Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 1 Jun 1926

Vol. 16 No. 1

ESTIMATES FOR PUBLIC SERVICES. - VOTE 40—OFFICE OF THE MINISTER FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND PUBLIC HEALTH.

Mr. BLYTHE

I move:

Go ndeontar suim ná raghaidh thar £374,689 chun slánuithe na suime is gá chun íoctha an Mhuirir a thiocfidh chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31adh lá de Mhárta, 1927, chun Tuarastail agus Costaisí Oifig an Aire Rialtais Aitiúla agus Sláinte Puiblí, maraon le Deontaisí agus Costaisí eile a bhaineann le Tógáil Tithe, Deontaisí d'Udaráis Aitiúla agus Ildeontaisí i gCabhair, agus Costaisí Oifig Chigire na nGealtlann.

That a sum not exceeding £374,689 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1927, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Minister for Local Government and Public Health, including Grants and other Expenses in connection with Housing, Grants to Local Authorities and Sundry Grants-in-Aid, and the Expenses of the Office of the Inspector of Lunatic Asylums.

MINISTER for LOCAL GOVERNMENT and PUBLIC HEALTH (Mr. Burke)

In view of the fact that this Vote is a rather difficult one in which to anticipate lines of criticism, I do not intend to dwell very long on any particular item. In view of the current criticisms in the Press and in other places I thought, at the outset, it might not be inopportune at the present time to give a short survey over the periods between 1914-15 and the present year, as indicated by comparative figures, showing the cost of Local Government services in 1914-15, 1921-22, and the present year. It will, perhaps, be information that will be useful and acceptable to Deputies. The figures for 1914-15 and 1921-22 are proportionate figures for the twenty-six counties, although at that time the whole of Ireland was under review. The cost of officials' salaries in 1914-15 amounted to £46,065. In the year 1921-22 we had reached the position, as Deputies are aware, when there were two Local Government Departments functioning in the country, the British Local Government Board and the Dáil Local Government Department. In that year most of the actual work was being carried out by the Dáil Department. The cost in that year of the Dáil administration was £15,314 and the cost of the English Board was £86,940. In the present year, as the Estimates show, the cost is £84,535.

Under sub-head B the cost in 1914-15 was £5,738; the cost in 1921-22 was for the Dáil Department £2,057, and for the British Local Government Board £4,353. In the present year the cost under that sub-head is £9,550. Under sub-head C—Salaries of Auditors—in the year 1914-15 the figure was £9,155. In the year 1921-22 for the Dáil Department it was £3,392, and for the British Local Government Board, £14,500. In the present year it is £10,950. Under sub-head D—Travelling Expenses, etc., of Auditors—the amount in 1914-15 was £2,462; in 1921-22 the cost under the Dáil Department was £683, and under the British Local Government Board, £1,693, and the present cost is £3,200. The total of those figures represents roughly the amount expended on salaries and travelling expenses of officials. The total amount for 1914-15 was £63,420. For 1921-22 the inclusive cost of the Dáil and British Local Government Board was £128,922, and at the present time the cost is £107,835.

Coming now to the actual sub-heads, indicating the services provided in those years, we find that under sub-head E there was no expenditure at all in 1914-15. Sub-head F in 1914-15 was £2,893. In 1921-22 it was £671, and in the present year it is £1,200. I do not think that it is necessary to go down all the sub-heads, but there have not been very many changes or very remarkable changes in the cost until we come down to sub-head K— Child Welfare. We find there was no provision made under that sub-head in 1914. There was provision made of £10,900 in 1921-22, and there is provision made for £15,530 in the present estimate. Likewise on sub-head L—Medical Treatment of School Children—there was no provision made, of course, in 1914-15, but in 1921-22 there was provision of £190, and in the present year it has jumped to £1,700. Likewise with regard to sub-head M—Education (Provision of Meals) under the Provision of Meals (Ireland) Act, 1917—of course there was no provision in 1914-15. In 1921-22 £194 was provided, and at the present time £5,700 is provided. Welfare of the Blind is another service that was not in operation in 1914. Likewise Treatment of Tuberculosis, Treatment of Venereal Diseases, Grants to Local Authorities, ect., under Housing (Ireland) Act, 1919; Grants to Municipal Authorities, under Government Housing Scheme, Grants to persons and Local Authorities, building or reconstructing dwellinghouses. Under none of these headings was there provision made in 1914-15. These are the sub-heads which are responsible for all the increases or practically all the increases in the present cost of Local Government services.

If we compare the figures showing the amount expended actually on salaries and wages in 1914 with the amount expended actually on services, we get the remarkable result that there was £63,420 expended on salaries and wages in 1914-15 whereas the cost of the services actually only amounted to £22,788. In other words, salaries and travelling expenses amounted to three times the sum expended on the services. In 1921-22 there was an improvement in that respect. In that year we find that there was £128,922 expended on salaries and travelling expenses whereas the cost of the service was £123,051. When we come to the present year we find that the proportion has advanced very considerably. In the present year there is £107,855 expended on salaries and travelling expenses and £454,054 expended on actual services. Of course housing, tuberculosis and these other social services are mainly responsible for this development. In view of the fact that the cost of Local Government services has gone up very much since 1914 I thought it well to give those figures.

Probably the sub-head under which we will have most discussion is that of Appropriation-in-Aid which brings in the question of the road policy of the Department and accordingly I shall say a few words on this subject. There appears to be a great deal of confusion in the public mind in regard to the road policy of the Department at the present time. Much confusion in my view arises mainly as a result of half truths enunciated by interested parties of various kinds. You have the owners of heavy lorries, and those interested in the sale of heavy lorries, crying out that our roads are the worst in Europe. They are continually inquiring what the Government is going to do, and when are we going to give the owners of these lorries value for their money. You have the motorists crying out that they are being taxed very heavily for road maintenance, and that they are getting very poor value. You have those interested in railways saying that it is unjustifiable on our part to be expending large sums of money maintaining a permanent way for a rival form of transport, and that at a time when the railways are in anything but a flourishing condition. You have the ratepayers crying out that they are being fleeced in the collection of rates to maintain roads and highways at a standard that they have never asked for, and which is of no use to them. There is a certain amount of truth in all these contentions, but, on the whole, the untruth more than makes up for the little grain of truth they contain.

It is certainly a gross exaggeration to say that our roads are the worst in Europe. It would be very much nearer the mark to say that our roads are the best in Europe. Both statements would be untrue. With the exception of England, I should say that our roads compare more than favourably with the roads in European countries. In saying that I am not confining my statement to the main or trunk roads, but I refer to every kind of road. The bye-roads in this country are maintained on a much higher standard than similar roads on the Continent, taking the average road of that particular class.

There is nothing to be gained by continually crying out that nothing has been done in the way of improving our roads. We have not as good roads as they have in England, and we never will have. The reason for that is, not that we are not looking after our business as well, but simply because of the fact that we have 14½ miles to every 1,000 of the population in this poor country, compared with 4½ miles to every 1,000 of the population in Great Britain. In England they are in a position to spend £200 to £232 per mile from rates, whereas we are only in a position to spend £27 per mile. Doing our very best, I cannot see that the time will come when we will be able to maintain our roads at the standard at which roads are maintained in England. When we take into consideration that for five years nothing in the way of maintenance was done to our roads, and that during that period we had two wars in Ireland, in which the main object of attack seemed to be the roads and the bridges, I think we have brought our roads into a very creditable condition, indeed. The ratepayer in the country has really very little to complain about as regards what he is being charged for the upkeep of the roads. In pre-war times the expenditure from the rates on the roads was £670,000. At the present time it is £1,234,000, or an average increase of 98 per cent. over the past three years. We must bear in mind the fact that the main item of cost in the maintenance of roads is labour, and that the increase in rates for road maintenance should bear very close relationship to the increase in wages. The increase in the wages of road workers really amounts to 146 per cent. If that is taken into account, it will be seen that the ratepayer is paying a relatively small increase for that particular service. In England the increase from 1915 to 1922 was much greater. It increased from fifteen millions to fortyone and a half millions.

When discussing this question we must remember that this is a universal service, and that everyone in the country who utilises the roads benefits. Men, women and children have to use the roads, which are an essential service. If we bear that in mind I think we must realise that our present expenditure is relatively small. If we compare our expenditure on roads—a universal service—with what we spend, say, on old age pensions. a service that only embraces a very small number of people in the community, it will be seen that we are certainly not overdoing it. We are spending over 2½ millions on old age pensions. The cry of the railways is, of course, altogether unjustifiable. The average cost to the ordinary ratepayer for the maintenance of roads has gone up 98 per cent., but the increase in rates for roads on railway property has only gone up 66 per cent., so that they have no grievance whatsoever. The policy enunciated by the Minister for Finance in his Budget speech was not a policy intended to remedy grievances. There were no grievances to remedy. The sole object of the Minister's policy was to try and devise a more economic and a more efficient method for expending the resources at our disposal. In his Budget speech, he announced that £2,000,000 would be made available for improving the main arteries of the country—namely, trunk roads—limited to 1,500 miles. We are at the present time making all possible haste to get ahead with that scheme. It is, of course, being financed out of the Road Fund. Heretofore, that fund was not capitalised. That prevented our doing any really constructive work of a permanent character.

This new policy will enable us to undertake much more ambitious schemes. Under our present policy, it is our intention, so far as possible, to stereotype or standardise the present rate paid for roads. We intend to try and stereotype the rate paid for roads at about 60 per cent. above what was paid in pre-war times. That is a rough figure. In some counties it will be more, and in others less. But we realise that the agricultural community should be given every possible assistance in their struggle in the British market with foreign competitors.

Last year and the year before we thought well to relieve the farmer by increasing the Agricultural Grant. This year we are again bringing relief to that section of the community by not insisting on an increase in rates for roads to the extent that the present cost of living figure would indicate if the roads were to be maintained at a proper standard out of rates. This giving of relief to the agricultural community and to the ratepayers in general will, of course, necessitate our placing additional burdens on other shoulders. Accordingly, we have thought well to place that burden on the shoulders of those best able to bear it—namely, on the owners of heavy lorries.

The roads in Ireland were never intended for heavy traffic. Even in pre-war times, you had excellently constructed roads in England, laid down by engineers of the highest qualifications, and laid down on a strictly scientific basis. In Ireland, even our best roads—the mail-coach roads—often-times had only a surfacing of road metal a couple of inches deep. Beneath that you had clay. Accordingly, we have a much more difficult problem here than they have in England. To allow these roads to be torn up by heavy lorries would defeat our whole object, no matter what expenditure we incurred. Therefore, we found it necessary to limit the weight of these lorries. Last October I issued an Order limiting the weight to nine tons. Previously it had been limited to 12 tons. That in itself was something to be going on with. But anybody who knows the country realises that that in itself would not have been sufficient. A great number of lorries of nine tons laden, or even of six, seven or eight tons laden, would create a wear and tear that would tax us to repair.

We thought it necessary to devise a policy of steeply grading the tax on lorries according to weight. The result of that will be that either the heavy lorries will disappear off the roads—I would be sorry to see all lorries of over five tons disappear off the roads—or if they do not disappear, then the revenue for maintaining the roads will be very considerably increased. We anticipate from the system of taxation announced in the Minister's Budget speech a revenue of something between £600,000 and £700,000. Owing to the number of changes we have made, it is very difficult to give an exact estimate. We do not, of course, intend to capitalise all that amount. Several counties will not come in under our Trunk Road Scheme or will only benefit to a small extent. The idea is to link up the main national centres. It would not be equitable to divert all the money derived from the Road Fund to those particular counties, and to leave the counties that would have no trunk road mileage—as we understand trunk roads in this scheme—undowered. Accordingly, about half the figure will be available for maintaining trunk roads in those counties, and it will also be devoted to works of a similar kind in counties where, perhaps, the road scheme will also be in operation to some extent.

Mr. O'DOHERTY

The Minister has stated that this money will be devoted to the making of trunk roads. In several counties the trunk roads are already made. In other counties no trunk roads are made. Will it rest with the County Council or with the Minister to decide whether this money shall be devoted to trunk roads or otherwise?

Mr. BURKE

When this road scheme was first announced, my Department was literally inundated with demands from people all over the country—road authorities and individuals interested one way and another —insisting that this road and that road should be made a trunk road and giving the most plausible reasons in substantiation of their claims. The road scheme then announced took a considerable time to mature and, accordingly, that agitation died down. In view of the demands that were made at that time, I decided to take a very strong line in this matter. We have sent out our engineers—experts in this matter—who have consulted with the county surveyors and people able to give them information in the various counties. The Roads Advisory Committee have spent months deliberating on this point and have decided what roads should be included in this 1,500 mile scheme. This is a matter that has to be decided from a national point of view. If we are to have national roads, they must be roads that are important from that point of view and not merely from the point of view of the man living in a particular town or a particular county. Accordingly, we have decided to lay down those trunk roads and we do not intend to deviate an inch from the line we have taken up after very careful deliberation.

Accordingly, I will announce now the actual roads on which this extension will be made. As I have already said, the fact that we are expending this money on a scheme of national trunk roads will not, in any way, deprive counties which will not benefit by those trunk roads from their lawful share of the Road Fund. There will be a residue left every year out of which their legitimate claims can be met. It is proposed to repay this loan of two millions in ten years at five and a half per cent. interest. Therefore, in the first year the principal will be £200,000, and interest £110,000— £310,000 in all. That will leave a considerable residue to make up for any injustice which might otherwise fall on counties through which this trunk road scheme did not run. The lines of roads will run as follows:-

(1) Dublin, Balbriggan, Drogheda, Dundalk, Newry, with branch from Drogheda, Ardee, Carrickmacross, Castleblayney, Monaghan, Clones, Cavan.

(2) Dublin, Navan, Kells, Virginia, Cavan.

(3) Dublin, Lucan, Kilcock, Kinnegad, Kilbeggan, Athlone, Ballinasloe, Kilconnel, Athenry, Galway; Branch (a), Kinnegad, Mullingar, Longford, Carrick-on-Shannon, Boyle, Collooney, Sligo, Ballyshannon, Stranorlar, Lifford, Letterkenny—border at Derry; Branch (b), Longford, Roscommon, Castlerea, Claremorris, Castlebar, Ballina and Westport.

(4) Dublin, Nass, Kildare, Portlaoighise, Roscrea, Nenagh, Limerick; Branches: (a) Limerick, Ennis, Ennistymon; (b) Limerick, Rathkeale, Abbeyfeale, Castleisland, Tralee; (c) Tralee, Killarney, Macroom, Cork; (d) Limerick, Charleville, Mallow, Cork; (e) Cork, Bandon, Bantry; (f) Cork, Midleton, Youghal, Dungarvan, Waterford; (g) Cork, Fermoy, Mitchelstown, Cahir, Urlingford, Abbeyleix, Portlaoighise; (h) Waterford, Clonmel, Cahir, Tipperary, Limerick; (j) Clonmel, Kilkenny, Carlow, Naas.

(5) Dublin, Bray, Wicklow, Gorey, Arklow, Enniscorthy (branch to Wexford), New Ross, Waterford.

A great deal of work, of course, has been done on those roads during the last couple of years, but most of it has been work not of a very durable character. At least a quarter of the whole mileage has not received any treatment whatsoever. A survey of the work at various points has been carried out and the engineers of my Department are co-operating with the county surveyors in the various counties.

Mr. MORRISSEY

Do I understand the Minister to say that the main trunk roads from Dublin to Cork will run by Roscrea, Nenagh and Limerick?

Mr. BURKE

No. That is the main road to Limerick. There are two other roads to Cork, one going through Kilkenny and Carlow and another going through Portlaoighise and Urlingford.

Mr. HEFFERNAN

Do those two trunk roads in County Tipperary converge?

Mr. BURKE

No, except at Cahir, in the south. With regard to the method of reconstruction, it is a very difficult matter. As I have said, we are always up against the question of cost. I will give the Deputies here some comparative figures to show the cost of doing the really expensive work on roads at present. Most of this high-class road construction is beyond our means. Just now we are only expending from rates an amount equal to about £27 per mile on roads. On anything like high-class roads we would spend £3,000 per mile. Concrete roads will cost about £10,000 per mile.

Mr. GOOD

The Minister stated that roadways cost £232 per mile in Great Britain.

Mr. BURKE

That is the average cost. Some roads would cost more than that.

Mr. GOREY

The ratepayers have to pay.

Mr. BURKE

The ratepayers will pay for it. Even the ordinary waterbound macadam steam-rolled road in some counties has been done at a cost of £250 per mile, and it goes up to as high as £3,000 per mile in some counties, where they undertook widening and put down very substantial foundations. In the County of Mayo you are doing ordinary steam-rolled waterbound roads at an average cost of £400 to £450 per mile. As Deputies are aware, we laid down several experimental stretches of road between here and Naas. Those stretches are of a very different kind. It may be of interest to give figures showing the cost of these different kinds of work. Reinforced concrete, twenty-four feet wide, with drainage, costs over £10,000 per mile. This cost prohibits any extended use. A much less expensive kind may be tried. This may be considered barred out on the score of cost. Secondly, asphalt surfacing has been laid as cheap as eight shillings per square yard. Even at such prices there can be only a very limited use. Even the cheapest asphalt, on account of its cost, will only have very limited scope under the new scheme.

Mr. GOREY

What does that cost per mile?

Mr. BURKE

It would be from six to eight thousand pounds per mile. Next in the order of cost is tar bitumen macadam. There are fifty-five different combinations of tars, bitumen and macadam. They have all a clear meaning to road engineers, but to the ordinary layman they express very little.

Mr. GOREY

What is the cost per mile?

Mr. BURKE

About £2,816 per mile for a road 18 feet wide, but incidental work might have to be done which would bring the cost to about £3,000 per mile. Although we are only expending at a rate of £27 per mile from rates, the old coach roads which were laid down one hundred years ago, cost over £160 per mile.

Mr. GOOD

To maintain?

Mr. BURKE

To construct.

Mr. GOOD

Is the £27 per mile for maintenance?

Mr. BURKE

It is the average cost over the whole country for maintenance.

Mr. GOOD

Under the old régime that would not cost £176.

Mr. BURKE

That is for mail coach roads. The fourth class of road is that done by grouting with bitumen and spraying. The cost would be about £2,800 per mile. The fifth class of road, grouting with cement and sand and tarring, would cost £2,500 per mile; the sixth class, silicate of soda grouting and tarring, would cost £2,150 per mile; the seventh class, a cheap form of tar macadam on good existing road crusts, would cost £1,500 per mile; the eighth class of road, rolling, spraying and chipping with incidentals, would cost £1,200 per mile; and the ninth class, rolling with centre strip tarred would cost £1,000 per mile. These estimates can only be taken as a rough approximate cost based on work already carried out or being carried out. The ninth class of road might cost less than £1,000, but if work, such as widening, drainage, and strengthening, has to be done the cost might run up to £3,000 per mile. It will accordingly be seen that it is not an easy matter to lay down exactly what a particular stretch of road will cost or what method you should adopt for improving it. Every mile of road will have to be surveyed and given special attention. It is our intention to give more attention to roads in the immediate vicinity of towns, where the traffic is heavier, and where we will achieve a double object, namely, that of improving the transport system, and also improving the appearance of the towns and probably improving the health of the inhabitants by having proper and hygienic highways. One of the greatest eyesores which we have at present is the miserable and dirty streets of some of our principal towns. I do not think, until questions are put to me, that I can say much more on that subject.

There is a good deal of discussion at present about nationalising our trunk roads. That is one of the vague expressions which people often bandy about without trying seriously to ascertain what is in their own minds. I must say that it is a term which confuses me a great deal. When we are asked why we do not nationalise our roads the best answer to the question, probably, is to say that we have nationalised them. We have certainly gone a considerable way towards doing so. Nearly all the terms used in this connection are vague. The term, for instance, "trunk roads," means so many different things that everyone has probably a different idea of its meaning. If you take, for instance, 1,500 miles of trunk roads, it is scarcely an exaggeration to say that we have nationalised them inasmuch as paying for their reconstruction will be a national charge. The operations on the roads will be directed from a national centre. We have decided where the roads are to run, to what standard they should be brought, and what kind of material is to be used upon them. Under the Local Government Act we have power, if we want to do it, either to get contractors to undertake the work of reconstructing these roads, or, if we care, we can do the work directly ourselves, but it will probably be more economical to allow the local authority to do the work. In some cases we may bring in contractors who may have more up-to-date machinery. In so far as that is nationalising the roads, we have done it. If by nationalising the roads is meant establishing an expensive Department in Dublin with a huge staff of engineers, putting three or four of them in every county cheek by jowl with the local engineers, and so duplicating our staffs in each county, I am afraid that the day is a long way off when that is going to occur. So far, however, as reasonable nationalisation is concerned, I think we have actually done it.

Mr. GOOD

After these trunk roads have been constructed on whom will the maintenance fall?

Mr. BURKE

On the county councils, but they will have to be maintained according to our standards and under our supervision.

Mr. DAVIN

Is it part of the Minister's policy to work gradually to bring down the laden weight of lorries to a maximum weight of five tons?

Mr. BURKE

No; nine tons.

Mr. DAVIN

The Minister, I think, mentioned five tons.

Mr. BURKE

No; it is to be brought to nine tons. Dealing with the Estimate generally, I do not think that there is any other item of such interest to Deputies as the roads, but I will just make a short statement regarding the various sub-heads. It may be convenient to deal with sub-heads A and C together. Under A there is a reduction from £91,042 to £84,535 or a reduction of £6,507 as compared with last year. Under C there is a reduction from £11,714 to £10,550, or £1,164 as compared with the previous year. In the numbers of staff there is a reduction under these sub-heads of 15 and 2, making a total reduction of 17. As Deputies are aware, the control of the Local Government in 1921 had passed to the Department of Local Government set up by Dáil Eireann. In that year there was a staff of about 70 engaged on local government administration the cost of which was defrayed out of Dáil funds. The Provisional Government took over the staffs of the British Departments in April, 1922, and the combined staffs of the Dáil Department and Local Government Board numbered 288. Between August, 1921, and 31st March, 1922, eleven members of the Local Government Board staff had gone out on pension, thirteen had been previously transferred to Belfast, while the Board's temporary staff, engaged upon the administration of the Irish Land (Provision of Sailors and Soldiers) Act, 1919, was not transferred to the Government.

The total of the combined staffs at April, 1922, was, as already stated, 288. At the present time the number is 253, which is the lowest figure that can safely be reached, consistent with efficient administration of the public services. The position compares favourably with the British régime, particularly when the extent of the services administered is taken into account. Already the bases of far-reaching reforms have been laid in respect of the poor law, public health and road transport, and the future development of these services demands careful administration. The housing problem, too, has claimed close attention. I shall deal more fully with the progress attained when I come to the Housing sub-heads. Up to 1922 there was almost complete stagnation. Then there are the services which have been transferred to the Department since 1922, namely, control of mental hospitals, elections to the Houses of the Oireachtas, and road maintenance, also the new service for the combined or central purchasing of commodities required by local authorities. Not alone have the duties and functions of the Department been extended, but in every branch of administration there has been a considerable accretion of duties which have been carried out without any net addition to the number of staff.

Sub-heads B and D do not appear to call for any special comment. Sub-head E deals with expenses in connection with International Road Congresses.

This year the Triennial Congress of the Permanent International Association of Road Congresses will be held at Milan. The objects of the Congresses, which are held triennially, are:

The publication of sundry articles, reports and documents relating to roads.

The collection of the results obtained in every country from the tests of materials used or suitable for use in the construction and maintenance of roads, by application on the roads or by researches in the laboratory.

It was considered that the Saorstát should be included in the list of countries belonging to the Association. The great majority of the nations have already joined the Association. An Imperial Congress is to be held in London during the year, to which it is proposed to send a medical representative. Provision is made for annual subscription to the International Union against Tuberculosis, to be held in Washington in October. We are not sending a delegate, but we have to keep in touch with it, and to retain our membership. The object of the Union is to co-ordinate the efforts of organisations and institutions in the various countries in the campaign against tuberculosis, and scientific conferences for that purpose are convened from time to time, usually biennially. Having regard to the widespread incidence of tuberculosis in this country it is necessary to keep in touch with the latest developments in the struggle against the disease in other countries, so as to be in a position to avail of the most modern methods for its prevention and cure. Provision is made for a subscription of £100 to the International Office of Public Health at Paris. It has been constituted under the International Arrangement of 1907, in pursuance of the Paris Sanitary Convention of 1903, and embraces all the leading countries in close co-ordination with the Health Section of the League of Nations. The office is controlled by an International Committee composed of technical representatives designated by the participating States in the proportion of one representative to every State, and is required to meet at least once a year. One of the duties of the Committee is to make recommendations as to the modifications which may be needed in International Sanitary Agreements.

The International Office is an acknowledged world authority on matters of Public Health. Its principal object is to collect and bring to the knowledge of the participating States information of a general character relating to public health, especially as regards infectious diseases and the measures taken to combat them. The Office issues a monthly Bulletin comprising notices of legislation and administrative regulations respecting transmissible diseases, statistics dealing with public health, and summaries of current literature on sanitary subjects. The subscription covers the travelling expenses and attendance fee of the delegate. Membership of the Office is a qualification for representation at periodical conferences dealing with public health questions of international concern in connection with the dissemination of infection through shipping and the movement of emigrants.

I do not think that sub-head F calls for any particular mention. Sub-head G shows a reduction. This reduction is due to the fact that amounts were included last year for clearance of a site, and so on, that are non-recurrent. The dwelling accommodation of the Vaccine Institute at 25 Upper O'Connell Street was destroyed, and there was an amount in last year's Estimate for the clearing of that site.

Mr. JOHNSON

Can the Minister tell us what is the salary of the bacteriologist?

Mr. BURKE

£240 a year——

Mr. JOHNSON

Is that whole-time?

Mr. BURKE

—with an allowance for clerical staff and a further sum of £120 for house expenses. It is not whole-time.

Mr. JOHNSON

Where is the Minister for Lands and Agriculture now?

Mr. BURKE

As regards sub-head H, £200 is for office travelling. It is sometimes necessary to send an indoor officer to the country to consult with local officers upon special matters which could not be undertaken by the outdoor staff. For example, there are matters in connection with elections. Miscellaneous minor services represent the usual charges for the cost of advertisements, daily newspapers, Local Government publications, petty office expenses, and expenses of messages— tram fares—when urgent delivery of letters is required. The increase under the sub-head for this year is due to the inclusion of the amount required to meet expenses of the Trade Section under the following heads:

Advertisements and petty cash	£80
Advisory Committee travelling expenses	120
Purchase of samples	200
Testing quality of commodities	300
	£700

I do not think it necessary to deal with telegrams and telephones under sub-head H (2). Sub-heads I and J are recurrent. Sub-head K deals with the grant for maternity and child welfare. The disbursements from the grant in 1925-26 amounted to £14,369. Of that total £6,065 went to twentysix local authorities, the balance being paid to eighty-six voluntary agencies. The classification of the latter is as follows:

Health visiting	69
Institutions	7
Centres	4
Boarding out	6

The infant mortality in Saorstát Eireann—67 per 1,000 births—for 1925 showed a reduction as compared with 1924, and was only fractionally higher than the record year 1923. This improvement was specially noticeable in urban districts where the infant death rate for 1925 was below the figure of 1923. The high mortality amongst illegitimate infants continues to be an unfavourable feature, but efforts have been made on the part of the Department to effect improvement by the circulation of recommendations for concerted remedial action to the local authorities and voluntary agencies in Dublin County, and county borough, where the loss of life among this class is abnormally heavy.

The Estimate for the coming financial year provides for an expansion of services, especially on the part of local authorities, who have generally shown disposition to enlarge their activities for child welfare. The national grant defrays 50 per cent. of the net cost of approved services. The principal undertaking assisted is the provision of health visitors, that is to say, trained nurses who get in touch with expectant and nursing mothers, and children under five years of age, and give advice as to maternal health and as to the care and management of young children. The primary object of health visiting is preventive, so as to forestall the development of conditions of ill-health. The work is carried on by whole-time officers in the larger centres of population, and elsewhere the services of district nurses have been utilised on part-time conditions. Twenty-six local authorities and eighty-six voluntary agencies participate in the grant. The general infant mortality for 1925 was as follows:—

Whole country	67 per 1,000 births
Urban districts	97 ,, ,, ,,
Rural districts	53 ,, ,, ,,

In 1924 the statistics were:—

Whole country	71 per 1,000 births.
Urban districts	102 ,, ,, ,,
Rural districts	55 ,, ,, ,,

Sub-head L deals with the grant for school medical service. In 1925-26 this amounted to £570, which was applied to five voluntary schemes and the two municipal schemes in Cork and Clonmel. The latter have developed in accordance with the results ascertained on the preliminary inspections, and arrangements have been made for the treatment of dental defects and of affections of the eyes and throat. In Dublin the Commissioners have been furnished by the Medical Superintendent Officer of Health with a report on the requirements, and still have the matter before them. In Waterford the Corporation are considering a report on a scheme of school medical service submitted by their medical officer. In the administrative counties the matter is closely associated with the appointment of county medical officers, one of whose early duties will be to formulate recommendations suitable to the requirements of their respective areas.

Sub-head M deals with school meals. The expenditure on school meals was incurred in two county boroughs, namely, Dublin and Cork, and in fourteen urban districts, namely, Athy, Navan, Brí Chualann, Carlow, Ceannanus Mór, Clonmel, Dungarvan, Dun Laoghaire, Kilkenny, Killarney, Listowel, New Ross, Wexford and Youghal. Recoupment from the grant is made in respect of half the actual expenditure from rates for the provision of food for school meals. Primary schools under the control of the Christian Brothers will, as a result of arrangements made between the Department of Education and the Christian Brothers, come under the terms of the School Meals Acts. About sixty-seven primary schools under the control of the community will be covered by the new arrangement. The extension of the school meals scheme will not affect the grant until the year 1927-28, as recoupment therefrom in any year is only made in respect of expenditure incurred during the preceding financial year.

The decrease in the present year's Estimate is due principally to the dropping of the school meals scheme framed by the Rathmines and Rathgar Urban District Council. Urban authorities have been reminded of their powers as regards the provision of school meals, but the general views of the councils who have not adopted schemes were that there was no necessity for such arrangements in their districts. During the year 1924-25, approximately 12,478 school children were fed, of whom 6,061 were dealt with in Dublin County Borough, and it is estimated that 1,521,953 meals were supplied.

Sub-head N deals with Welfare of the Blind. There is but little change to be recorded in the position as regards the provision required to be made for the blind. The number of workshop employees and of inmates in the institutions for the blind shows a slight decrease, which accounts for the reduction of £100 in the grant as compared with last year. The scheme adopted by the Commissioners for Dublin County Borough for the welfare of the blind has been continued for a further year and has been extended by the Dublin County Council to their area. Similar arrangements are being brought into operation in Cork Co. Borough, and consideration has also been given to their adaptation for Limerick County Borough. The training of the blind in this country is not a problem of any great extent. Particulars as to the number of blind persons between the ages of five and thirty years in the several counties of the Saorstát have been secured through the County Boards of Health, and, omitting Dublin county, in which a scheme is operating, and the four county boroughs, the total number of blind persons between these ages is found to be, approximately, 116, or an average of less than five such persons per county. In Dublin blind persons are admitted to the register on a certificate from a recognised ophthalmic surgeon or specialist. Provision is made for the education, training, employment and maintenance of suitable blind persons in the existing schools, workshops and homes for the blind. The wages of blind workers employed in those workshops and living in their own homes are being augmented under the scale. I do not think it is necessary to give that scale, as I gave it last year.

Sub-head O is for the treatment of tuberculosis. The administration of county tuberculosis schemes was transferred, in pursuance of Section 15 of the Local Government Act, 1925, from the county tuberculosis committees to the county boards of health as from 1st October last. In addition to the existing tuberculosis schemes in twenty-two counties and two county boroughs, comprehensive arrangements for dealing with the disease are under consideration at present in Cork County and County Borough, Limerick County Borough, Meath County and Roscommon County. The Cavan County Council are completing a tuberculosis hospital at Keadew, Cavan, and several other councils are also considering proposals for advanced case institutions. It is somewhat difficult at present to estimate the effect of these projects in increasing the claims on the National Tuberculosis Grant in the present year, but an additional sum of £3,500 has been included to cover the contingencies of the adoption of new schemes, the operation of new institutions and the increase of patients under treatment, due to the operation of the compulsory notification of tuberculosis in pursuance of Section 17 of the Local Government Act, 1925. The total number of patients dealt with under approved tuberculosis schemes during the year 1924-25 was 10,131, composed of 2,680 insured and 7,451 uninsured persons, and the amount issued from the grant as recoupment in respect of their treatment was, approximately, £34,300.

The mortality rate from tuberculosis for the year 1924 was 1.45 per thousand of population. This was a slight increase on the previous year's figure of 1.41 per thousand of population. Such an increase was not unexpected in view of the disturbed conditions of the two previous years. The comparative progress made in this country in reducing the mortality from tuberculosis may be estimated by examining the time which has been occupied in this and the neighbouring countries in securing the same measure of improvement in the death rate from the disease. The highest rate of mortality in Ireland from tuberculosis was 2.9 per thousand of the population, and this figure was last attained in the year 1904. The lowest record for the Saorstát was reached in 1923 in the rate of 1.41 per 1,000 of the population. Thus the reduction of the rate from 2.9 to 1.41 per 1,000 population has been effected in nineteen years. England last showed a death rate from tuberculosis of 2.9 per 1,000 population in the year 1878, and the rate did not fall below 1.5 until 1910. This gives a period of thirty-two years for the corresponding diminution of the rate as against nineteen years in Ireland. Scotland's rate of mortality from tuberculosis was 2.9 per thousand of the population in the year 1883, and it did not go below 1.5 per thousand until the year 1919, or thirty-six years afterwards. This country has, therefore, achieved in nineteen years the same reduction in the death rate from tuberculosis which was effected in England in thirty-two years, and in Scotland in thirty-six years.

In connection with sub-head P, I have to say that the attitude of the majority of the local authorities towards the provision of facilities for the treatment of these diseases is generally adverse. The five approved schemes for Dublin County Borough, and the counties of Dublin, Kildare, Wicklow and Monaghan have been continued. In addition, approval has been given to the general outlines of schemes for the diagnosis and treatment of venereal disease in Cork County Borough and in Offaly County, and it is expected that these arrangements will shortly come into operation. In County Westmeath the council have approved of the resumption of their approved scheme, which has been in abeyance for some years past.

As regards the work performed in connection with existing schemes during the year ended 31st March, 1925, it is to be noted that the out-patient attendances at the treatment centres were 26,076, as compared with 25,292 in the previous year, and the number of in-patient days amounted to 7,591, as against 7,022 in the preceding year. It does not necessarily follow from these increased statistics that the disease is becoming more prevalent, but the figures probably indicate that the facilities for treatment afforded under the schemes are becoming more widely known and utilised. The total cost of the approved arrangements for dealing with the disease during the year ended 31st March, 1925, was £8,707 13s. 4d., of which 75 per cent. or £6,530 14s. 11d. was refunded from the State grant, leaving only £2,176 18s. 5d. to be met from the rates. The total cost for the financial year 1923-4 was slightly higher, £8,913 18s. 6d.

Progress in housing is being sustained. The total amount included in the present year's estimate is £348,000. Of this amount £2,000 is in respect of three schemes which were carried out under the Housing Act, of 1919, viz., schemes undertaken by Dalkey Urban District Council, Balbriggan Town Commissioners, and St. Barnabas Public Utility Society, Dublin. In the first two schemes the subsidy payable is based on the annual deficit on the schemes, and in the case of the Public Utility Society the subsidy equals 50 per cent. of the loan charge on the approved expenditure. The Exchequer subsidy under the 1919 Act to local authorities was a payment on basis of loan charges pending the completion of the houses, and when the houses were completed of a payment of 35/- for each £1 of rent collected, the subsidy not to exceed the actual deficit incurred. Final payment in respect of any year's subsidy is not made until the accounts are audited. With the high building costs prevailing at the time no progress could be made, and the schemes local authorities had in view were deferred pending more favourable conditions. Compared with the conditions which prevailed up to 1922 the present rate of progress must be considered satisfactory. The Government has already provided over one million and a quarter for housing grants, and this year a further sum of £348,000 is required. Under the £1,000,000 grant which was made available for urban housing in 1922, schemes providing for about 2,100 houses have been undertaken by urban councils and with one or two exceptions are now completed. The sum of £20,000 included in the Estimate represents the balance of the grant.

The numbers of houses which are being provided under the 1924 and 1925 Acts are as follows: The number of houses constructed by private persons under the 1924 Acts is 2,745 and the number provided by local authorities 864, making a total of 3,609. Of this total there have been built 1,079 in county boroughs, 357 in urban districts, 65 under town commissioners, and 2,108 in rural districts. Under the 1925 Act grants have been allocated in respect of 2,507 houses to be erected by private builders, 90 by public utility societies and 769 by local authorities, making a total of 3,366. This number of 3,366 houses is allocated between urban and rural areas as follows: County boroughs, 1,045; urban districts, 278; town commissioners, 64, and rural counties, 1,979. From price schedules which have come to the notice of this Department the cost of building shows a slight downward tendency. Under the schemes of the Civic Commissioners the building cost of five-roomed houses in Dublin during the past twelve months averaged between £500 and £535, while in the smaller municipal areas houses of similar accommodation are being built at between £450 and £500.

Sir JAMES CRAIG

In previous years I offered a considerable amount of criticism on this Vote. I am going to be very short this evening, because I am getting less hopeful as time goes on of ever being able to make any impression on the mind of the Minister. We have agreed to spend four hours on the discussion of this Vote, and the Minister has already occupied more than an hour. I do not think he could have done justice to himself or his Department in any less time than he has taken. He has made a very clear and full statement. I want, however, to bring one or two matters to his notice to which, I think, attention should be called. In the first place, I want to ask him to stiffen his back in regard to certain local bodies.

Throughout the Saorstát there has been adopted a scale of salaries for dispensary medical officers. This has been done in all the counties except Mayo and Longford. The local bodies in these two counties have refused to fix a scale of salaries for their medical officers. I think the Minister should stiffen his back, and urge these two counties to come up to their neighbours in this respect. It is not a very satisfactory thing for a man to be working in Mayo, say, on a salary of £180 a year while a doctor in the neighbouring county of Galway, doing the same work, is getting, perhaps, £250. I do not want to be twitted with the charge that I have pressed for economy because I have never pressed for reducing salaries where efficient work is done. I have pressed on this Vote, frequently, for a reduction in the number of people employed to do a certain amount of work, but that is quite a different thing from suggesting that salaries should be cut down, which I have never done. I think the Minister should see that the county boards of health or the county councils in these two counties should adopt a scale of salaries for their medical officers.

The next point I want to call the Minister's attention to is the fact that I do not think he is sufficiently stringent with the local authorities in demanding from them that they should look after the adulteration and contamination of food, particularly milk. He himself has alluded in his statement to the very high mortality amongst infants and children. I will tell him at once why the mortality is so high. It is due to dirt in some form, but chiefly to dirt that contaminates milk. There is no question but that the greatest and the highest mortality is due to summer diarrhoea amongst children, the result of contaminated milk. Further, probably more than half the cripples we see throughout the country is due to the fact that they have been drinking tubercular milk. It is well known that diseases of the bones and joints are due to bovine tuberculosis which they have got from milk. I suggest to the Minister that he should insist on local authorities carrying out the provision of the Public Health Acts in order that purer food is given to the people.

I am quite sure that he may excuse himself by saying that these things will be better done as soon as county medical officers of health have been appointed. We have been waiting long for these people. Let me say that we have here in Dublin a superintendent medical officer of health, and we have not yet, as he has said himself, adopted the Medical Inspection of School Children Act. Why that is so, I cannot understand. It was quite reasonable in previous years for us to say that it was not possible for the Minister to do this because he had not the county medical officers of health to superintend all this work. In Cork the scheme has been adopted, but in Dublin, where we have a superintendent medical officer of health, no scheme has yet been adopted for the medical inspection and treatment of school children. We have, I am glad to say, adopted the child welfare scheme here, and I believe it is working well.

The only other remark I wish to make is with regard to the roads. As one who uses the roads a great deal, I repeat what I said when the Budget statement was being discussed, that the heavy lorries should be driven off the roads. I have followed them travelling at 20 miles an hour, and going as I was at that speed myself, I could feel the surface of the road flying up after them. They should not be allowed at all on the soft roads. I would not object at all to the heavy lorries going on the roads if we had road surfaces such as you see out in Merrion Street— or concrete roads—because in that case I do not believe they would do any harm, but I certainly have the greatest objection to allowing heavy lorries of ten tons to travel along our ordinary surfaced roads.

Mr. MORRISSEY

I would like to say a few words with regard to the road policy of the Department. At the outset, I wish to say that I agree with what the Minister has said that our roads are not nearly as bad as many people try to make out. I think when we realise what the condition of the roads was, say, three or two and a half years ago, and compare their condition then with to-day, we should give credit to the Department, to the County Councils, and to the men for the very good work they have done, not only with regard to the roads, but the bridges. The roads are not as good as we would like to see them, but at the same time they are nothing like being as bad as some people would have us believe.

I suggest to the Minister that our roads would probably be much better if we had some sort of standard system as regards the making and maintaining of them. The trouble concerning the making and maintaining of roads is that in almost every county you have a different system. In some counties the work is very well done. They have a very efficient staff, very efficient engineers, and they have very up-to-date machinery. In other counties they have not an efficient staff of men, for they do not keep them. They take up a certain number of men, employ them for a few months, then these men are let go, and later on raw men are again taken on for a few months. In addition, they have not up-to-date machinery, and in effect they have no system for the making and maintaining of roads. I think the Minister himself will, perhaps, be the first to admit that. I would suggest to him that he might well pay some attention to this matter, and see whether it would not be possible to devise some scheme which would make for a standard method of dealing with roads throughout the whole Free State.

The Minister in his statement said there was a good deal of confusion in the public mind regarding the road policy of his Department. I think there is very good reason for that, and the public is not altogether to be blamed. This time twelve months, I think it was, the Minister announced a very big road policy. There was to be an expenditure of something like £3,500,000. A few months afterwards we were told that had been passed on to the Minister for Industry and Commerce, and again a few months afterwards we were told that it had been passed on to the Minister for Finance. Eventually, after a good deal of pressure from all parts of the House, we were told that the Minister for Finance would disclose the whole scheme in his Budget statement. He did, and he told us that the Government would give £2,000,000 for 1,500 miles of trunk roads. I should like to know why the original scheme, which apparently recommended itself to the Local Government Department, was not gone on with. I would also like to know whether the Minister for Local Government and his Department had a better opinion of the scheme propounded by the Minister for Finance than they had of their own scheme. It seems to me that the original scheme mentioned by the Minister for Local Government, which had occupied the attention of the officials of his Department for many months, and then received the seal of that Department as being a good scheme, should have been gone on with.

Another matter I wish to touch upon is the question of the amalgamation of unions. I thought we would have had some statement from the Minister on that important question. I would like to hear from the Minister when he is replying whether he is satisfied that the amalgamation of unions has been a success. So far as I am concerned I am satisfied it has not been a success, and I doubt if there has been any real financial saving, but whatever saving there may have been it has not been worth the hardship, and in some cases the misery, inflicted on the poor people as a result of the amalgamation. I suggest to the Minister he should go into this matter very carefully and systematically. He should have a proper inquiry made into the working of the whole system throughout the country. I am satisfied if that inquiry is carried out he would be very much surprised at the effect it has had on the poor people. There are cases in which the poor people have to be taken forty or fifty miles across country to county homes and county hospitals, and we know there are cases in which people sooner than go that distance from their friends elect to remain at home, and in many cases die in their own homes. If the district hospital had been nearer they would, as in the old days, go into it and they could be visited there by their friends, and their lives would have been saved.

I do not want to exaggerate the position. I am stating the case as I see it, and as it has been presented to me in discussions I have had with people interested in the matter. I believe that within the past few years there have been many deaths that might not have occurred if these people were not forced under the amalgamation scheme to travel forty or fifty miles, and perhaps in some cases more, to go to hospital. In that connection, I also wish to bring to the Minister's attention the policy that is creeping up in certain hospitals under the control of County Boards of Health of admitting to those hospitals what are known as paying patients. I have no objection to people paying for their maintenance in hospitals, but I object to the hospitals, the nurses and the doctors that are paid by the ratepayers to look after the poor, looking after people who can afford to pay for themselves in outside hospitals. We know what will naturally happen in a district hospital in which there are a number of poor people, and a number of patients who perhaps are in a position to pay a couple of guineas a week. Naturally the paying patient will get more and better service than the poor patient lying by his or her side. That patient will also have other advantages. Certain patients, because of their position in life, will have wealthy friends coming in to see them, bringing with them many luxuries which the ordinary patient in the hospital cannot have. I consider it is not fair to the poor patients lying in their beds to have people coming in offering delicacies to paying patients when these unfortunate poor patients can never hope to have such things for themselves. That might appear to be a small matter, but I draw attention to it because it is being talked of throughout many counties in the Saorstát. The idea is gaining a good deal of ground that County Boards of Health are encouraging paying patients and are increasing their number. I submit that if paying patients are brought into a district hospital maintained by the ratepayers, the poorer patients, who cannot contribute to their treatment, are likely to suffer. I would like the Minister to give us his opinion and state the policy of his Department on the question of the amalgamation of unions.

Mr. SHAW

I welcome the Minister's statement with regard to road schemes. The statement he made this evening will constitute welcome news both to the persons who use the roads and the great number of unemployed throughout the country. In my opinion the biggest asset the Free State will have for the future will lie in the attraction to Ireland of tourists from all over the world, now that peace has been restored. Already, even though the strike in England had a serious effect, people going about the country must be astonished and pleased to see the large numbers of strange motor cars conveying people from other countries through different parts of the Saorstát. I would like to see the Department of Local Government more in contact with the Irish Tourist Development Association. A rate has been struck by many Co. Councils which will bring in a considerable amount of money for the purpose of advertising the attractive features of the Saorstát. The Westmeath Co. Council struck a rate which, I think, will amount to something like £400. That money will be available for advertising purposes. If the scenic attractions of this country were more generally known, large numbers of persons would come here.

There is another matter with which I would like to deal. It is of such very great importance that I propose to occupy a little of the time of the Committee with it. As Chairman of the Westmeath County Board of Health, I happen to be in contact with an important institution, the county hospital. If there is one thing in this country that ought to be rectified soon it is the question of unmarried mothers. It is a rather unpleasant subject to introduce, but its importance justifies its introduction. At the present time all over the country there are large numbers of these people in the various county homes. They are not classified; a first offender is put in with a professional who has in many cases reared a family in the institution. The more innocent girls have very little hope of reformation. I do not know what the Poor Law Commission will recommend in connection with this matter, but the existing state of affairs in many county hospitals is really deplorable. I look upon this matter as one needing prompt attention.

I would like to hear if there is anything going to be done in the direction of establishing an institution in Dublin, or any other place through the Saorstát, into which those unfortunate people can be taken. At such an institution they could be classified and given suitable work to do. Ratepayers generally would not find any fault with such a system as that; they would be quite willing to pay for that. The conditions in regard to unmarried mothers at the present time are really terrible. I happened to pass to-day through an institution where unmarried mothers are being looked after. There are 35 of these people herded together, and the innocent ones—the first offenders— have no hopes for the future. Some remedial measures should be introduced and I would appeal to the Minister to take up this matter seriously as soon as he possibly can. It is one of the most important matters requiring attention at the present time.

Mr. GOREY

I heard Deputy Morrissey saying that several classes of people deserve credit for the condition the roads are in. Credit was given to the Government for authorising the expenditure of money; to the county councils for spending the money, and to the people who made the roads for earning the money. Not a scrap of credit was given to the people who pay the money. If there is anybody who deserves gratitude in this connection it is the people who find the money and pay it.

Mr. E. DOYLE

Who are they?

Mr. GOREY

The ratepayers of the country. It is out of the rates we get everything, except what can be got— some people got it that way recently— at the point of a gun.

Mr. JOHNSON

What about the people who drink beer and smoke tobacco?

Mr. O'CONNELL

And who own motor-cars?

Mr. GOREY

The chief credit should be given to the people who pay the money and who have paid it cheerfully up to this. Deputy Morrissey said another thing I take exception to. He talked about receiving paying patients in hospitals where there is plenty of room and staff. The dividing line between the poor people who are entitled to go into hospital of right and the paying patients is in many cases very narrow. The only line of demarcation is that one belongs to a family with a certain social valuation, but who is actually poorer than the people who are entitled to go into the hospital of right. To say that these people get special treatment that detracts from the treatment poor patients are getting, and that because of the presence of paying patients there the others are not getting the attention they would otherwise get, is a gross reflection on the officers of the different institutions and also on the Government staff who supervise the institutions. I think it is pure imagination. I hope there is no ground whatever for the statement.

As a former member of a board of health, I am prepared to assert there is no ground for the statement. The people who enter as paying patients are just as poor, and are even poorer, than the people who claim to go into the hospital as of right. Their presence in no way takes away from the attention and the facilities given to other patients. I do not think Deputy Morrissey has given this matter the consideration it deserves. I do not know that there is any use going into the question as to Government policy, with regard to motor traffic and so on. We had it recently, and we will have an opportunity of discussing that question again at a later stage on the Finance Bill.

Deputy Sir James Craig referred to the bad quality of milk. There may be some truth in what he stated in regard to the city. I do not know what the condition is as to infant mortality in the city, but I am acquainted with child life in the country, and I have not seen any sign, or at all events very little, of that class of infant cripple or deformed children referred to. As to the milk of the country generally the reports from the dairy inspectors are in conflict with the things mentioned by Deputy Sir James Craig. Now, I appeal to the Minister on the question of administration to consider the very serious position we have. As between county council and county council it is not a very crying grievance, even though they have different methods of construction and policy, and approach the same roads from different viewpoints, but there is great discrepancy between the policy of the county councils and the urban councils. Most of the urban authorities I am acquainted with have the streets of the towns in an intolerable condition, showing that thousands of pounds contributed by the county councils for their upkeep have been absolutely squandered.

There is always danger in passing through these towns; the condition of the streets and roads in them is scandalous. I am not exaggerating the position; my own town of Kilkenny is an instance. If the ratepayers spend money for the upkeep of the highways, they ought to be kept in a proper way. One authority in a county is sufficient. I draw special attention to that. Even if it is necessary to introduce a Bill doing away with some of the old Charters and superseding the powers they claim of maintaining the roads within their areas, the matter ought to be dealt with. It is a crying necessity. You have good roads entering a town at one end, and good roads going out at the other end. The roads are good enough until you come to the boundary, but the moment you strike that you strike bog and do not feel a good road again until you get out at the other end of the town. That is the rule, and not the exception. The Minister said in a very off-hand way, the ratepayers had very little to complain of, and that they could congratulate themselves on only having 98 per cent. of increase.

Mr. BURKE

In comparison with the increase for other things.

Mr. GOREY

I think 98 per cent. is a huge amount, something to give us food for thought at the moment. A good deal has been made, and continues to be made, about the cost of living, but other people have to live besides people in receipt of salaries. The country is very fast losing its capacity to pay. That capacity has been reduced considerably. One of the principal industries of the country is the dairy industry, and the price this year of the principal article of dairy produce, milk, is such that the agricultural community will be very lucky if they get 6d. a gallon, and that that can be maintained for twelve months. It is the same with every other agricultural revenue-producing source. Farmers will be lucky if they get anything like what will meet their outlay. Ninetyeight per cent. of an increase cannot be approached as a light matter; it is a very serious matter for the ratepayer. There is no question of an increase in his position. There is a decrease in his capacity. The farmer is in a worse position to-day than he was in 1914.

Mr. BURKE

On a point of explanation, I do not know if I made it clear but our object, and present policy, are to fix the increase on road expenditure from the rates at 60 per cent. above pre-war. That is fixing it at something like the farmers' index figure for what he gets for his commodities, and that is considerably below the cost of living figure. Ninetyeight per cent. was the average figure of last year and the two years before.

Mr. GOREY

Suppose he does get 60 per cent., which is rather doubtful at the moment. I do not think it is 60 per cent. increase with regard to milk. What, then, would the pre-war price be?

Mr. BURKE

What about pigs?

Mr. GOREY

As regards milk, something about 4d. would be right. Are we asked to accept that? This is a very serious matter. The Minister is quite right when he said that most of the roads, practically all our roads, were never intended to bear extraordinarily heavy traffic. The foundations were never laid to bear such heavy traffic, and when he fixes the limit at nine tons laden, I think he is still too high. I think six tons laden will have to be about the weight, and, even then, only a small proportion of the roads, outside the main roads, will be able to bear it. None of the bye-roads is in a condition to bear a six-ton lorry. When you come to examine the amount of money that will be required per mile to deal with this class of road construction, I think £27 a mile will go very short of achieving what the Minister has in view and what we all have in view. I do not see any prospect of doing business in any kind of a satisfactory manner with the cheaper class of roads mentioned. The cheapest kind is £1,000 a mile. I do not think the Minister himself would recommend that except in exceptional cases. I think we may assume that it will be roughly £3,000 a mile or £2,860. How far this £27 a mile gives a good prospect in that direction I do not know. The two things hang together. The Minister may have figures at his disposal, but, listening to his statement for the first time, I am rather doubtful that his figures are right.

Mr. BURKE

They work out at £1,333 a mile for 1,500 miles of road. That would be the average.

Mr. GOREY

May I again impress upon the Minister the necessity of taking up this question of urban authorities dealing with connecting main roads going through their areas within the urban boundaries?

Mr. MORRISSEY

They have nothing to do with the main roads now.

Mr. GOREY

Since when?

Mr. MORRISSEY

The 1st April.

Mr. GOREY

They are doing it up to the present.

Mr. BURKE

I presume the Deputy has his own city in mind. In Kilkenny they are responsible for the maintenance of their own roads. That is an exception.

Mr. GOREY

That is the particular town I am referring to.

The PRESIDENT

It is a corporation.

Mr. BURKE

It is a city.

Mr. GOREY

The sooner it ceases to be a city, as far as roads are concerned, the better for the roads.

Mr. P. HOGAN (Clare)

I am rather at a disadvantage in speaking on this Estimate, because I did not hear the Minister, but I know it is nothing unusual for people in this country to speak to things they did not hear. Therefore, I will try my hand at it. There are a few outstanding things, no matter what the Minister said, that require attention immediately, and alteration if at all possible. With Deputy Morrissey I would like to hear the Minister make some definite and detailed statement regarding the amalgamation schemes. There is a general consensus of opinion that they are a failure.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

Are the amalgamation schemes law, or are they made by Order?

Mr. BURKE

I do not wish to be too particular in insisting on my rights.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

Are they law?

Mr. BURKE

They have been made law by the Local Government (Temporary Provisions) Act.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

With regard to the amalgamation schemes, has the Minister any discretion?

Mr. JOHNSON

He may cancel by Order, I think.

Mr. BURKE

Notice has to be given of the revision.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

But there must be an amalgamation scheme. If legislation is required to alter it we cannot discuss it.

Mr. HOGAN

May I proceed on the question of amalgamation?

Mr. T. MURPHY

May I ask if it is possible to have a discussion on the lines on which such a scheme is being administered?

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

We can have a discussion on any question in which the Minister may, without legislation, intervene, but we cannot have a discussion on any matter which would require legislation. One matter introduced was the question of heavy lorries on the roads, but I do not think heavy lorries can be taken off the roads without legislation.

Mr. HEFFERNAN

Yes.

Mr. BURKE

By order.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

That leaves the Minister in for that.

Mr. BURKE

With regard to this question of amalgamation, though technically it can be ruled out, in view of the fact that there is a Commission dealing with the whole matter, I am not in a position to make any statement on it. If the Deputy has any particular views to air it may be better for him to do it, but I cannot give him any satisfactory reply, in view of the fact that this Commission is sitting, and that they have not brought in their report. I expect they will this summer.

Mr. HOGAN

Still I know no other means whatever by which local government administration in this country can be spoken to except on this Vote. I know no other means by which people who, up to the time of amalgamation were receiving necessary hospital treatment, and are not receiving it now, can be dealt with.

The PRESIDENT

What about a motion in the Dáil?

Mr. HOGAN

If I am to be closured on this matter, I do not see what we have to talk about.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

I could suggest to the Deputy several means of doing it. The only thing that is to be said here is that in Committee on Finance we are discussing, as I have said frequently before, how the Minister is spending the money which is voted. A change of the law cannot be advocated. I want to make a further point. The more Deputies advocate legislation in Committee on Finance the easier it is for the Minister to pass his Vote and get his money without any criticism.

Mr. HOGAN

I will try to steer within the four corners of the ruling.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

The Deputy is very free because nobody appears to know what the amalgamation schemes are and I am not supposed to know.

Mr. HOGAN

As a matter of fact, it is a thing I can never understand, and I am glad to find that it is the general opinion in this House that nobody can understand it. I will give one concrete example to the Minister. It is, perhaps, the best way to bring home to him the hardships that are being suffered by a good many people in this country. In the matter of county hospitals the majority of the buildings that are being used were invariably, before the amalgamation scheme, county infirmaries. If I might say so, the atmosphere of the operating theatre still hangs around them, and people regard them as only places for surgical cases. There were, in most of the other towns, hospitals in connection with other institutions that were there for the benefit of the poor, and they were mainly regarded as places for medical cases. People who go into the present institutions for medical attention do not expect, and invariably do not get, the care and attention that were given formerly to medical cases. They have to go with the surgical cases into the county hospitals where the atmosphere of the operating theatre still obtains. The one concrete example that I wanted to give is this. I remember seeing a married man of about 30 years of age, one evening at the end of his house. It was a cold evening, and he was trying to pacify a child of about eight months. I asked him where the mother of the child was, and he said she was in the county hospital. Here was this unfortunate man trying to look after a child in arms because the child would not be taken in with the mother. In the other institutions infants were admitted with their mothers. That is only one case of the terrible hardship that people have to suffer. Imagine the condition of that unfortunate man trying to look after an infant. I think it ought to be sufficient to bring home to the mind of the Minister some of the hardships that are now being suffered in the country.

I agree with Deputy Shaw regarding girls in the county homes, but I will pass it over and refer to another class of people that are housed in the county homes. I refer to the harmless insane and the imbeciles. I saw their condition in some cases, and it is not at all conducive, where there is only temporary insanity, to the happiness of the unfortunate people or to the restoration of their sanity. Their surroundings are gloomy at present, and something should be done to take them elsewhere and make their surroundings better and more likely to improve their mental condition. In the case of paying patients it is a very serious matter. If I could be sure that the sick poor would get first attention I would be perfectly satisfied, but from a lot of the hints one gets, I think that such a thing is not being done. Further, there is in these county hospitals such a thing as wrangling amongst doctors as to whether they are to be closed boroughs for one set of doctors more than another, or for one or two doctors more than others. That kind of thing is not conductive to the interests of the sick poor, and it should get immediate attention.

Regarding motor traffic, I said when the Budget proposals were going through that you could not force motor traffic off the road at the present time, but this much I would suggest to the Minister,—that it is not at all equitable to be endeavouring to maintain a national service as a local charge because that is what is being done at the moment. The road service at the moment in the country is a national service and you are endeavouring to maintain that up to the standard as a local charge which is not at all equitable. The development of tourist traffic is, of course, an excellent thing, but we should be mindful, too, of the people who are constantly in the district and paying for the maintenance of the roads just as we are mindful of the people who come to spend a very short time in the district. I would suggest to the Minister very seriously and earnestly that he should assure us of some change in the present amalgamation scheme or of some immediate attention to it.

Mr. GOOD

One is disappointed to hear from the Minister, after the consideration that has been given to this road problem extending over a number of years, that we are to have in the future exactly the same method of maintenance, the same distribution of responsibility, as has existed in this country for a number of years. I have maintained that that system is wrong in principle. The proposal of the Minister appears to be that certain roads, known as trunk roads, will be maintained out of the Road Fund. I was wrong in saying "will be maintained" because I understand from the Minister that these trunk roads will be constructed out of the Road Fund and will be maintained by the local authorities. I do not know whether I am correct in that view of the Minister's statement or not. He did not seem to be very clear on the point and one would like to be quite clear before one starts to criticise.

Mr. BURKE

It is not very easy. I should say that these roads which are to be constructed out of the national funds will be maintained so far as maintenance is required——

Mr. GOOD

Are we to know from the Minister definitely, because we have been on the subject so long that it is time we got to definite conclusions, that these roads will be constructed out of the Road Fund and maintained out of the Road Fund?

Mr. BURKE

Not altogether. They might be maintained as to seventy-five per cent. out of the National Fund and twenty-five per cent. out of the rates. One cannot make any clear distinction because these 1,500 miles of road may ultimately be very greatly extended. There are over 4,000 miles of what we call trunk roads in the country at the moment and 4,500 miles of linked roads. This is an arbitrary selection of roads arrived at by our experts. It is not a fixed mileage by any means. There may be other roads included in it later on and we cannot lay down a hard and fast policy to hold to indefinitely.

Mr. GOOD

Apparently we have not succeeded yet in getting what we have been trying to get for a number of years, that is, a settled road policy.

Mr. BURKE

And never will.

Mr. GOOD

We never yet got from the present Ministry what conclusion they have come to definitely. What we have got from the Minister is that we are going to get the cost of the construction of the trunk roads, and the question of the maintenance of the trunk roads must remain in abeyance until a policy is settled.

The PRESIDENT

Until you have money enough to deal with it.

Mr. GOOD

The President has referred to the question of money. May I remind him that the increased charge on the local authorities for the last two years is one of forty per cent. and that it has very largely arisen, as the President knows, from the increased cost of maintenance and construction of roadways within those areas?

The PRESIDENT

The increase that the Minister has anticipated in connection with the local authorities' rates for roads is sixty per cent. over the pre-war cost. To that is added the whole of the Road Fund and the Deputy might concern himself with suggesting how best this money could be spent. The Minister has tabled his proposals.

Mr. GOOD

With regard to the Road Fund, we have argued that the road users should contribute more largely in the future to the construction and maintenance of the roads than what they have done in the past and that less of that burden should fall on the local authorities. In consequence of that recommendation there is included in the Budget of this year what is admittedly a heavy charge on road users. I do not remember at the moment what the product of that charge will be.

The PRESIDENT

It is £100,000— by the time the clippings that have been asked for here come off.

Mr. GOOD.

We will leave the question of the clippings alone. We want to get from road users a very much larger proportion of the cost of and maintenance of roadways than we have done in the past and I must strongly urge that the local authorities should be relieved of that burden to a very considerable extent. It has been properly argued here that the tourist traffic is an important asset in the country. We recognise that, but tourists go to these places of attraction and those of us who know this State of ours know that the places of attraction are confined to a comparatively small number of counties. The other counties are the highways to these places. They do not benefit at all from that tourist traffic. But the proposal is that they are to maintain the roadways leading to these centres from which they derive no benefit. That is why I hold it is unfair.

Mr. BURKE

I did not say that. I think the Deputy has misinterpreted me.

Mr. GOOD

I did not say that the Minister had stated that. I was laying down an axiom that will be clear to every Deputy. I do not attribute that to the Minister, but seeing that that method, the present policy whereby it is proposed to go as far as laying down the roadways, to put the maintenance of these roadways on the local authorities, and seeing that the local authorities in many cases derive no benefit whatever from that through-traffic, I say it is an unfair system. As long as that system prevails, I for one, at all events, will oppose it.

AN LEAS-CHEANN COMHAIRLE

took the Chair.

Mr. BURKE

What does it matter to the ratepayer if his rates are not increased? We are fixing the rates at a certain figure over the pre-war figure. It does not matter how we maintain the roads if his rates are not increased.

Mr. GOOD

I have shown that within two years his rates have increased over forty per cent.

The PRESIDENT

What rates?

Mr. GOOD

The local burden.

The PRESIDENT

Absolute nonsense. Absurd. In 1923-24 the sum contributed from local rates for roads was £1,300,000 odd. Last year it was £1,200,000. I am speaking from memory, but I am not far out as regards the amount. The incidence has gone down for the last three years by £150,000, approximately. I would like to know how the forty per cent. was made up on that?

Mr. GOOD

I was not talking of the increased cost as entirely arising from roadways. The proposition I put forward was that in the last two years there has been an increase in the rates per head of the population of the country of 40 per cent.

The PRESIDENT

I dispute that absolutely.

Mr. GOOD

The President can dispute the figures given to me in an answer by the Minister for Finance. That is the best authority I can quote. The President may be a better authority, but, in an answer the Minister for Finance gave me within the last few months, he informed me—the President will find the answer on the records—that in 1922-23 the local expenditure amounted to £1 3s. 1d. per head of the population, and that in 1924-25 the amount had increased to £1 13s. 5d. per head of the population. I leave those figures to the President. One would like to see improved standards in methods of road construction and road maintenance. Those who pass occasionally through the different counties notice not alone the different surfacing on the different roadways but they notice, as well, the different methods of the different engineers in different counties.

Mr. BURKE

You will find that in the City of Dublin.

Mr. GOOD

It is capable of improvement, and that is why I draw the attention of the Minister to it. There are certain counties in which considerable improvement might be effected both in road construction and in road maintenance. There are some counties where one is delighted to see the condition of the roadways. The Minister might, through his Department, have improvement effected in certain counties which I will not name at the moment. I am sure the Minister knows them himself. Unfortunately, the roadways of some counties are notoriously bad in comparison with those of other counties. And these counties in which there are bad roadways have a considerable attraction for tourists. I might say, in passing, that a little more attention on the part of the Department and its officials to the officials of those counties would add to the comfort of the tourist, and would also add to the number of the tourists who visit those areas.

As regards the weight of traffic on the roadways, there will be opportunities of discussing that matter on another occasion. But it occurs to one that the question of the size of tyres has not had the attention that is desirable in connection with modern road construction. Possibly if we devoted some of the attention—Deputy Hewat will agree with this—that is being devoted to what we call heavy lorries, to the tyres that heavy vehicles use, it would be better. It is common knowledge that certain forms of tyres and certain widths of tyres do infinitely more damage to roadways than others. Additional attention should be devoted to that subject in the future. It would help to lighten the burden of the maintenance of these roadways.

As regards the question of housing, I observe from the Minister's statement that there has been a falling off in the number of houses erected under the 1925 Act, as compared with the number erected under the 1924 Act.

The PRESIDENT

The former year was the year that you said the scheme was not going to be a success.

Mr. GOOD

I do not want to enter into any discussion with the President at the moment. Possibly we will have other opportunities of dealing with these points. I want to concentrate more on the Minister for Local Government for the moment, and leave the President for a future occasion. I notice from the Minister's statement that under the 1924 Act there were 3,609 houses erected and that under the 1925 Act there were 3,366 houses erected. The falling off is one that may to some extent be accounted for by the policy. That is why I call attention to it. The policy of the Minister with regard to housing and the policy which he has urged on local authorities has been to concentrate very largely on five-room houses. The five-room house caters for the more well-to-do section of the working classes. There is a limit to the demand for that type of house. It means a rental of anything from 12s. to 20s., and I do not for the moment suggest that there have not been four-room houses and three-room houses erected under these schemes, but the policy has been to encourage the larger house.

It does appear to me that we should direct more attention to the smaller type of house and thereby provide for a section of the community that has been, to some extent, overlooked in connection with our housing proposals —the poorer section, the men who are not able to pay from 13/- to 20/- a week for a house. Seeing that the well-to-do tradesmen have been provided for during the last couple of years, something should be done for the unskilled labourers who form a larger proportion of the community than the skilled labourers. These are the unfortunate people who dwell very largely in tenements and in the slums of our city and large towns. One would like to see a bigger attempt to provide suitable houses and better surroundings for those people than was done under the previous Acts. I admit there are difficulties in respect of these cases that are not as easy of solution as the difficulties in the case of other classes of the community. But I think the time has arrived when we should do something more for them than has been done in the past.

Deputy Sir Jas. Craig has complained that the local authorities are not doing as much as regards examination of foods as they should and he says that the death rate which has been considerably reduced, might be still further reduced if there were greater activity by the local authorities in this direction. I do not doubt that statement but I do urge that the fines that accrue from the work of those local authorities should not, as is provided for in an Act passed recently, go into the Central Fund but should go towards the expenses of the local authorities as they did heretofore. This is going to place a further burden on the local authorities and the effect of that will be that the local authorities will not be as active in the future, seeing that it is going to cause them greater expense. I should like the Minister to use his influence with the Minister for Finance and get him to issue an order, as is possible under that Act, so that the local authorities will get from the Central Fund the moneys they received in the past from these fines. There would be no excuse then for any falling off in the work. If these fines are taken from them, it must be obvious that the work done in the past will not be continued in the future.

Attention has been directed from the Labour benches to the question of paying patients in hospitals. Let me say, as one who has had some little experience extending over many years of the working of our hospitals, that but for the money received from paying patients a great many of the hospitals would be closed up.

Mr. JOHNSON

Is the Deputy referring to Union hospitals?

Mr. GOOD

I am referring to hospitals with which I am associated. I think the principle applies to all hospitals—that those who can afford, as many of our better class trades people can afford, to contribute to the hospitals during time of treatment should do so. I am glad to note that that principle has met with such approval from some of the Labour organisations that the Unions contribute themselves to the hospitals for their members while in hospital. That principle ought to be encouraged. If it is not encouraged and if it is not more largely adopted, these hospitals, which do such magnificent work for the poor of our cities and towns, will have limits placed on their ability to carry on that work by reason of inadequate funds. I am glad to know that the number of paying patients is largely on the increase in these hospitals. But for that fact, many of our hospitals would have to close their doors to those they were accustomed to help in the past.

The PRESIDENT

I will intervene to point out that Deputy Good asked the Minister for Finance on 4th December, 1925, a question as to what the expenditure, local and national, was in the years 1922-23, 1923-24 and 1924-25. I am sure Deputy Good did not want to pose in that question. I am sure it was an innocent question and a fair question. But I should like to point out that the year 1922-23 was not a year that any sensible business man would base a case on. The estimate for 1922-23 was compiled by the Co. Councils in December, 1921. Just imagine for a moment what the condition of affairs was then. For 18 months the Agricultural Grant had been held up, the Estate Duty Grant had been held up, and various grants in connection with local administration generally were in suspense. Obviously, in the year 1922-23 there was a complete mix-up in the finance of local authorities. Deputy Good will, I think, admit that that is not a year upon which a standard could be based. I should like to hear from the Deputy on this point, on which we ought to be honest with ourselves.

As the Deputy will not answer, I will have to go a little further into it. I rather dislike going into it, as I happened to be a member of the Corporation of Dublin at the time. I recollect the economies we had to recommend and which had to be accepted by the Corporation. They were far-reaching. They went so far as to ask the work-people employed in the Corporation to take 75 per cent. of their wages for nine months in order to enable us to carry on the administration of the city. They agreed. In 1922—it may have been in January and it may have been as late as February—the British Government agreed to pay £1,300,000 out of the withheld grants. That was the year Deputy Good selected and which the Press has taken up in order to prove that there has been 40 per cent. increase in local expenditure from that year to the next year and, continuing that sum, 40 per cent. up along from the other years. The Deputy has not said whether or not that was a fair year to put down as standard and to mark the incidence of an increased percentage from. I think the House is satisfied that you might as well base a case on a balloon in connection with finance as on the year 1922-23.

Mr. JOHNSON

A case with a nail in it.

The PRESIDENT

We have disposed of that to everyone's satisfaction except that of Deputy Good. The other point is that of Deputy Morrissey, what the Minister's view was of the Executive Council's attitude in turning down his last year's programme for three and a half million pounds. I am not concerned with what the Minister's view is, but, in justice to the Executive Council, some explanation should be given. The income from the Road Fund is £540,000. A three and a half million pounds programme would absorb, taking the figures of the Minister for Finance in his Budget speech, £310,000 on a two million capital expenditure. A three and a half million capital expenditure would absorb £540,000. That is the whole of the fund. That is why the Executive Council could not view with equanimity the proposal to capitalise the entire amount of the Road Fund. They proceeded to approach consideration of the question, No. 1 by increasing the income of the Road Fund, and No. 2 by putting aside as much of the increase and a little of the ordinary income of the Road Fund as would satisfy the claims in respect to the two million capital expenditure.

It was hoped to increase the income of the Road Fund by 50 per cent. The nervousness of certain Deputies—I do not know whether Deputy Good is one who is nervous—has confirmed the suspicion I entertained that we were not going to get that 50 per cent. Deputy Good has made a case that road-users were taxed a little more here than they were elsewhere. Road-users were paying relatively less here than in England. This year they are asked to pay as much. The ordinary man who uses his car as Deputy Good does, for his business and pleasure, has been getting off to the extent of 10 per cent. for the last three or four years. Now, with better roads, he is asked to pay more.

Mr. GOOD

Has he complained?

The PRESIDENT

I understood from the tone of the Deputy's speech that there was a complaint.

Mr. GOOD

By the users of heavy vehicles.

The PRESIDENT

I am glad to know that Deputy Good is satisfied.

Mr. DALY

In the County of Cork there are several urban councils and the roads were managed or maintained by those up to a short time ago. They are all very aggrieved at being interfered with by the arrangement of the Local Government Department. Cork County Council are prepared to meet them half-way, and I believe, in some instances, have already agreed to allow them to carry on as usual for the reasons that there are certain staffs employed by those urban councils, and that it will disorganise the staffs. Some of them will have to lose their employment if the new regulation is persisted in. In some of those urban councils you have other services. In one of them you have a harbour board— Youghal. The county council knows nothing about the management of the harbour board. There are other services the county council cannot well manage, the cleansing of towns after a fair or market day or the sprinkling of the street on a dry day. The county council will be far away from it. I suggest to the Minister for Local Government that he should allow the county councils and the urban councils to enter into a mutual agreement, and let them carry on in order not to disorganise the services that have been well managed for many years.

AN LEAS-CHEANN COMHAIRLE

The Minister must see that the law is administered.

Mr. DALY

We are all wishing that the county medical officer will be appointed very quickly because, in the different districts, especially the poorer villages and a lot of the towns, there are people living in fearful houses and, might I say, the doctors are not interfering with them? Perhaps they have reasons of their own. Let us hope that we will get an independent doctor who will go around, condemn those houses, and report to the Local Government Department. Let us hope the Minister and his staff will enforce the law so that these poor people will not be living in houses which have been condemned during the last twenty years, I suppose, at least ten times. The moment one family leaves, another poor family hopes to get in. When one family dies from consumption, which is so much dreaded by Deputy Sir James Craig, another family hopes to enter the house. Hence it is that a lot of poor people contract consumption in this way. These old houses should be burned and better houses built wherever the money will be got. The real way to do that is to get this county medical officer immediately to see that the law is properly administered and that these people will be relieved. I ask the Minister for Local Government immediately to appoint this county officer of health. It is the best part of the Local Government Act. It was the only part acceptable to a great many in this House and it is the part which is acceptable to none more than the poor people who are expecting the appointment of the medical officer of health for the last nine months.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

resumed the Chair.

Mr. T. MURPHY

I propose to refer to the reply given to Deputy Morrissey's criticism in regard to the question of patients. I think that Deputy Morrissey referred to county hospitals maintained for the benefit of the poor. Deputy Good, in dealing with the revenue of other hospitals, did not, I think, understand the case put up by Deputy Morrissey. Deputy Morrissey referred to the hospitals maintained for the poor and to the way in which accommodation was monopolised to the detriment of the poor, and I think his remarks were justified. As regards the road policy of the Ministry, I congratulate them. They have done useful work generally in regard to improving the roads. I would, however, like to direct the Minister's attention to a matter in that connection. I was glad to hear Deputy Gorey's statement in regard to this subject because the tendency in many places, especially on the part of local authorities, is anything but progressive. In Cork county, where Deputy Gorey's Party have a majority on the county council, a different line of action is taken. There are men on that council who hold Stone Age views and their principal cry is "back to 1914." Their policy is to reduce road expenditure, but they forget that the conditions now are entirely different to those of 1914. They have cut down expenditure to such an extent that within the next two or three years the roads in that county, with the exception of those which will be dealt with by the Minister's Department, will be little better than goat tracks. I know a case in that county where an agreement was entered into to maintain a road for £1 18s. 6d. I regret that the progressive policy of the Ministry is not reflected to any great extent in that of the local authorities.

In regard to amalgamation schemes, I appreciate the fact that when that policy was thought out the difficulties were very considerable. Those who put that policy into practice were actuated by the best motives, but it was thought out very hastily, and it was too big a question to be dealt with under semi-war conditions, and it has not justified itself to any considerable extent. From my experience in connection with a local authority, I do not think that the result of the amalgamation scheme for Cork County has resulted in economy. As a member of the county council, I am satisfied from the claims that come in for compensation for loss of office and other claims, that the net result will be a loss. Along with that, you have to take the different services that have now to be maintained. Take, for instance, the condition of people in West Cork, especially in Castletownbere, where the people live eighty miles from the county home. I can leave it to the Minister to picture the discomfort that is endured by old people who have to be carried eighty miles to the county home. It has resulted in great hardship to the poor people, and sooner or later, the Minister will be faced with the alternative either of changing the scheme or of scrapping it altogether. Any economy effected under it has been at the expense of the poor.

I would like to draw the Minister's attention to another matter which I regard as very important. The Poor Law Commission sat recently in Cork, and I am not sure whether the Secretary of the Ministry was present at the sitting or not—I think he was—but Mr. Monahan, Commissioner for Cork, gave evidence. He referred to the position of paupers—as he called them in his very charitable phraseology—and he dealt with the expense of removing them from where they died to their homes. He amazed many people by saying that if a pauper, belonging, for instance, to Macroom, died in Cork, people should not be asked to spend the few shillings that would be necessary to convey him to his home. He further said that a pauper is only entitled to a pauper's grave, and that he would be slow to advocate a policy of incurring expense to convey that person home. I never heard a more uncharitable expression, and if that is the frame of mind which is generally reflected in the Commissioners appointed by the Minister, there is not much hope for poor people, especially when we remember that people on local authorities in other parts of the country are expected to be guided by an experienced administrator like Mr. Monahan. This gentleman has been paraded in the Press, notably in the "Irish Independent," as being a person who effected considerable economies in the area of his administration. If he is effecting economies in that way, he is doing it only by hurting the poor, and he has not shown any Christian, humane, or honourable spirit in his treatment of the poor.

I ask the Minister to see that the amalgamation system shall be carried out as humanely as possible, especially in regard to the poor, and that due respect shall be paid to the custom of the country of honouring the dead and giving them decent burial, whether they are poor or not.

In regard to the amalgamation system generally, another very serious difficulty is the question of hospital accommodation. I know a particular instance rather intimately, because I brought it to the notice of the Minister some time ago. The vicinity of Castletownbere has for a number of months past been visited by fever of a virulent type, and numbers of people have died. The small hospital that was there was occupied by National troops, and day after day at meetings of the board of health we got reports regarding the outbreak of fever. The nearest hospital is the county home in Clonakilty, some seventy or eighty miles away. I suggest that in this particular case where we have outbreaks of a very serious kind of disease, with the whole countryside becoming affected, through the ignorance of the people in having wakes in cases where they are not prevented in time, the position is a very serious one, and some attempt ought to be made to provide hospital accommodation within reasonable distance of such a district.

What is the attitude of the Department in regard to the question of labourers' cottages? Is it their intention to do anything in regard to the building of further cottages? Local authorities find day by day an increasing demand for labourers' cottages, and although I come from a district where perhaps a very strong claim cannot be advanced for the building of more houses, having regard to the amount of arrears outstanding, not perhaps that the tenants have entirely failed to honour their obligations, but because of the system that prevailed in the past, I think that something might be done generally, because no question of huge amounts of arrears obtains generally. What is the attitude of the Minister in regard to legislation to enable tenants to purchase labourers' cottages? This is a question that many of us are frequently asked about. There are thrifty and industrious people who are anxious to be secure in their own homes by being allowed to purchase them. I think it would be a very good thing if the Minister would outline some scheme whereby such tenants as are willing and as are in a position to become the owners of their houses might be allowed to do so.

At present the members of the Cork County Council and the people generally are in a state of ferment in regard to the question of the payment of bonuses to local officials. A very dishonest agitation is being carried on in Cork in regard to this matter. The chairman of the county council, the gentleman who was referred to yesterday, has, I understand, refused to sign the pay sheets because bonuses of local officials are included. The bonus varies with the cost of living, and as the cost of living goes down, the bonus is reduced. My view is that this is a matter for which legislation is needed. At any rate, the result of this agitation in Cork will mean that in a short time the public services will be in a state of chaos. Another Department concerned with this matter is that of the Minister for Lands and Agriculture, but I am not entitled to refer to that now. I would like the Minister to take definite action to clear up this position. Day after day we are treated to sermons with regard to the attitude of the Department in refusing to sanction the abolition of these bonuses, and the so-called economists are treating us to homilies on the extravagance of the Local Government Department in this matter. The Minister should make his position clear, and should take action to protect the local officials, at the same time pointing out, if legislation is necessary, what are the intentions of the Department with regard to it.

I agree with Deputy Daly's reference to urban roads. We have had complaints as regards the hardships entailed by the new order made by the Minister in regard to urban roads. The position is that the main roads running through an urban area are supposed to be maintained by the county council. The back roads are being maintained by the urban staff. In adiiton to the unemployment and disorganisation to the urban staff that this causes, there seems in many urban areas to be absolute confusion as to who is responsible for scavenging. I have had complaints regarding the filthy condition of towns due to this, and there does not seem to be any clear idea as to what exactly the position is. It seems rather peculiar to have the county council workmen working in one part of the town and urban employees in another part. I have heard that this is a preliminary to the abolition of the urban councils. I hope that the Minister will make the position clear on this matter.

The county homes are buildings that used to be called workhouses. Most of us, and most of the people, were not in love with workhouses, but so far as I can see the workhouses have only changed in name. I was recently through a workhouse that is now glorified by the title "county home" and I was very much struck with the absence of any real comfort in it. I saw unfortunate people rigged out in the regulation uniform, huddled together in cold and cheerless dining-rooms, and taking their food out of tin mugs. It is not the question of the tin mugs that matters so much as that of the food, but it appeared to me that, with very little extra expense, a more comfortable atmosphere could be created in such a building. It was cold, cheerless and bare, and it struck me as being more in the nature of a county jail than a county home. I suggest that a more humane line should be adopted with regard to institutions of that kind. The poor have always had a horror of going into a place like this, and I do not wonder at it, having seen the conditions. I saw a cold, bare, hard board in the dining-room. It would not make much difference in the cost of running the institution if a table-cloth were provided. There are pretty gardens around workhouse buildings in some places, and it would not be too much luxury to place a bunch of flowers on the table. That may sound ridiculous to some people, but it might brighten the atmosphere for unfortunate people who are compelled to end their days in a place like that and who were in far more comfortable positions.

Another matter brought to my notice was that there are large numbers of old people in these county homes who are unable to take strong food. I saw dinner being provided that appeared to me to be good, substantial and well-cooked, but an official pointed out that there were many toothless old men and women who were unable to eat cooked meat and potatoes, that application had been made for an alteration of the dietary scale to provide such people with more suitable food, and that owing to some regulation such an alteration could not be sanctioned by the Department. At any rate they did not sanction it. That appears to be too cast-iron an attitude altogether, and I think that in a case like this an alteration might very easily have been made. The result at present is that the food simply goes to waste. That is a matter that the Minister might give some attention to.

In regard to the question of housing, I have nothing but praise for the manner in which the Housing Act has worked, as far as my experience goes. I live in a town where no houses had been built for twenty or thirty years before this Act came into force, and I can say that the whole appearance of the town, and of many other places that I know, has been transformed within the last two or three years. Any praise that is given to the Minister or to the Department in regard to this housing effort is well deserved. I would suggest in regard to future housing legislation, that attention might be given to the small houses. The only difficulty I have seen with regard to these new houses is that the types of houses put up are not in most cases available for the people most in need of houses, and the only relief that the building of these houses brings them is that they may be able to leave the wretched houses they are in and get into the slightly better ones that are vacated by the men who go into the new houses. At any rate, this scheme has been a great success, and I hope that this housing policy will be continued for a very long time, because the need for houses, particularly in small towns where no urban authorities are in existence, is very great. In cases where towns have urban powers the local authority has a means of raising money, but in some cases they have not been very active. Perhaps the need for houses has not been so great as in these small towns where there are no urban powers. At any rate in one town I know of the Housing Act has worked wonders, and I have to thank the Department for the manner in which it has been thought and worked out. With the foregoing criticisms I think I have covered all the ground. But I do suggest again to the Minister that he might, with advantage to the State, to the poor people, and to the good name of his own Department, review this whole system of workhouse amalgamation and improve it radically.

The Dáil went out of Committee.

Progress reported, the Committee to sit again to-morrow.

The Dáil adjourned until 3 p.m. on Wednesday, June 2nd.