It is calculated that about two-thirds of the workmen employed could be accommodated in huts while the remainder could be lodged in the neighbouring towns and villages. The number of workmen employed, according to Messrs. Siemens-Schuckert's proposal, would be 2,100. They say the number of workmen has been calculated on the basis of the normal output of our workers. That has nothing to do with huts. They add: "Should this output, contrary to our expectations, not be attained, the number would have to be increased, and this, of course, would affect our estimate of costs." Their estimate of costs, 33 1-3 per cent., which the Minister more or less agrees was the estimate, was based on the normal output of German workers. The Minister was good enough to inform the Seanad that Siemens-Schuckert had given a freewill testimony. He said: "These German engineers already have had an experience of Irish labour, and they have found Irish labour to work under conditions that would not be tolerated in Germany. Their output was in no way behind what they would get in Germany, and they have given me of their free will that testimonial."
So far we have it that this estimate was based upon the normal output of German workers. The Irish workers' normal output would be equal to that of the German workers, and on that there was a calculation of 2,100 men estimated to be necessary. The experts, after examining the report of Messrs Siemens-Schuckert, made certain comments, and they told the Minister and the Dáil that it was desirable to make an increase, at least to estimate for a possible increase, in the cost of labour. They tell us that Messrs. Siemens-Schuckert's project was based upon a very detailed estimate of costs, accompanied by explanatory texts. The texts gave a short description of the process of constructional plans for the works, and that is the subject of observations. Amongst these observations are the following: "The total estimate is based on basic prices appearing in Messrs. Siemens-Schuckert's report, and the authors of the report have arrived at these prices, partly as a result of their own inquiries and partly in accordance with the figures given to them by the Free State Government." This did not include the cost of the building machinery. At the end of each section of the estimate items are given covering the transport of machinery back and forward, the cost of its hiring and maintenance.
We have not had placed before us how these unit prices are made up, but one may deduce from these that the cost of hiring machinery, its transport to and fro, general expenses, contractors' profits, and wages cost, amounting to one-third, would all be included. Then we have this statement:
"The experts had given special consideration to the question of labour costs in the execution of the works, and have examined in the light of labour conditions in the country the basis of Siemens-Schuckert scheme."
And they go on to say:
"Taking all the circumstances into account the bases adopted by Siemens-Schuckert were reasonable, but that it would be wise from the point of view of the Government to allow for a possible increase in the estimated expenditure under this head of an amount equivalent to 8.25 per cent. of the total outlay of the civil constructional part of the power development plant."
It appears from the information that has been given to us that that 8¼ per cent. of the total has been included in the contract prices which are estimated to be £2,492,000, so that prior to the addition of this 8¼ per cent., or excluding that 8¼ per cent., the cost would run to about £2,300,000. Adding 8¼ per cent. to that or about £190,000, or making 36 per cent. of the total we had £900,000 or, to be exact, £897,120. So that we have the sum of £900,000 estimated as the cost for wages, the labour costs in Ireland of this scheme. We have had also from Siemens-Schuckert that they were calculating that 2,100 men would be required to do the work. The experts at a later stage in their report said that during the period of the first partial development, about 2,500 workers would be employed at the power development work proper for three years. So that between one estimate and the other there was anything from 2,100 to 2,500 men estimated for that period of three years.
As the Minister told us, provisions of the contract regarding the labour costs are not based on the number of workmen but on the experience of the engineers as to the normal proportion borne by labour to other costs from works of this kind. The normal proportion then was in the first instance £710,000, to which has been added £190,000. I wonder then if the Minister could tell us what was the estimated cost per man per week for general labour in the Siemens-Schuckert original proposition? Perhaps he does not know. The information that was supplied and upon which their estimate was based was that in the Co. Clare, the Co. Limerick. and the Co. Tipperary, the adjacent counties, road workers were paid 36/- and 35/- per week, that is, to men living at home. But the estimate, the Minister tells us, was not made up of any calculation of the number of men per week per wage, so much per week per man, on a given number of men. That was not the way the estimate was made up, but rather on the proportion of the total based upon the engineers' experience of works of a similar kind. In any case, we have £900,000 as the proportion estimated to be set apart for wages. But, nevertheless, we have, notwithstanding the fact that that was not the method of calculation, the figure of 2,100 or alternately in the experts' report, 2,500 men for a period of three years.
We are entitled to ask ourselves how much of the £900,000 would 2,100 men draw in three years at a given sum per week, or we may take the 2,500 men and ask the same question. If we take 2,100 men at 32s. a week, which is a sum which has been mentioned for general labour (and beyond which the Minister says the scheme would be uneconomic and would entail a charge upon the taxpayers or on the consumer of electricity) for three years, we arrive at the gross sum of £525,000, leaving a margin for payment over and above 32s. a week for skill or otherwise of £375,000. If we take 2,500 men, the number mentioned in the experts' report, and calculate their wages for three years at 32s. a week we have £624,000, leaving still a margin of £276,000. Now the figure that has been presented, and these are the only figures that have been placed before us——
