I move:—
"That the Dáil disapproves of the policy of the Minister for Local Government, so far as it has been made known through the general activities of his Ministry."
My reason for putting down this motion is in order to try to find out exactly what the mind of the Local Government Department is in its relation to the various Councils in the State. In the first place they seem to be affected by an over-dose of the now prevalent disease called "economy." The policy which the Local Government Department in its present frame of mind is following is indiscriminate economy, and an economy which is not going to achieve what perhaps the the Minister has in his mind. The Local Government Department is pursuing a policy which to my mind is not in conformity with what the people considered they would get from a native Parliament. Recently circulars have been sent out to the various Councils in the State, calling upon them to practise the most rigid economy in all their Departments. They did not point out at the beginning what economy could be effected, and I am sure it will be news to the members of this House to know that the present unhappy state that some of the Councils in the State find themselves in to-day is due to the policy of the Local Government Department. I speak with first-hand knowledge of my own native county, and the Local Government Department owes the County Wexford to-day the sum of £52,000. It is very hard on a Council which has been harassed like the Wexford County Council has been, for some four or five years past, to try to exist and to carry out its ordinary functions, when the Department I have mentioned is keeping back the huge sum of £52,000. In consequence of that money being withheld, the Council has had to borrow a sum equal to it, for which they have to pay interest at the rate of 5 per cent. I do not think it is a very wise policy of the Government to withhold from a Council in Ireland a huge sum of money like that, and to sanction an overdraft from the bank on which they have to pay 5 per cent. interest, and in the same voice to call upon them to economise. Now, various representations have been made to the Minister in order to try to get from him the rights which that Council are entitled to.
Under the old régime, so far as I know, these grants were paid regularly. Sometime recently a deputation waited upon the Minister. Of course he was very sympathetic and told us he would do all he could; he was very courteous and all the rest, but he seemed to be tied down by the Treasury to a certain policy. He told us that the reason for the grants being withheld was because it was anticipated that the annuities would not be paid during the coming year. To my mind that is not a policy or an attitude that any responsible Government should take up. So far as I know, and I think the Minister will agree, the annuities in the County Wexford have been paid very well. As a matter of fact, in the exact words of the Minister concerned, up to December last they had been paid extremely well in the County Wexford. Now I am sure the Dáil will forgive me for dealing with the County Wexford, but as I have first-hand knowledge of that county I think it is well that I should use it in support of my arguments in favour of this motion, because I feel pretty certain that the same condition of affairs prevails in other counties in the State. What I object to is that these grants are withheld, as the Minister says, in anticipation of farmers not paying their annuities during the coming year. That, as I have said, is not a policy or an attitude that any Government should take up.
It appears to be the policy of the Government that if certain counties in the Free State do not pay their annuities at all and that other counties pay up in full, that the counties that are paying up and discharging their liabilities are to be subject to the same treatment as the counties that do not pay at all. There is another aspect of the situation that I wish to refer to. Recently the President told the Dáil that the Local Government Department were about to release one-and-a-quarter millions of money in order to relieve unemployment and to reconstruct roads in Ireland. He told us that a motion which had been moved here was tantamount to a vote of censure upon the Government because the Deputy who moved the motion had in his mind that the unemployed in the Free State had been neglected. We thought at that time that the Minister would permit Councils to expend this money at the rate of wages that prevailed in the particular areas, and we were rather surprised that circulars were sent broadcast to the Councils operating in the Free State area stipulating that a certain wage should be paid which, to my mind, was a disgraceful wage, and should not be suggested by anybody taking upon themselves the responsibilities of the Government of a country.
I put down a question about a fortnight ago asking the Minister for Local Government where he derived his authority to fix the wage suggested in the circular, and he told me that he derived such authority from Parts 2 and 3 of the Roads Act. So far as I can see, the only place that he could derive that authority is under Section 4, Sub-section (8) of that Act, which states: "Advances to County Councils may be made by way of loan or grant, or partly one way or partly another on such terms and subject to such conditions as the Board think fit." I suggest to the Minister that that particular Section does not bear the interpretation that he puts on it, and I suggest that if Hansard were looked up during the period in which that Act was going through the British House of Commons it will be found that no such statement was made, that such conditions should apply, or that would enable the Minister to take the inference that he has taken from that particular Section. There is a stipulation in that grant that ex-National soldiers should get first preference. So far as I am concerned, I think it is pretty generally known that I have been on the side of the Government in the last conflict. I have never hidden that, and I do not want to do so now, but I do think that discretion ought to be left to the various Councils in Ireland to deal with unemployment in their area as the position warrants they should deal with it. There are men in the Free State to-day who have been idle for the last three or four years. Some of them made application to be taken into the Army, but they were not taken for some reason or another. I do not think it is the right thing for the Government to prevent these people from working and earning a livelihood if they are willing to do so, and I suggest that they withdraw this clause. The Councils of Ireland, so far as I know, though there may be some exceptions, are fully alive to what they owe to the National Army for what it did during the recent struggle. The wages suggested by the Minister may, I think, be taken at an average of 28s. per week. How anybody with any sense of responsibility or with any knowledge of the price of food stuffs in this country at present could expect a man to keep a wife and family on 28s. a week is beyond my comprehension.
I am sure if the Minister goes into the matter he will find that it was absolutely impossible for that man to do so. To go back to the question of the National Army men, I do not think that it is fair that these men should be used—I do not say that they are deliberately used—to cut down the wages of their fellow men, because if the Councils in Ireland can get National soldiers to work for 28s. a week at making roads, it follows as night the day that there will be a general reduction in that particular period and that the private employer is going to take advantage of the situation created by men working at 28s. per week. I want to know is it the considered policy of the Local Government Department to make that a medium for cutting down employees' wages. They may say that it is not their intention, and that these particular conditions only apply to the grant of 1¼ millions. I have a recollection of a County Council meeting at Wexford. When this particular grant and the conditions attaching to it came up for consideration an employer rose to his feet and proposed that the wages for County Council work should be at the rate of 28s. a week, a reduction of 18s. on the present wage in that county. That man, I suggest, was prompted to do so by the conditions attaching to the grant which the Government proposed to pay to County Councils. I would appeal to the Minister for Local Government to revise and reconsider his decision on this matter.
The members on these benches are as anxious for economy as any other body, but we are asking you not to start economy again on the bottom dog and not have the same spectacle as we have had by the cutting down of old age pensions. All economies are starting at the wrong end. I believe that there should be a general enquiry into the whole question of Local Government before you start an indiscriminate policy of economy and an attack on the workers' wages. You certainly have an advantage, and you are using it over the unfortunate man who has been idle for the past three or four years. I do not think it is fair when you find a man on the verge of starvation to use him as a medium to cut down the wages of his fellow man. It is not a proper position to put a soldier in, a man who has given his best in order that his country might live. There is another matter in connection with Local Government administration to which I would like to refer. The Department, as I said before, have sent circulars round calling on Councils to practise the most rigid economy. During the war between England and this country the County Councils were instructed by the Local Government Department of Dáil Eireann, which, I am glad to say, practically all the Councils now in the Free State area, recognised and obeyed to do certain things in connection with rate collection. They were told to disregard the treasurer whom they had up to that time, and were told to appoint trustees and to instruct the rate collectors to lodge their collections with those trustees. That was in direct conflict with the terms of their appointment.
The Local Government Department were certainly alive to that situation, but they persisted in their instructions, which I considered right instructions, for that particular time. I have raised this matter before, but I do not think that there is any harm in raising it again. In County Wexford there were 21 rate collectors, 17 of whom refused to obey the instructions that had been sent from the Local Government Department through the County Council, with the result that the County Council had to discharge them by express instructions from the Local Government Department. The County Council had then to appoint new rate collectors, who duly took up their positions, but most of them found themselves in prison before six months were at an end. What was the surprise of the County Council to find that last year the Ministry set up a tribunal in order to pay these men who had disobeyed the Council and the nation in a very critical period! I have no objection to giving them remuneration if they think they are entitled to remuneration, but I object to the local Councils being called upon to pay the burden of such remuneration.
The Councils which took this particular action were acting in the interests of the nation at the behest and direction of the Government, and I think that this is a matter that ought to be taken up by the Government, and that the remuneration should be paid by the Government, and should be adjusted in the same way as the other financial arrangements will be adjusted between the two countries. There is also another aspect of the situation. It is in connection with the collection of rates at the present time. There are rate collectors in certain counties who have done their duty as well as it is possible to do it under the conditions prevailing. A certain amount of rates is outstanding, and the Government insist that those rate collectors should proceed to obtain decrees against the defaulters.
In a great many cases rate collectors hold decrees against defaulters for full amounts. They have had to lodge a certain amount of money to get those decrees. Those decrees have been given in the Courts for a considerable time, yet there is no sign whatever of the decrees being executed. That may be a matter for the Minister for Home Affairs, but, in the first instance, it is a matter for the Minister for Local Government to bring pressure on the Minister for Home Affairs in order that the various Councils of Ireland may operate as they should. The real grievance is that the Government will not allow County Councils to pay rate collectors until the decrees are executed.
I would also like to draw the attention of the Dáil to the question of amalgamation. This is a matter which was approached very hastily. The various Councils in the Free State obeyed the Government at the critical time without due regard to the aged poor and the sick. It was pointed out to the Councils by the Local Government Department at that particular time that certain economies would be effected, and that the brand of pauperism would be lifted from the people. I was doubtful then that that would happen, and I am doubtful now that it will. I remember being called to Dublin, accompanied by Dr. Ryan, T.D., Seamus Doyle, T.D., and Sean Etchingham, T.D., to interview the President, who was then Minister for Local Government. We were evenly divided on the question of amalgamation, not on the broad principle of amalgamation, but on some of its details. Two of us were in favour of cottage or district hospitals, and two against. The President tried to reconcile the two positions in his usual manner, and gave certain promises. Those promises, up to now, have not been fulfilled. He promised that in view of what we considered to be the faults of the scheme, he would institute an inquiry inside of twelve months if amalgamation did not work satisfactorily. As far as I know that promise has been brought to the minds of the Ministry on two different occasions within the past twelve months, and nothing has been done.
I seriously suggest that the question of amalgamation should be gone into thoroughly and examined, with a view to finding out if the necessary economies have been fulfilled, and if the sick and infirm are getting the attention they deserve. Personally, I do not think they are. In view of the fact that all those schemes were rushed, I do not think it was carried out even as satisfactorily as the Minister himself thought it would have been, under the conditions which prevailed. There is another matter, and that is the question of the proposed abolition of District Councils. I do not know if I am in order on this, in view of the fact that the Government have not declared their policy, but I do know that a deputation from the various District Councils in the Free State has waited on the Minister for Local Government in view of certain rumours that were abroad, that he was about to abolish District Councils. He made a reply which prompted them to believe that he was going to abolish District Councils. I wonder has he considered the effect that that will have on the administration of the various counties?
As far as I know, County Councils at the present time have already too much to do, and if District Councils are to be abolished it is going to mean that the County Councils will have to stay in session constantly. It is a retrograde step. Even the newspapers in the country say that, and God knows they are bad enough. I would ask the Minister for Local Government to reconsider his decision in the matter. I do not think that the people will be represented as they should be if the District Councils are to be abolished. There are many little things which get attention from the District Councils about which the County Councils have no time to bother. In conclusion, let me say that I think the Local Government Department are taking too much notice of the ramblings of the Press on the question of economy. I think that the pretext upon which the Local Government Department demands an inquiry nowadays is not sufficient to warrant that there should be an inquiry. I do hope I am wrong in thinking that it is the considered policy of the Government to send Commissioners to the various areas to administer local affairs. That would be a retrograde step and should not be listened to for a moment by the present occupants of the Ministry. If the British Government had suggested anything similar two or three years ago I could imagine our President holding up his hands in holy horror and using it as a foundation for a magnificent speech. I would ask the Ministry to reconsider its whole policy and to take the country into its confidence as to what it is going to do, especially in regard to the wages question and the undue interference between public boards and their employees.
