HC Deb 14 June 1892 vol 5 cc1045-7
DR. TANNER

I beg to ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office why no reply has been given by the War Office to the Guardians of the Cork Union on the subject of the Ballincollig water supply; whether the supply of 25,000 gallons daily is sufficient; and whether they are aware that the work is being delayed in consequence of the procrastination of the Military Authorities?

DR. TANNER

had notice also of the following question: To ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he is aware that the Local Government Board will not sanction the issue of the loan for Ballincollig Waterworks until the Military Authorities have fixed a maximum number of gallons per diem as their requirement; whether, at the commencement of the correspondence on this subject, the maximum requirements of the Barracks were stated not to exceed 16,000 gallons per diem; and whether the present water supply in the Barracks has been almost wholly condemned by military medical authorities?

MR. BRODRICK

I will answer the two questions of the hon. Member at once. The letter from the solicitor of the Cork Guardians came through the General Officer commanding in Ireland, to whom a reply was duly sent. Personal communications have been taking place in Dublin, which may have delayed a final answer to the Guardians. The present water supply is not sufficient. I have reason to believe the Local Government Board has now sanctioned the issue of a loan to the Ballincollig Waterworks without insisting that a maximum quantity shall be named, and an agreement has been signed under which a continuous and plentiful supply of water for the Barracks is secured, and the necessity for stating a maximum quantity does not arise. There has been no avoidable delay on the part of the Military Authorities, and I believe the whole matter has now been satisfactorily arranged.

DR. TANNER

Is it not the fact that the maximum requirements of the Barracks were stated not to exceed 16,000 gallons per diem, and the Local Authority undertook to supply 2,800 gallons? Will the hon. Gentleman take steps to bring the matter to a conclusion at once?

MR. BRODRICK

I believe that originally the maximum was as stated, but as an arrangement has been come to by which there shall be a continuous supply, the question of a maximum need not further disturb the arrangement.