Dáil Éireann debate -
Friday, 5 Dec 1924

Vol. 9 No. 22

COMMITTEE ON FINANCE. - VOTE 19.—RELIEF SCHEMES.

Mr. BLYTHE

I move:

That a supplementary sum, not exceeding £250,000, be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st March, 1925, for contributions towards the relief of unemployment and distress.

Of the sum previously granted by the Dáil the greater part, about £60,000, has already been allocated. The major portion, certainly the most substantial portion, of that sum was allocated for works done by the Land Commission. There was allocated, in the first instance, directly to the Land Commission for general works, a sum of £74,000, which included a sum of £2,000 for the extension of Dungloe Pier, in County Donegal. The remainder was for the ordinary works of land improvement, which the Land Commission carries out, that is drains, accommodation roads of various kinds, and bog roads. Then a sum of £6,000 was allocated to the Department for forestry work. That is the most substantial sum that was given. There was a sum of £35,000 allocated to the Dublin Corporation for various important works, building at Marino, various sewerage and drainage works, and paths. Then £14,000 odd was allocated in the Counties Kildare, Wexford and Sligo, and for the Clonmel Council for road works. Over £38,000 was allocated towards waterworks schemes. These included the towns of Drogheda, Arklow, Dingle, Rathdrum and Youghal. There was a small sum for road making. These were the major sums. As the Minister for Industry and Commerce explained yesterday, the allocation of the full grant was held up because at first it was not contemplated that it would be absolutely necessary to devote a further sum, and it was thought that by holding over some portion of it and allocating it when we got into the winter, we might get through with the £250,000 that was voted. It is now seen that that would not be possible, that there is a degree of unemployment and distress throughout the country which makes it necessary to make further sums available.

Of the further £250,000, for which the Dáil is now asked, it is proposed that the most substantial portion shall again be given to the Land Commission for works of improvement in the various counties where they can carry out such works in an economical way, where useful and necessary work can be done, and where unemployment exists. There is not exactly a final schedule from the Land Commission; various proposals have been put in, but I cannot say that all of these proposals will be accepted or that there will not be substitutions for some of them. But there are proposals in from the Land Commission for over £180,000 for various counties, all, except a small sum, in the congested districts. There will remain over of the new sum that is asked for some £60,000 or £70,000. That may be allocated to the Land Commission after further investigations; it may be given for works in towns and urban districts where suitable schemes may be put forward and where the need for employment exists. There remains, also, as I have said, some £60,000 or £65,000 of the first £250,000. It is necessary that we should have this new fairly substantial sum granted in order that immediate allocation may be made, so that schemes for the giving of employment may be put in hand at once.

We feel that as far as possible, where distress exists and where relief is necessary, the relief should be given by employment on useful works. That is the most desirable way of doing it. Of course, you cannot define those works, and in some cases the sum involved would be too great, and perhaps the work might not be of a type into which it would be desirable to put money at present. But I think I can say that all the works that are proposed to be done under this particular Vote are works useful and necessary in themselves, and that the expenditure of this money will be very valuable towards relieving the hardship that does exist, both in town and country. There is great urban unemployment, the figures of which were indicated by the Minister for Industry and Commerce. There is rural unemployment not less serious, although there are not the same details available, owing to the fact that the Unemployment Insurance Act is not applicable to agricultural labourers, but there is most serious unemployment, and there is, in poor districts where the recent season has been something in the nature of a calamity, distress which can be relieved by employment, although the people in distress are not all exactly labourers.

I believe that this grant should carry us through the winter so far as this particular kind of expenditure is concerned. The schemes of work that have been suggested—good schemes— do not seem likely to require more money than is now asked for, but certainly where distress exists we will deal sympathetically with all schemes put forward if they are good schemes, and if schemes in excess of the amount are put forward we will consider the matter afresh.

Mr. JOHNSON

Would the Minister say whether he is making it a condition of these grants that they shall be expended within the winter period, that is to say, before the 31st March? Allocation is one thing but expenditure is another and it is not going to be very much use to the persons who require this assistance if it is merely allocated and there is no assurance that it will be expended. It will be a bad thing if in this case, as in several other cases hitherto, monies come back to the Exchequer because they have not been expended.

Mr. T.J. O'CONNELL

Will the Minister indicate the provisions he is making to deal with the scarcity of fuel? I think that is a matter that was mentioned yesterday.

Mr. CORISH

May I ask the Minister if he would see to it that there is a speeding up of these works, and that an effort is made by his Ministry and the other Ministries concerned, to have some of the relief work started before Christmas, because that is a season when there is great distress amongst the unemployed. Another thing I would like to ask the Minister is, is it to be stipulated where a local council puts up a scheme, that they should provide a certain amount of the money themselves? I do not think that that stipulation should be made, because ratepayers are suffering to a great extent at the moment, and in some places they have put up a certain amount in order that they would get a grant. In this connection I would ask the Minister not to make a contribution necessary.

Mr. BAXTER

I might say that I am interested in this Vote particularly, as although I come from a constituency that is at times at least unfortunate enough to be outside the scheduled area of congested districts, the people are just as unfortunate at present as are the people in the congested districts with regard to fuel and distress. I want one or two points explained in connection with this Vote. It is not going to be an easy matter to make regulations about how this money is to be spent in various counties, and it can be misspent. I must say that we have unemployment both in town and country. It is so in my constituency. But I will say this, that the people unemployed in the towns generally, at least in my county, are able to make a good deal more noise about unemployment than the people in the country. Consequently it is not unlikely that the towns will perhaps get more than a fair share of the amount to be expended. I think that the money should be spent in proportion to the number unemployed in each district. Unless in the allocation of this money consideration is given to this point of view, that it should be spent in districts in accordance with the scarcity of fuel, which must be the first thing to be provided, and in accordance with the number of people unemployed in these districts who want work and who are prepared to work, I am afraid there is a danger that the best will not be got out of this money at all. I do not know whether it is proposed to spend the money through the county councils, or what the method will be, but this is a point of view that should be kept in mind, and I think if it were possible, it would be right to go as far as trying to ascertain how many people there are in town and country, either through the present clerks of district councils, or in some other way, who are prepared to work and who want work, before any scheme would be devised for relief of distress in any district. If you have 1,000 men who want work in one district it would not be fair to spend the same amount in that district as where there are only 200 men. Deputy Corish has raised a point about local authorities being called upon to put up a certain sum. It seems to me that a certain sum should go to the local authorities to enable them to relieve distress in any way, because we have everywhere people in distress who would not in ordinary circumstances need relief. These are people who are unable to work, and the local authorities must come to their relief. These people will number thousands in every county. I must say that it is my view that this will be too great a burden to put on the rates. Relief or home help will be too big a burden for local ratepayers to bear this season, and I think consideration should be given to that aspect of the case. In every county or at least in the counties where there is distress, a certain sum should be allocated to assist the county board of health to meet distress in the way that they have got to meet it.

Mr. DALY

I think that some of this money could be very usefully spent in my constituency. In my district we have 1,000 acres of good land left to us, in the hands of the military, if you like. A sum of money could be very well spent there in the production of beet. It is an industry that is in its infancy, and if it is to be started at all, I think that 100 or 200 acres could be set aside at Moor Park on which a number of men who are at present unemployed in the districts of Fermoy and Kilworth could be usefully employed. These men have already been deprived of their main employment. The British Government employed hundreds, I might say thousands, of them. They will be thrown on home help this winter if something is not done to relieve them. Relief is too often given without any advantage except to the poor person relieved, but relief of the kind I indicate would be very useful, especially if we intend to give the beet industry a fair trial. The fillip should come from the Government.

Major COOPER

I do not think any Deputy is disputing the necessity of this Vote. I do not think there is any opposition to the Vote, and the whole discussion is hinging on the manner in which the money should be expended. Now I have great sympathy with the point of view expressed by Deputy Baxter about enquiries, as to the manner in which the money should be spent, but I think it is too late now to make enquiries. Enquiries should have been made three months ago, when it became evident that the harvest would be a bad one. I think that by now enquiries have been made and schemes have been framed, and if any time is spent on enquiries the worst of the winter will be on us before any money can be spent.

Mr. BAXTER

I did not mean enquiries as to whether there was any necessity to relieve distress. I meant enquiries as to how many people there are in the various districts who want work. I say the clerk of the R.D.C. or the clerk of the U.D.C. could make enquiries, make a public announcement, if necessary, and in three days he will have fairly correct statistics of the situation throughout the whole county.

Major COOPER

I think the figures would require a little checking. I think they cannot send in guaranteed returns in such a short time. Some of them might attempt to exaggerate the distress.

Mr. BAXTER

I mean they should make application for work to him.

Major COOPER

I differ from Deputy Baxter because that would hold up the work by a week, and I do not want the work held up even a week. As to the manner in which the money is to be expended, I want to say a word. If any portion is spent in Dublin, there is no doubt what is the greatest need. The greatest need is housing. There is £60,000 or £70,000 that the Land Commission have not laid their hands on or laid claim to. If any portion of that money is to be spent in Dublin, it could not be better spent than in pulling down tenement houses and putting up decent houses to replace them. I hope the Minister will bear that in mind.

As regards the plans of the Land Commission, road-making is a good thing within limits, but one reason why our roads are so badly kept at present is that there are too many of them and those that there are are too wide. In the country districts we have extraordinarily wide roads. They were, I believe, made wide for military reasons to allow a company of infantry to march abreast. That means a considerable tax on the ratepayers for maintenance. I hope the Land Commission will not devote their attention altogether to the question of new roads. I would rather see the existing roads put into good order. Another point that I would like to emphasise is that the methods of road-making are being revolutionised. A new type of road-making has been introduced in England, and a new system is being tested in Northern Ireland. It would be a mistake to sink too much money in old methods of road-making when we may be on the eve of some improvement.

As to drainage, I will now follow Deputy Daly's bad example, and draw the Minister's attention to one particular scheme which is not in my constituency. Ten years ago the Congested Districts Board framed a scheme for the drainage of the Abhann Mór in Sligo. They obtained a grant from the British Treasury. The Government put the work in hand and partially carried it out. Then the war came. The scheme was carried on for some time, but then there came a period of financial stringency and the scheme was abandoned and never completed. I presume the plans for that scheme are in the possession of the Ministry. The work that has been done can be made use of. If it is intended to expend any of this money in Sligo, where very considerable distress does exist, the carrying on of the work of drainage of this river, plans for which are in existence, would be one of the most useful and effective means of expenditure. In view of the fact that a Parliamentary secretary represents Sligo, I hope his attention has been called to the matter.

In regard to the other points as to the abnormal work of the Land Commission, it seems to me that we have almost enough done in road-making. Though there is not enough done in drainage, drainage carried on on a comparatively small scale does not add an enormous amount to the growth of the country. I would like if the Minister for Finance would go a little further and consult with Ministers other than the Minister for Agriculture on this matter. Has he consulted the Minister for Education? There is no doubt that in the country districts there are a great many bad schools—dirty schools and insanitary schools. Money spent on repairing or possibly pulling down and rebuilding these schools would be as usefully spent as it could be. Then, again, has the Minister consulted the Minister for Local Government as to the various public bodies which could usefully use public money? Has he considered the advisability of granting them sums of money, not by way of a gift, but by way of loan, on easy terms and at a low rate of interest? Perhaps I might ask the Minister to go even further and consider—apart altogether from the Trade Loans Act—the lending of a certain amount of public money at low rates of interest to firms or individuals who are prepared to carry out work, extending their business and that sort of thing, but who cannot lay hands on the capital at the present moment. That would give more constructive and more useful employment than the interminable making of roads. Some of it would, of course, be employment for more highly skilled workers than would be engaged on road-making. I would like to know if the Minister has considered that? I can quite see that there are obvious objections to it, but I would like to know what the Minister's objections are.

I now come to the point which, I think, Deputy O'Connell raised—the question of fuel. On the Western seaboard that is really the crux of the whole matter. It is an evil that can be remedied comparatively easily. You cannot restore the turf, which has failed this year, to the people. But the Government, by tackling the thing on a big scale, ought to be able to supply these people with coal very cheaply. It is very largely a question of organisation. On this point—to meet the one serious need: to meet a famine—I am practically a Socialist; that is, on this one point. In a famine I would be a Socialist, and I would support the idea that in the case of plague or famine the State should take over everything.

Mr. JOHNSON

There is an emergency here almost as bad.

Major COOPER

I am saying that this is a big emergency and that in a fuel famine I would go a long way. I would be prepared to say that the State should organise a supply of coal to the districts on the western seaboard where the fuel harvest has failed. The Government could import the coal, say, from Scotland, in bulk from sea, and land supplies at, say, Killybegs, Sligo, Ballina and Westport, and make arrangements for its distribution at practically cost price. By doing that, a great deal of expense by loading in small lots might be saved. Of course, care will have to be taken not to ruin absolutely people in the coal trade in that area. Coal should only be supplied under the State scheme to those in need who were not in the habit of buying coal in the past—people who were accustomed to rely on turf as their fuel and who now find that they have not got that fuel. Subject to that limitation, there is a good deal to be said for the State undertaking some such scheme to meet the crisis. A crisis is there and has got to be met in some way. The way it is being met at the present time is largely by cutting down timber, which is an extremely bad thing for the country.

Mr. DAVIN

I want to draw the Minister's attention to certain difficulties which appear to have arisen in the case of monies voted from the Relief Fund for expenditure in district council areas in three or four cases in which I am concerned. In one district in my constituency the rural district councils have got into a sulky frame of mind owing to the decision of the Minister for Local Government to wipe them out. They have been called together in three different cases to discuss a scheme likely to secure the approval of the Minister for Finance and the Minister for Local Government, and which, if approved, would relieve a considerable amount of unemployment in these areas. I want to know from the Minister if he is prepared to take any steps to deal with a situation in which a district council will not come and do their duty in that way. What action is he prepared to take in conjunction with the Minister for Local Government to deal with the holding up of consideration of such schemes? Unless some special action is taken in the case of district councillors who refuse to attend the meetings or who are not prepared to form a quorum at these meetings, there is no use in money being promised for these particular schemes. I know of two drainage schemes which are held up in two towns where those drainage and water works schemes are desirable from a public health point of view and from the point of view of the relief of unemployment. I want to join with Deputy Corish in urging the Minister to see that no unfair amount is imposed on the local ratepayers in the case of any money voted for schemes such as drainage or water works or any other works the Minister may consider suitable for the objects which he has in mind. I know the case of a water works scheme which has been under consideration for the past two years, where the local charge upon the town would amount to 4/11 in the pound.

I think it is ridiculous in the present state of affairs, with the burden on the ratepayers, and with the general depression that exists, to insist on a local charge of 4/11 for carrying out a drainage and a water works scheme. I quote that as an instance of the necessity for giving attention to that, and I would urge that in any scheme that is to secure the approval of the Minister for Finance it is necessary that at least half of the money should be found out of the relief fund for this particular work. Deputy Cooper has referred to the question of mobilising the State for the purpose of organising the coal and fuel supply. I think he is gradually coming forward in the right direction and eventually, if he keeps travelling at that place, he will find himself, perhaps by accident, in the ranks of the Labour Party. If he is prepared to go that far, I think he might also urge upon the Minister the desirability of setting aside money for putting the available coal fields wherever they exist—the Arigna, the Wolfhill, Castlecomer—or the peat districts in a position to supply our own home requirements. That would prevent money going out of this country for imported coal. We should keep that money at home as far as we can. I think the State can only live when it first takes into consideration the desirability of producing as much as we can at home of the things we need, particularly coal and peat. We have, according to the estimate of experts, available peat resources to supply us for 30 or 35 years. I will not venture to suggest the amount of available coal we have, but whether it is available or not very little has been done by the present Ministry to encourage the development of our own coal in this country. We are dependent on England at the present time for 55 per cent. of our heat-producing power, and there is little use in people here or outside talking about absolute separation from England so long as we are economically dependent on England to that extent. I think these are the things we should tackle. We should reduce the quantity of imports by extending and developing our own natural resources, which are valuable and unlimited if we only realised it. Deputy Cooper suggested another point for the Minister for Finance, namely, that the State should lend money to business firms for business purposes. I wonder would he go so far as to suggest that we should have a State banking system, because from what I know of our banking system I would support him in that. That is a matter not merely for the Minister for Finance but for the Executive Council as a body.

Mr. GOOD

Where will you get the money to put into the bank?

Mr. DAVIN

If Deputy Good looks up the figures, he will find that although we are supposed to be bankrupt, there is at the present time in the Irish banks £200,000,000 available, most of which is invested outside the country against the interests and the development of our own country.

Mr. GOOD

We have banks enough; that is not the trouble.

Mr. DAVIN

I am supporting Deputy Cooper to that extent, and I will support him to a greater extent if he is prepared to go further. Deputy Cooper seems very interested in Sligo. I do not know whether his interest in that constituency is due to the fact that there is a double-barrelled vacancy there at the moment and that there would be very little difficulty in persuading the Minister for Finance, in view of an early election, to spend as much as he can in that particular constituency and the other vacant constituencies. The matter dawned upon me that Deputy Cooper anticipated the election and urged Deputy Dolan to press for as much money as he could out of the relief fund in view of that coming on.

I draw the attention of the Minister to the serious difficulty that exists in the areas where money is spent under the auspices of the local governing authorities, particularly the district councils, when those schemes are held up because of their sulky attitude. If no steps are taken by the Minister to deal with that particular situation, there is no use in the Minister promising to Deputies in this House money for the relief of unemployment by useful work.

Mr. MICHAEL DOYLE

I should like to ask the Minister in whose power it will lie to administer relief schemes. Is it in the power of the district council, the county council, or the urban council, or can an individual or a certain number of individuals apply to the Minister to start a scheme in a certain district? I should also like to impress on the Minister for Agriculture the desirability of letting us know who will have the promotion of those schemes of drainage in the different parts of the country alluded to by the Minister for Finance. Will the different boards, or a certain number of individual tenants who are perhaps in a flooded district or otherwise, have power to apply to the Ministry to start a drainage scheme in their district? I should also like to impress on the Minister for Finance that in dealing with this fund he should spend the major portion of it in the rural districts, because as a rule the town workers are all, or almost all, qualified for the dole. In the rural districts not an agricultural labourer can apply, and I can assure the Minister that there is as much unemployment in rural districts to-day as there is in urban ones. In my own county the rural districts are in a deplorable way for want of employment, and I would impress on the Minister to earmark the bulk of this money for the rural districts, and not to hoard it all for the congested districts either. In my own county there are districts in as bad a way as any congested district. I ask the Minister to deal liberally with the rural districts in the promotion of schemes in them, and if other people fail to promote the schemes the Minister should take the initiative and promote them himself.

MINISTER for LANDS and AGRICULTURE

I agree with the Deputies who stated that there is a danger that money of this sort might be misused. I want to assure Deputy Cooper—I am sorry he is not here—that the decision to spend this money is not an eleventh hour decision. If a last moment decision was taken to spend a large sum of money on relief works it is almost certain that nearly half of it would be wasted, at least, as compared with money spent in the pursuance of schemes which got full consideration. Deputy Cooper pointed out that this was not the time to be looking for information, that this was not the time to be looking for statistics or to be diagnosing the problem, and that we ought exactly to know what the problem is. I do not agree with his time table. He said this information should be found three months ago, and he was most specific that the effects of the bad harvest should have been ascertained three months ago. That could not be done. Three months would bring you into the month of September. The month of September was going to make a great difference in regard to the harvest. A fine month of September would have altered our problem considerably. There were certain tentative inquiries made in September but final information in regard to the harvest could not be gleaned in that month, and these inquiries have been brought up to date, and I am satisfied personally that I have in my office in map form an exact picture of the real position in regard to fuel, potatoes, grain and crops generally. This is not information that has been gathered during the past week, but it has been prepared, sifted, and analysed by particular officials whose duty it is to attend to those matters and to take part generally in the development of agriculture.

Mr. WILSON

What sort of a picture is it? Is it a bad one?

MINISTER for LANDS and AGRICULTURE

One thing at a time. I am coming to that. All this talk about famine is nonsense. There is no real famine in any sense of the word. These scare statements about a fuel famine, a potato famine, and a corn famine are inaccurate and misleading, and it is just what Deputy Cooper fears, that we are coming to conclusions without adequate information, that leads him to talk of famine.

From one point of view the use of the word famine might be correct. If, for instance, in one townland there was a shortage of potatoes, you could say that there was a famine there, but that would not justify you in speaking of famine all over the country, and that is the impression given by speakers here. If we do not envisage the problem properly we cannot consider it properly. We know that we have no unlimited money to spare, and we are anxious to see that money spent in the right direction. The first thing to do, if we are to achieve our object, is to refrain from making exaggerated statements in regard to the problem. There is a shortage of potatoes in certain districts, and it may be that time will tell that potatoes generally will not keep very well. We are not able to make up our minds on that at the moment, and, personally, I believe that time will tell a different story and that it will be found that they will keep. The real fear from that point of view is not a shortage of potatoes, or a danger that they may not keep, but that there is in certain areas extreme poverty coupled with high prices for feeding stuffs, and that these two facts may lead people to use potatoes which they could keep for seed, and there may be a shortage of seed next year. That is possible in regard to definite, limited areas. That is the problem at the moment, and it is one that cannot be intelligently discussed, because we have to wait for a year to see how it works out. In regard to fuel, I may say that the amount available is nothing like that of last year. It is not. There is an area where there is a one-third failure, and that is a very big area. There is an area where there is a two-third failure, and that is a rather small one, and there is an area, which is very much smaller still, where the failure is complete.

We have to face all those elements of the situation, not to isolate them, not as if they had not reactions on each other, but to face the fact that outside the harvest and other matters over which we have no control, you have a big agricultural depression in addition to a bad harvest, and bad results as regards turf, potatoes and grain. In addition, you have special areas within the congested districts where there is chronic poverty, which is aggravated this year. You have to face that whole problem and see what is best to be done. In regard to that part of the Vote for the Land Commission, some Deputies seem to be under a misapprehension as to what the £200,000 is to be spent upon. The Minister for Finance explained that most of the money would go to the Land Commission and would be spent on roads and drainage. This money, therefore, is not going to the local bodies, nor is it, as Deputy Cooper apparently thought it was, going to be spent on roads kept by the rural and county councils. The money is to be spent through the Land Commission on schemes which have been under consideration by the Minister for Finance and the Land Commission for at least a year.

Deputies will remember that money has been made available already early this year for the Land Commission, and practically all that money, with the exception of £10,000, will be devoted to the completion of works on hands. When it was realised at the end of last year that it was possible that the works which the Land Commission would have to do between this and five years could be done this year, they were asked to put in schedules to have them examined from every point of view. These are schemes which necessitate preliminary work such as drainage and the making of roads on new estates and other work of that kind necessary to be done in connection with land purchase operations and which would in normal times be done within about five years. It was realised last year that quite possibly these considerations, which have now occurred, might make it necessary that that money should be spent this year instead of spreading it over a period of five years, and the first schedules were put in to the Ministry of Finance early this year.

I suppose it is not a secret to any Deputy that in dealing with the Ministry of Finance you do not always put up your first proposition on lines which are going to be agreed to. The whole proposition was put up to the Ministry of Finance in the expectation that we could agree that some of the money would be spent early and the balance later on. At any rate all the Schedules have been before the Ministry of Finance and they have been under examination. I wish to point out that this is not an eleventh hour decision and the money is not now being voted because somebody has got into a panic. The schemes have been agreed to by the Minister for Finance and this money would have, in any event, to be spent within the next five years, but we consider it good business to spend it now when the needs are most urgent for this purpose. The Land Commission have got together an adequate staff and have begun to make arrangements for starting this work. Deputy Johnson asked when this money would be spent. Assuming that the Land Commission get this £200,000 they would be able to complete the work within twenty weeks.

Mr. COLOHAN

Would the Minister say when he would be ready to employ the men?

MINISTER for LANDS and AGRICULTURE

They are taking them on already, and the works should be in full swing in a fortnight. I would not be surprised if more than 50 per cent. of the men were at work in a fortnight, because the Land Commission have done the preliminary work on this during the last three weeks.

Mr. T.J. MURPHY

Do I understand the Minister to say that no scheme but the schemes already considered and reported on will be considered—that as a portion of the money of the Land Commission has been spent you will not be in a position to consider any other schemes put up?

MINISTER for LANDS and AGRICULTURE

The Deputy's point, I take it, is that as the works have already begun, and within a fortnight 50 per cent. of the men will be taken on, that that makes the scheme rigid and that it must go through. The Land Commission, say, propose to open a road on an estate. It is quite easy for them, even a long time after beginning, to decide to make roads not so costly, and they may consider that part of the money will be, for a month at least, in such a position that it can be transferred fairly easy. You cannot, of course, have accurate proportions in these matters. You have to take into consideration that you must start these schemes quickly, and you have first of all to realise that once a decision is taken the work has to go on, and waive as many objections as you can to the preliminary work starting quickly. That, to a certain extent, makes the scheme somewhat less elastic. Ask yourself whether, having regard to the fact that at least one-half the money can be exchanged within a month, it is not right to go ahead with the schemes at once, and lose probably elasticity by being committed to a certain amount. You have to put one against another.

Mr. COLOHAN

I want to ask the Minister will his schemes cover the whole country, or will some counties be left out altogether. Every county is suffering at present, and the county I represent has about 2,500 unemployed scattered all over the county. We want this money to be spent in such a way that all districts will benefit by the grants, as otherwise it would be of no use. I would impress on the Minister that the need is immediate. We want work to start at once. I am afraid these land schemes the Minister thinks so much about, and that no doubt are requisite for the reclamation and improvement of the land, will take a long time to mature, and that during the time he is getting his engineers to work the people will die of hunger; but what we want is immediate employment under this scheme.

MINISTER for LANDS and AGRICULTURE

That is hardly a question. The Deputy wants so much information, on so many different points, that I cannot deal with the matter by question and answer.

Mr. COLOHAN

Is this a scheme dealing with the whole country?

MINISTER for LANDS and AGRICULTURE

The scheme I was addressing myself to does not cover the whole country. We must begin at the beginning, and the right place to begin is with the poorer districts. We had to take into account the relief of unemployment. The description, relief of unemployment, is likely to be misleading. These schemes will relieve the agricultural labourers, of which there are not so many, and the sons of small farmers, men who are half farmers and half labourers, and that class of people. It is relief of unemployment, but also relief of the farmer who is working on his land and ekeing out an existence by earning a certain amount of wages. In considering this problem we are faced with the fact that we have certain limitations financial and otherwise. As I have said, we have to begin with the poorer districts. We could easily dissipate ourselves all over the whole country, and do nothing in any particular way. This money I have mentioned will not be spent outside congested districts, except in Cavan, which is a congested county except in the legal definition.

Mr. A. BYRNE

Why County Cavan?

MINISTER for LANDS and AGRICULTURE

Perhaps I will let the Deputy answer. He is a good judge. I want Deputies to remember that there is £50,000 more in this Vote which we have to deal with which is available for other districts, and as the Minister for Finance mentioned, £60,000 on the other Vote. The suggestion, I take it, is that there is going to be an election in Cavan. There is hardly a Deputy among the farmers who does not know that, outside the congested districts, Cavan needs more attention than any other county in Ireland. I would say that with the exception of one or two areas in the congested districts, Cavan needs most attention both as regards fuel and potato supply. Why County Cavan? The farmer Deputies know that this year you have an extraordinary phenomenon, that not only have the roots failed, but the grain has failed in most counties. When there is a wet year you would get a fairly big grain crop, though the quality may not be good, but in Cavan the root and grain crops failed because of the peculiar quality of the land. Anyone who knows agriculture knows that in Cavan, and in parts of Monaghan, the quality of the land is extraordinary. As a matter of fact, the shortage of fuel and potatoes in Cavan is rather similar to that in Connemara.

I think Deputies will appreciate that this is an extremely difficult problem. It was suggested that coal should be made available to be sold at cost price. I do not think that should be done. That would really mean tackling a very big area. The particular area I referred to is only one-third short. The Government could not go in and provide coal, and sell and distribute it in a huge area. The real problem in regard to fuel is a limited one—it is the supply of fuel in the poorer districts in Connemara, Leitrim, and the islands off the coast, where there is extreme poverty, and no money to buy the fuel. I want Deputies to remember also that the Land Commission could not guarantee to find work in every district where there are unemployed. Deputy Baxter suggested that we should get a census of the number unemployed, and give work to them in strict proportion. Deputy Cooper made a suggestion that we should go in for drainage work like that at the Owenmore, but any farmer will tell him that you cannot work on a drainage scheme in winter, and especially in this month, December.

On the one hand you have Deputy Cooper's suggestion that we should concentrate large sums of money in one particular district, and, on the other, Deputy Baxter's, that there should be an exact census taken of the unemployed, and that the money should be divided accordingly. We can do neither. The Land Commission can only spend money where they have work. They will take into consideration, so far as they can, that a certain area is poor, and that consequently money should be spent there, if we have work there. But they cannot do it in that entirely accurate and scientific way that Deputy Baxter suggests. Neither do they propose to do it by concentrating all the money in one little area.

Besides this £250,000 there is available in the Board of Works at the moment £100,000 to be issued to farmers by way of loans for buildings. The applications are coming in rapidly, and will be dealt with rapidly, and that will give a certain amount of employment outside the congested districts. There will also be made available for individual farmers for drainage, sums up to at least £100,000. I think farmers will agree with me that money spent in that way is far more remunerative than money spent on schemes. It might take £20,000 to drain a river, defined as a drainage maintenance district. It is essential it should be done, as it might improve the holdings of ten or twenty farmers. I do not want to suggest that that sort of work should not be done as soon as possible, but the £20,000 lent to an individual farmer, who knows just the amount of profit you can make out of farming, and who is not going to waste his money, would produce very nearly twice the amount of wealth. I say that apropos of the fact that as well as money for farm buildings in the Board of Works there is also a further sum of perhaps £100,000 available for drainage. If these applications come in, they can be examined by the time that you can do drainage on individual farms, say about March.

Mr. HEFFERNAN

Under what Department is that?

MINISTER for LANDS and AGRICULTURE

The Board of Works.

Mr. DAVIN

What is the rate of interest?

MINISTER for LANDS and AGRICULTURE

I could not state at the moment.

Mr. WILSON

Will it be less than 7 per cent.?

MINISTER for LANDS and AGRICULTURE

The right way to get that information is to apply in the proper way.

Mr. COLOHAN

What about the congests on the Bog of Allen?

MINISTER for LANDS and AGRICULTURE

I pointed out that there was further money available. When speaking of the Land Commission I was only speaking of a sum of £200,000 out of £250,000.

Mr. GOREY

Will bodies of farmers availing of this grant get expert engineering advice so as to guarantee that the money will be spent in a proper way?

MINISTER for LANDS and AGRICULTURE

If an individual farmer makes application to the Board of Works for a small loan to drain his farm the Board of Works examines the scheme and approves of it. The farmer does the work and it is inspected afterwards.

Mr. GOREY

It is absolutely impossible to expect good results from the operations of one farmer, if the other farmers round about render the work absolutely useless.

MINISTER for LANDS and AGRICULTURE

That raises another point. If Deputies think the Government are going to go in and drain every stream that flows through their land and that of their neighbours they are making a mistake. There are two sorts of schemes. Take a river like the Owen-more. You could not expect farmers to drain rivers like that. These schemes are dealt with under the Drainage Maintenance Act. There are smaller streams, four or five feet wide, flowing by farmers' lands. Farmers will have to make up their minds to keep these clean. If the drainage system is so blocked that a farmer cannot drain his own land, then he is in an unfortunate position. I hope farmers are not taking up the attitude that because they will not themselves do the bigger drains on their lands, then it is impossible to make loans to farmers to do the smaller drainage which, as I say, is highly remunerative and necessary.

Mr. HALL

What about rivers like the Tolka?

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

The Minister is endeavouring to explain a rather complicated subject in which everyone is interested and it would be better to let the Minister finish his explanation. Deputies can speak more than once in Committee.

MINISTER for LANDS and AGRICULTURE

I do not know anything about the Tolka. I suppose, as it has a name, it is a rather big river. There are rivers 15 or 20 yards wide which flow through and by the lands of farmers. I never expected farmers to clean them. There are also rivers one or two yards wide. They are expected to clean them. There was never a suggestion that the State should clean those rivers. Then there are small drains, a foot or two wide, that they make on their own lands, which it is absolutely essential to make and which yield immense returns. Deputy Gorey's point was, I take it, that there was no use making small drains because they could not clean the river into which they flow. If one farmer cleans his part of the river and his neighbour will not clean his part, we cannot help that. There are some things we must do ourselves and farmers must make up their minds that they must clean the bigger drains flowing by their lands.

Mr. GOREY

My point is that the money will be wasted if a body of farmers do not act together and if the scheme is looked at only from the point of view of one farmer. The money expended on one particular farm will be absolutely wasted. I want to know if seven or eight farmers come together and make an application for a loan, would they get expert advice from the Government so that the money will not be wasted.

MINISTER for LANDS and AGRICULTURE

Why will it be wasted?

Mr. GOREY

It would be wasted because there are difficulties in the way, not on the river at all, but on the way to the river—engineering difficulties.