There were some points raised by Deputies on this Vote that I had not an opportunity of replying to before the adjournment. I will deal with them as briefly as I can. Deputy Boland raised a point in connection with the increased provision for the administration offices of the Department of Defence. This is due to the fact that the Board have now taken over responsibility for the upkeep of the entire headquarters buildings. These buildings formerly were under the charge of the engineering section of the Department of Defence. That item accounts for this extra charge.
The Deputy also dealt with the expenditure of £1,000 for the Governor-General's establishment in connection with furniture, fittings, utensils, etc. The sum covers both the Governor-General's residence and the Private Secretary's Lodge. It must be understood that in a large establishment of this kind, apart from expenditure in connection with renewals of furniture, there is a constant need for repairs and for beds and bedding, bed clothes, carpets, linoleum, rugs, blinds, repairing and upholstering and repolishing furniture, renewals of kitchen utensils, delph, cutlery and plate, table linen and general household requisites. The average annual expenditure for the past five years was slightly under £1,000, which covers the cost in this case. Old furniture and carpets no longer of use in the public service are sold off periodically by public auction. Deputy Boland also raised a point in connection with the Phoenix Park School and asked why it was provided for out of Public Works and Buildings rather than by the Department of Education. This is because that school is provided for the use of the employees in the Phoenix Park and the Commissioners of Public Works are patrons of the school.
Some Deputies, notably Deputy Sheehy (Cork), raised a question with regard to the rebuilding of the destroyed military barracks and coastguard stations. He asked if it were not possible to reconstruct these buildings and afterwards to let them to private individuals. The Board of Works are concerned principally with the reconstruction of those buildings so far as they are required for Government purposes. They do not reconstruct them for private individuals. Destroyed buildings not required for such purposes are advertised for letting on lease on terms which would place the responsibility for rebuilding on the lessees.
Local authorities have also been approached, as in the case of the Ballincollig Barracks, to take over such properties for housing schemes, and while in a few cases they have done so they are not always disposed to take advantage of the offers made to them. Deputy Anthony dealt specifically with Ballincollig Barracks. The first occasion on which an inquiry was received here in connection with these barracks was on 5th February, 1926, when Mr. E. Callanan, the Secretary, Cork County Council, called and suggested that the Board should bring the property officially under the Council's notice. Though the property was not in our charge at the time, we understood it would be transferred to us shortly by the Department of Defence and we accordingly, on 10th February, 1926, forwarded a siteplan of the barracks to the Council and told them to prepare a scheme for conversion of buildings at the barracks into labouring-class dwellings and obtain the approval of the Department of Local Government for this scheme. No reply was received to our letter.
The property was definitely transferred to our charge by the Department of Defence as from 1st April, 1927. Several representations have since been made to the Council, but the matter stands there up to the present. It may be mentioned that the barrack buildings which were destroyed by fire covered about 19 acres, and there are about 219 acres of land attached. The entire property is held on long leases at rents amounting to £1,135 3s. 2d. per annum. One of the buildings is used as a Gárda barracks. Pending ultimate disposal of the property, we have made several grazing and conacre lettings of the land, from which we derive about £230 per annum. In March, 1928, we advertised rebuilding leases of the barracks and we also stated that we would consider applications for lettings of any part of our lands adjoining.
It may be mentioned that the Secretary of the Cork County Council, on his call here on 5th February. 1926, stated that he was definitely of opinion that it would not be possible to utilise the barracks to the best advantage unless the lands attached were divided into a number of small holdings to go with the houses which would be constructed from the remains of the barracks. We, however, received no applications for rebuilding leases of the barracks, except for one small building, but we received a number of offers for leases of the lands. These offers were mainly inadequate and, in all the circumstances, the disposal of the property as a whole is being further considered.
Deputy Carney was mainly concerned with the position in Buncrana. This is a case where sensational fireworks have resulted from the attempt to short-circuit departmental red tape, to find a short-cut out of difficulties that we are continually accused of placing in the way of such transactions. This site would have been advertised in the ordinary way were it not for the fact that strong representations were made to the various Departments concerned that it was very much to the interest of the local people concerned that this factory should be established in Buncrana. Accordingly, the different Departments lost no opportunity of making the site available. The Department of Defence transferred the site to us, and we got in touch with Messrs. Moore and Company. After our valuer put what he considered a fair value on the huts, we allowed Messrs. Moore and Company to enter into possession at their own risk, subject, of course, to the sanction of the Oireachtas and the Department of Finance.
In the ordinary way, as happened on several occasions before, this method would have worked out to the entire satisfaction of all parties concerned. But it so happened in this particular case that this arrangement did not give satisfaction locally. It happened that there was another firm in the field who were also large employers of labour—in fact who gave more employment than Messrs. Moore. They claimed to have been looking for this site even before Messrs. Moore and Co. were in the field at all. Accordingly, when those representations were made there was no course open but to readvertise the huts. But seeing that Messrs. Moore had been put to some inconvenience going into possession of the site, we thought it was only fair to put up the two sites for public tender. Accordingly, that has been done. We also considered that it was only fair that Messrs. Moore should be allowed to leave their furniture and fittings on the site until the result of the tenders was known. If Messrs. Moore happen to put in a higher tender, they remain on the site. If not, they will have to move all their fittings and the other party comes in. In any case, there is alternative accommodation available for the person who fails to get the original huts.
Deputy Anthony was very much concerned with the position with regard to national monuments, and he referred to the fact that there seems to be so small a Vote for this rather important service. He called our attention to the sum of £67 on page 35 of the Estimates under Vote 10. He apparently overlooked the provision of £2,000 on page 52 of the Estimates. Altogether, there seems to be such little knowledge about the functioning of this section of the Department of Public Works that I thought it might be well to make a brief statement on the matter of the works performed by this branch, and to give the Deputies some idea of how this £2,000 is expended. The monuments in the care of the Commissioners of Public Works are of two main classes.
First of all, we have national monuments which consist of about 120 ecclesiastical buildings, or groups of buildings, including round towers, of which the Commissioners were constituted owners in 1880, under the provisions of the Irish Church Act of 1869. Secondly, we have ancient monuments, which are buildings both lay and ecclesiastical, and prehistoric remains such as dolmens, tumuli, cashels, raths, etc., of all kinds of which the Commissioners have been constituted guardians or owners, as the case may be, either by private owners, public bodies or the Land Commission under the Land Acts. These number about 240, a number which is increasing annually and they represent a much larger number of actual monuments as in many cases the registered number covers a whole group. For instance, the Aran Island monuments actually number over 60. These monuments are repaired and kept in order by the Commissioners' ancient and national monument staff of clerks of works who carry out the work with local labour and under the direction of the inspector of ancient and national monuments. The expenditure is met out of funds provided at the time in the case of national monuments and out of votes in the case of ancient monuments. The first named has an income of about £850 per annum and the voted sum is £2,000 per annum. Expenditure includes labour and materials for maintenance works, salaries of inspector and clerks of works, and of caretakers and travelling expenses.
As to works carried out, restoration in the usually accepted sense of reconstruction is never attempted, but conservation and protection only. In certain cases where a collection of fragments of carved work, etc., happens to exist, they are frequently combined in their original form to indicate as far as is possible their original appearance and position. The works carried out in the past few years give a fair idea of the varied character of the work:— (1) Holy Cross Abbey, Co. Tipperary.—A complete overhaul of all walls and vaults which were protected by weathering and pointing has been carried out; the partial rebuilding of a dangerous pillar and the re-ercetion of some parts of a cloister arcade of which a number of loose fragments remained and others were given up by local people have been attended to. (2) Church Island, Valentia Harbour, Co. Kerry.—This oratory was being undermined by the sea and protection works were carried out. (3) Oileán tSeannig, Co. Kerry (Maharees Islands).—Here a small sea wall was built to prevent further erosion which was affecting an ancient cashel containing remains of an early monastery. (4) St. Francis Abbey, Kilkenny.—The beautiful 14th century tower which was insecure was adequately supported.
(5) Carndonagh Cross, Co. Donegal. —The Cross and accompanying stones were moved to a new site in consequence of road-widening operations, a new base and enclosure being formed. (6) Lightning conductors fixed to two round towers— Fertagh, Co. Kilkenny, and Turlough, Co. Mayo. (7) Taghman Church, Co. Westmeath; Kilcool Church, Co. Wicklow, and Crucetown Church, and Cross, Co. Meath, completely repaired and made secure. (8) Dunooghley Castle, Co. Dublin.—Here the interesting oaken roof, the only extant 15th century roof on a castle in Ireland, is being repaired.
That will give an idea of the varied character of the work carried out by the Department. Until the Ancient Monuments Bill is passed, we have no power to do any further work in this direction. I hope to have that Bill introduced before the present Session concludes.