital grant funding provided to Dublin Zoo in 2025; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10737/26]
I want to ask about capital grant funding of €2.8 million that was given to Dublin Zoo by the OPW in 2025. That is part of a ten-year programme so there will be more funding in subsequent years. There is no scrutiny of Dublin Zoo. Who is going to monitor how this money is spent and what it is spent on? The zoo can also raise funds from the public through charity appeals and charging people at the gates. Wild Lights is an abomination that is very bad for animals. Who is going to monitor this money?
Dublin Zoo, along with Fota Wildlife Park, submitted proposals in 2021 seeking State support for ten-year capital development programmes. Following the Government's approval, the OPW provides capital grants to both organisations. These grants are funded through the OPW's annual Estimates. The funding is in recognition of the specific financial impact of Covid-19 and the need for continued investment in their infrastructure.
In 2025, the OPW provided a capital grant of €2.8 million to Dublin Zoo to support a range of priority capital projects, aligned with Dublin Zoo's master plan for 2021 to 2031. The projects which received funding in 2025 included: refurbishment of the 130-year-old South American house; conservation works to the old cottage; infrastructure and sustainability improvements; upgrades to selected play areas; and enhanced education and visitor experience.
All funding is paid in line with public governance standards, including the relevant circulars. The funding is reported in the annual accounts of the Zoological Society of Ireland. The OPW has no day-to-day involvement in the operation of Dublin Zoo.
That is my problem. It has been consistently raised on the floor of the Dáil that nobody is properly inspecting Dublin Zoo in an independent way. The Minister of State talked about the South American house and play areas. The director also had his house renovated during that Covid period while making appeals to the public for funds.
My issue is animal welfare. There is a dog-fighter working as an elephant consultant in Dublin Zoo. The chimps are obese and agoraphobic. They are afraid to go outside and are pushed out for the public. They have nothing to do. It is extremely bad for animals to be in confined spaces. One former zookeeper who I met - there have been whistle-blowers about the zoo - told me they were sent to Smyth's Toys Superstore to buy a few toys to keep the chimps occupied. Some €100 was spent to buy a doll and stuff like that. The chimps are heavily medicated.
An elephant report was sent to the Department of agriculture but there has been no response on the confinement of the elephants and the climate not being suitable. That is what the OPW is funding.
A memorandum of understanding was signed between the OPW and Dublin Zoo in 2025. Payments are made only after the zoo submits its vouched invoices and its works are approved. This ensures compliance with the public grant rules.
On the Deputy's last question, the National Parks and Wildlife Service, NPWS, is responsible for the licensed inspection of the zoo and the oversight of an annual inspection of Dublin Zoo. Inspections are carried out by an independent multidisciplinary team with specialist expertise.
Not a week goes by that the Deputy is not standing outside the zoo with a phone. Does she ever go in? Has she ever gone in to see the good work the zoo does and that the staff do? I visited the zoo on the basis of some of the things that have been said in this House. The workers in the zoo treat all the animals with the height of respect and dignity. The zoo is essential to the people of Dublin and Ireland. I work closely with my colleague beside me, the Minister, Deputy Chambers, and other Deputies in the House in relation to Phoenix Park. I have control over the work that goes on. Dublin Zoo is a place I visit on a regular basis and I cannot but praise the people in Dublin Zoo for the work they do.
Is the Minister of State a zoologist? A report was done recently by independent zoologists on Dublin Zoo. Elephants have half-----
It is probably the Deputy's report.
-----the lifespan-----
The Deputy is very good out there with her social media, shouting and roaring.
Minister-----
May I have extra time? The Minister of State is barracking me as I am speaking.
Keep going, Deputy.
It is unbelievable that he cannot sit and listen. I get little enough time to raise this topic. Elephants have half the lifespan in Dublin Zoo. Matriarchy and family are very important for elephants. These two sister elephants were split up. We should not be spending money sending children to zoos. Any money for conserving species and biodiversity would be better spent out in the wild where there are very good programmes under way, rather than diverting it to Victorian concepts like zoos. Many other issues with animals have been reported. The NPWS does not have zoology expertise. It is also very close in relations to the management of Dublin Zoo. The Minister of State should meet zoo keepers and give them more funding and more space and time to deal with the animals, but we really should be phasing out zoos.
Thank you, Deputy.
Okay. It was very difficult when I was being barracked by the Minister of State.
I allowed you another ten seconds for that. The Minister of State to reply.
I cannot believe the Deputy never mentioned the big cataract operation that was done in Dublin Zoo. It was all over the news all over the world. It was the first ever carried out. She did not mention the good work of the zoo. She continually comes in here and complains and says there is cruelty to the animals in Dublin Zoo. I asked her a question. Did she go into the zoo and meet the people or did she stand outside taking pictures and selfies and talking and complaining? She should go in and meet the staff and management to see the good work they do. The people love that zoo. It has hundreds of thousands of visitors every year and the Deputy is telling me that because one element she has centred on is wrong, everything is wrong in the zoo. The zoo is perfect in my eyes and I will continue to support it.
5. Deputy Richard O'Donoghue asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation the reason figures for existing levels of service, ELS, were not included in the budget 2026 documentation; the plans for these to be provided in detail in budgetary documentation going forward, considering recommendations from the Oireachtas Committee on Budgetary Oversight; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11621/26]
Each year the expenditure report seeks to improve on previous iterations to refine and improve the approach used to present budget day figures. The expenditure report for 2026 provides a more detailed description of the budget package components than in previous years, in the table set out on page 12. There have been many alternative approaches in the past and work on the best way to present each year's budget will be an iterative process. The approach taken to the budget 2026 differs from previous years and therefore cannot be compared on a like-for-like basis. The information is no longer available in the format used in recent years as the budget estimates for 2026 have been constructed in a different way to previous years' budgets. This was undertaken to better reflect the totality of expenditure, where this funding is being invested and what is being delivered for our growing population. This approach placed a greater emphasis on reform, efficiency and placing value for money at the centre of government decision-making. It allows for more focus on the total size of the overall expenditure ceiling.
The 2026 expenditure report provides a more detailed breakdown of the budget package than in previous years, as shown in the reconciliation table provided on page 12. The overall uplift for 2026 is allocated across the following categories: €900 million for increased recipients of public services in social protection, childcare, disability and housing; €2.2 billion for key policy adjustments and expansion of services, including welfare measures, education and youth reforms, increased apprenticeship places and supports for public transport; €1.1 billion to meet the 2026 cost of decisions taken in 2025, such as the roll-out of pay-related benefit, auto-enrolment and additional PSO transport supports; €1.2 billion for the cost of the public sector pay agreement; €1.4 billion reflecting ongoing scheme costs, additional staff recruitment and programme-specific funding across a number of areas; €2.1 billion; and €300 million unallocated, to be assigned later as required, consistent with previous years.
A range of sources of information relating to the budget are published throughout the year. The expenditure report on budget day summarises the programmes. The Revised Estimates Volume follows the budget and provides additional details and information on spending plans. The fiscal monitor each month provides year-to-date spending figures for each Vote group. This compares them against the profiles set out by Departments and against the previous year. The public service performance report details how Departments performed against targets set in the Revised Estimates process. I have more I can set out.
The budgetary oversight committee is great and we have a diverse range of people on it. The one thing we want to see is accountability. We want to be able to see forecasting. The job of the committee is to go back year by year and see where moneys are being spent and where the delivery is. Looking at the Departments, if I ran my business the way the Government runs its business I would not be in business. We want to see the delivery of the funds the Minister has named and all the millions he has listed to see that we get delivery on budget and on time. What I have seen to date is that we have seen a lot of moneys spent but we are not getting the delivery. If you compare it with business models we are not getting the same results. Those businesses make profits out of their work but the Government cannot deliver in the same way businesses can. I need to try to address that.
To take the Deputy's business model analogy, businesses do not do ELS as he has sought in his question. Businesses look at the totality of expenditure and to drive better delivery, better outputs and better efficiency in terms of the totality of spend. That is exactly what we are seeking to do in how we framed and delivered budget 2026. That is where the weaknesses of existing levels of service are identified and we now focus on the totality of expenditure rather than only the incremental budget package, which has been the nature of it in previous years. That places reform, efficiency and value for money at the centre of decisions we make and shifts the emphasis from the expenditure level towards what policies are being advanced, what services are being delivered and how funding supports a growing population. That is where, in terms of the ELS, there is an inconsistency across Votes. Just sitting additional expenditure above a system that might be inefficient in a particular expenditure area does not address the need to better link output. What we are trying to do and how we have changed the expenditure approach is to extract better outputs around how we manage the totality of expenditure, aligned with the point the Deputy has made.
I understand what the Minister is trying to do and I take in the context of what he is saying. There is better forecasting - that is probably the word I am looking for. However, look at the children's hospital where we have gone €1.2 billion over budget. Now I hear we are looking to take a legal challenge against the contractors for not finishing the job. The problem here is not the contractors but the contract and how it was set out on the first day, through the Departments. Every year that goes on, the regulation changes. It is an ongoing issue. From the point of view of the delivery of infrastructure such as that hospital - which is becoming a white elephant and I wonder whether it will ever be finished - how can the Minister budget for that within his Department of infrastructure? It is €1.2 billion over budget. Where would that go to deliver a lot of the services out there? I want accountability not only for the developer but also for the Departments and how they deliver for the Minister and the people.
That is obviously a separate issue to the existing levels of service in the Deputy's question. What we have set out is a new national development plan and a new way of delivering infrastructure in the economy. We have a series of reforms we are advancing through 2026 which are about accelerating wider delivery but also responding to the evidence, which is there, that too many of the systems are cumbersome, slow and duplicative in many instances. This has impacted delivery on water, energy, transport and the wider social and economic infrastructure of the State.
Of course we have had reports published on overspends and the children's hospital and there have been learnings from that for the Department of Health. Reforms have been made to mitigate the risk of such an example arising in future. Obviously that is a separate and distinct issue from the existing levels of service, but we are seeking to deliver more infrastructure and to speed that up because the time spent in a process-driven approach has a cost and we are trying to bring a broader rebalancing to get projects moving.
6. Deputy Barry Heneghan asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation the extent of any engagement his Department and the Office of Public Works have had with Dublin City Council in relation to flood risk, coastal overtopping and storm surge impacts in Clontarf following recent flooding incidents; whether the Office of Public Works has carried out or plans to carry out assessments of existing coastal defences and flood mitigation measures in the area; the interim or longer term flood defence measures under consideration; the way in which such works would be funded and prioritised within the national flood relief programme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11103/26]
I have a question for the Minister of State on the engagement his Department and the Office of Public Works have had with Dublin City Council in relation to flood risk in north Dublin, coastal overtopping and storm surge impacts.
We all saw the devastation that occurred last week. I thank the Minister of State for the work he did in Portrane to protect houses. Houses on the Hole in the Wall beach are at risk. I would love the same scheme to be rolled out there. How will flood defence works in north Dublin be funded and prioritised in the national flood relief programme?
I have witnessed first-hand the impact of flooding and the devastation it causes to homes, businesses and local communities. I am very familiar with the flood risk in Clontarf, having visited the area and met with local representatives, businesses and the community in May and October of last year. As the Deputy is aware, Dublin City Council received planning consent for a flood relief scheme for Clontarf. However, the scheme did not progress to construction. The OPW is engaging with Dublin City Council to progress the design of the flood relief scheme for Clontarf. The assessment of the recent flooding is informing the development of scope of service for the appointment of engineering and environmental consultants and will also inform the design of the flood relief scheme for Clontarf. The scheme will be designed to protect against a one-in-200-years coastal event and meet the requirements of Insurance Ireland.
Dublin City Council is leading the Clontarf flood relief scheme. The council and the OPW are engaging on the development of tender documents for the appointment of engineering and environmental consultants. Progressing a viable flood relief scheme for Clontarf is to be funded by the OPW, through funding for flood relief under the national development plan. Pending the design and completion of a permanent scheme, last year I prioritised the replacement of temporary sandbag structures along the promenade. In May, I met businesses and the local community to listen to their concerns regarding the appearance of the sandbags. My office worked with Dublin City Council on feasible alternatives, which I discussed with the local community, when I visited last October. This meeting facilitated the agreement for the replacement of the sandbags with interlocking barriers as a temporary measure. Dublin City Council has advised that over 300 m of the interlocking barriers have been successfully installed on the Alfie Byrne Road. Work will be completed in the coming weeks.
I again thank the Minister of State. To have him in the constituency I represent three times in the first nine months of the Government's term was like Christmas coming early. I thank him for that. They call me Mr. Sandman now for getting rid of the sandbags. I want to sincerely thank the Minister of State for his engagement.
The two recent flooding incidents have exposed the scale and urgency of the work that is needed. The Minister of State indicated that planning was granted for flood defences. I have clarified in the House before, and will do so again now, that there was a proposal for a berm for the north city arterial main, NCAM, project running down the promenade that would have been covered in muck. It would have been joined. Anyone who is elderly, vulnerable or with additional needs would not have been seen on the promenade. The promenade is used by many people in north Dublin. A flood defence is very much needed there. The work proposed was going to be the same, and there would have been a secondary wall. In the context of the demonstrations the Minister of State has shown me, we know that if the second wall had been in put in place, it would not have acted as a catchment area. I look forward to engagement on increasing the height of the secondary wall adjacent to the cycle lane or for an additional mountable wall to be built. There is a wall there which is 100 years old and which has mountables in it. It is important that the work is done.
I love the drive of the Deputy when it comes to this matter. He might be a colleague of mine, but if I could get every colleague in the House to go to their local authorities, drive schemes and develop the interim solutions such as those the Deputy is working on in Clontarf, I would be very grateful. We come into the House and blame the OPW and everybody else, but public representatives have a huge part to play in delivering by pushing local authorities. I fund local authorities in the context of staff, and I need them to drive schemes forward.
Regarding Clontarf, I have changed the funding limit for the minor works scheme from €750,000 to €2 million. That will allow the local authority to develop more interim solutions. The Deputy and councillors have invited me to a meeting, which I look forward to attending in due course, to determine how we can deal with this, what we can do in the interim - we did the same thing last year - and whether we can do more.
I appreciate that. The Minister of State has agreed to meet Councillor Kevin Breen and other local representatives. I have attended meetings with him and the OPW. It is amazing to see what happens. If every Minister of State was like him, we would get a lot more done. I thank the Minister of State for agreeing to meet all of the other Dublin Bay North Deputies in the coming weeks to discuss Northern Cross. That is something that needs to be progressed.
The work in Clontarf needs to be done immediately. We objected to the flood wall and the berm. It needs to be said that those would have removed everything. People always say we lowered the wall. The wall was lowered down at St. Anne's Park. It is a completely different wall. That needs to be said because it is constantly stated that people in north Dublin did not want flood defences. We need to build a wall, and we need to make the southside pay for it.
I will work with the Deputy and with the local authorities. He referred to on Portrane, which is another prime example of interim measures. This is the first time we have ever obtained a MARA licence to allow us to do work on the coast. That should happen in respect of areas all around the coast of Ireland. Other local authorities that have issues with coastal flooding should look at what was done in Portrane and, in the context of the MARA licence, deliver more critical infrastructure to protect communities. I look forward to engaging with the Deputy, his colleagues and the local authority.
When a scheme that meets the criteria comes before me, I have never been found wanting. We have always engaged with local authorities to do the best thing for communities. While we all talk about the delivery of long-term projects, which is the overall large scheme, a lot can be done in the interim. That is something on which I have put a huge focus over the course of last year. That is why I made the changes to delivery. I want to continue that work, but I need help from everybody in the House to drive those projects forward. That is very important.
